GUILTY FL - Dan Markel, 41, FSU Law Professor, Tallahassee, 18 July 2014 *arrests* #12

[Sherubbian]

Having a bit more time to digest this, I think this Decoste 2.0 is either personal brand protection mode (i.e, sure we lost, but have you even SEEN how guilty she really was!?) or it's an attempt to thaw out the icey relations between the client/Defense and the State while negotiations on a deal are underway. The fact that he stuck around Talahassee for a week after the verdict suggests that they are definitely trying to deal.

He was a prosecutor for several years so it's possible that he is being genuine. I would prefer to believe that. However, its hard to take Decoste 2.0' entirely at his word given that about six months ago he was telling the media that essentially Cappleman was as guilty as the Adelsons and Rivera/Garcia in charging and holding Magbanua. And that video is still on his IG.

DeCoste 2.0 is one example of the multiple dramatic changes, my “educated suspicion” predicts to occur within the coming weeks. However, this is not the only astonishing about-face my “educated suspicion” foresees.
Just as a desert, compare and contrast DeCoste’s statements for the Tallahassee Democrat with Tara Kawass’ posts online! It is as if they were not in the same criminal defense team!

 

[Weki]

If I was DeCoste I would be embarrassed to sit with the Kawass sisters as co-counsel. I don’t have a high opinion of DeCoste - I think he’s too ostentatious but the Kawass sisters were too cliquey with KM and honestly I’m confused about what the other sister’s role is. It seems like she’s there to provide ego support to Tara Kawass and gossip. I just find their demeanor inappropriate. Then breaking down after the verdict - I’ve never seen that before! Ever!

 

[DropthePuck]

I’m surprised but also not surprised by DeCoste. Kawass has lost all professionalism in this case. I find it disturbing that she and her co-counsel appeared like a bunch of giggling teenage girls with KM in the courtroom. Her breakdown after the verdict was in poor form. I think her direct of KM was poorly done because she has lost sight of her role. DeCoste knows the score. She’s obviously guilty. When the verdict came, he didn’t look sympathetic at all to me. I’m also almost certain that they didn’t want her to take the stand. She didn’t help herself there. And the body language between KM and DeCoste was also stiff throughout the portions I watched. My guess is he didn’t fall into her narcissistic games whereas Kawass and the other female atty did. The dynamic reminds me of Jodi Arias and her female atty vs Arias and Nurmi.

Do these female defense attys find it difficult to represent borderline/narcissistic female defendants while maintaining professional distance?

The KM and Kawass side show reminded me of three high school teenagers in science lab whispering/laughing to each other during class instead of listening to the teacher.

 

[Blue Shakehead]

If I was DeCoste I would be embarrassed to sit with the Kawass sisters as co-counsel. I don’t have a high opinion of DeCoste - I think he’s too ostentatious but the Kawass sisters were too cliquey with KM and honestly I’m confused about what the other sister’s role is. It seems like she’s there to provide ego support to Tara Kawass and gossip. I just find their demeanor inappropriate. Then breaking down after the verdict - I’ve never seen that before! Ever!

I was just as confused by Kristen Kawass' role. Obviously, the Kawass sisters have a psuedo-family practise and are very close but introducing her as a 'post-conviction' appellate attorney' during a trial where a conviction has not even been rendered is a very dubious and unnecessary detail.

Any attorney can file an appeal so identifying her to the court as an appellate attorney who also represented Magbanua in trial would automatically diminish some of Magbanua's avenues to appeal (i.e., ineffective counsel). My own view is that they made her specialization known as an appeal to authority to signal to Judge Wheeler that their arguments/case law references were more credible and also as a bit of a veiled threat: "rule against us, and this case will be overturned on appeal". I dunno, maybe its not as ominous as I'm making it out to be but that was my impression.

 

[jbc]

If I was DeCoste I would be embarrassed to sit with the Kawass sisters as co-counsel. I don’t have a high opinion of DeCoste - I think he’s too ostentatious but the Kawass sisters were too cliquey with KM and honestly I’m confused about what the other sister’s role is. It seems like she’s there to provide ego support to Tara Kawass and gossip. I just find their demeanor inappropriate. Then breaking down after the verdict - I’ve never seen that before! Ever!

Their defense of Katie was as vigorous as it could be and necessary. For that, I commend them.

As far as the crying, I just think that it was a reflection of their personal relationship with Katie. Watching Katie on the stand, I just couldn't help feeling that there is some essence of humanity that makes her likable. If you became attached to that over many years, you might have their same reaction.

A contrast would be Jodi Arias. Same age and somewhat similar vibe, but I don't see any essence of anything that is likable in Arias. She exudes evil out of every pore. It's much easier to see one escorted off to oblivion, but the other causes you to pause. ...that is until you remind yourself she's just as much a cold-blooded murderer. The K sisters must understand that - it's their chosen profession. I don't fault them for being emotional - but that must make their career very difficult personally. I could see TK as a nurse, frankly. She might enjoy it better.

 

[clearskies1]

I've heard it's wise to get new, independent counsel for an appeal. Someone who can be objective about how the trial was conducted and your attorney's decisions. I'm not sure Tara Kawass' sister is the right person. JMO.

 

[jbc]

The KM and Kawass side show reminded me of three high school teenagers in science lab whispering/laughing to each other during class instead of listening to the teacher.

Such girls become lawyers.
Not scientists. Thankfully.

 

[DropthePuck]

Their defense of Katie was as vigorous as it could be and necessary. For that, I commend them.

As far as the crying, I just think that it was a reflection of their personal relationship with Katie. Watching Katie on the stand, I just couldn't help feeling that there is some essence of humanity that makes her likable. If you became attached to that over many years, you might have their same reaction.

A contrast would be Jodi Arias. Same age and somewhat similar vibe, but I don't see any essence of anything that is likable in Arias. She exudes evil out of every pore. It's much easier to see one escorted off to oblivion, but the other causes you to pause. ...that is until you remind yourself she's just as much a cold-blooded murderer. The K sisters must understand that - it's their chosen profession. I don't fault them for being emotional - but that must make their career very difficult personally. I could see TK as a nurse, frankly. She might enjoy it better.

You are much nicer than I am! I found her intensely unlikeable on the stand. She was insolent and spouting lies left and right. I was very unsympathetic towards her.

 

[Blue Shakehead]

You are much nicer than I am! I found her intensely unlikeable on the stand. She was insolent and spouting lies left and right. I was very unsympathetic towards her.

I would agree with this. In a case full of sociopaths, narcissists and pathological liars, we might be splitting hairs here but I think Magbanua comes off as the second-most manipulative person in this case, behind only Wendi Adelson. Obviously, Charlie Adelson is very deceptive and cunning, but he's only trying to deceive the police.

Magbanua is deceiving the police, her new boyfriend and her ex-boyfriend all at the same time. Its a minor detail - but I suspect she broke up with Garcia only after Charlie Adelson showed interest. She used Garcia's devotion to her and his desperate financial position as the basis for him committing a murder for her. She lied and told him he was doing it for a lady named Wendi and left out the parts where Wendi was an Adelson and the actual contractor was his arch-nemesis and the man he tried to run off the road 3 weeks earlier - Charlie Adelson. I would be very interested to know when Garcia figured out that Charlie was behind the whole thing. And then look at the audacity...of going after Garcia for child support AFTER he commits a murder on behalf of her and her new boyfriend. Try to put all of that together in your mind.

Then look at how she plays Charlie. She gets cash but she also needs breast surgery. And a car. And the car she got sucks so she wants a better car cause her kids aren't safe. And she needs trips. And she needs a job at Adelson Institute. And catering service. Oh, and maybe a boat. And then the bump happens....and instead of calling the blackmailer, she tries to get Garcia to phone the number because if it IS the cops, its ok if he goes down, but not her. And she tells Charlie she did call the number and as payment, she needs a raise and an Escalade. At first she saw Adelson as a lottery ticket to a new dream life but when it became clear that wasn't going to happen, she knew she could milk the Adelson cow forever. She was essentially lowkey blackmailing the Adelsons for the two years before the FBI tried it. And even after spending years in jail, at some point she calculated that she would rather risk life in prison for the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow (lottery odds to get out of prison to cash in the lottery ticket to the rich life she always wanted) than to get out and raise her kids...because that life would have been the same financial struggle she already lived - even moreso as a convicted felon.

She is not a sympathetic character at all. She practically cried on cue when Kawass asked her about her mother on the stand and we all knew that question was coming because the State filed successful motions in pre-trial to bar Kawass from asking it. The only real emotion I've seen from Magbanua was when she pissed herself when the cops arrested her and when she cried hysterically when the jury announced they had a verdict - her emotions are for only her own suffering, not anyone else.

 

[friendlyobserver]

I would agree with this. In a case full of sociopaths, narcissists and pathological liars, we might be splitting hairs here but I think Magbanua comes off as the second-most manipulative person in this case, behind only Wendi Adelson. Obviously, Charlie Adelson is very deceptive and cunning, but he's only trying to deceive the police.

Magbanua is deceiving the police, her new boyfriend and her ex-boyfriend all at the same time. Its a minor detail - but I suspect she broke up with Garcia only after Charlie Adelson showed interest. She used Garcia's devotion to her and his desperate financial position as the basis for him committing a murder for her. She lied and told him he was doing it for a lady named Wendi and left out the parts where Wendi was an Adelson and the actual contractor was his arch-nemesis and the man he tried to run off the road 3 weeks earlier - Charlie Adelson. I would be very interested to know when Garcia figured out that Charlie was behind the whole thing. And then look at the audacity...of going after Garcia for child support AFTER he commits a murder on behalf of her and her new boyfriend. Try to put all of that together in your mind.

Then look at how she plays Charlie. She gets cash but she also needs breast surgery. And a car. And the car she got sucks so she wants a better car cause her kids aren't safe. And she needs trips. And she needs a job at Adelson Institute. And catering service. Oh, and maybe a boat. And then the bump happens....and instead of calling the blackmailer, she tries to get Garcia to phone the number because if it IS the cops, its ok if he goes down, but not her. And she tells Charlie she did call the number and as payment, she needs a raise and an Escalade. At first she saw Adelson as a lottery ticket to a new dream life but when it became clear that wasn't going to happen, she knew she could milk the Adelson cow forever. She was essentially lowkey blackmailing the Adelsons for the two years before the FBI tried it. And even after spending years in jail, at some point she calculated that she would rather risk life in prison for the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow (lottery odds to get out of prison to cash in the lottery ticket to the rich life she always wanted) than to get out and raise her kids...because that life would have been the same financial struggle she already lived - even moreso as a convicted felon.

She is not a sympathetic character at all. She practically cried on cue when Kawass asked her about her mother on the stand and we all knew that question was coming because the State filed successful motions in pre-trial to bar Kawass from asking it. The only real emotion I've seen from Magbanua was when she pissed herself when the cops arrested her and when she cried hysterically when the jury announced they had a verdict - her emotions are for only her own suffering, not anyone else.

wow this sums it up on her...hundred percent

 

[jbc]

...We might be splitting hairs here but I think Magbanua comes off as the second-most manipulative person in this case, behind only Wendi Adelson. Obviously, Charlie Adelson is very deceptive and cunning, but he's only trying to deceive the police.

Magbanua is deceiving the police, her new boyfriend and her ex-boyfriend all at the same time. Its a minor detail - but I suspect she broke up with Garcia only after Charlie Adelson showed interest. She used Garcia's devotion to her and his desperate financial position as the basis for him committing a murder for her...

In my experience, all of the deception shown by Katie is not that different than most people. The big difference is the murder part. But the greed, the dishonesty, the manipulation, the narcissism, the deception, infidelity....it's most humans. Men and women. It's the nature of our species.

 

[JT_Watchman]

Here's the audio of Jason Solomon from "Justice for Dan" on the Preston Scott Morning Show. His segment starts at the 1:08:00 mark. For those who may not be familiar, Preston has done a great job of pursuing justice for Dan Markel over the years.

Mon. Jun. 6th, 2022: Kids Aren't Ready to Go to School - Preston Scott Show | iHeart

Our guests today include:<br />- Sal Nuzzo from the James Madison Institute, and<br />- Jason Solomon from Justice for Dan Markel. <br /><br />Follow the show on Twitter @TMSPrestonScott. <br /><br />Check out Preston’s latest blog by going to wflafm.com/preston. <br /><br />Listen live to...

www.iheart.com

 

[vislaw]

Here's the audio of Jason Solomon from "Justice for Dan" on the Preston Scott Morning Show. His segment starts at the 1:08:00 mark. For those who may not be familiar, Preston has done a great job of pursuing justice for Dan Markel over the years.

Mon. Jun. 6th, 2022: Kids Aren't Ready to Go to School - Preston Scott Show | iHeart

Our guests today include:<br />- Sal Nuzzo from the James Madison Institute, and<br />- Jason Solomon from Justice for Dan Markel. <br /><br />Follow the show on Twitter @TMSPrestonScott. <br /><br />Check out Preston’s latest blog by going to wflafm.com/preston. <br /><br />Listen live to...

www.iheart.com

Thanks for this. I appreciate hearing Jason's thoughts on the status of the case and, especially, his thinking that Charlie might be willing to implicate Wendi when it comes down to brass tacks. I also agree with his assessment that Katie may simply not be worth much to the prosecution at this point. We know she is a prodigious liar and unless she has some way to corroborate whatever story she tells, it is difficult to see her being a witness at the trial against Charlie.

For his part, we can take some satisfaction that Charlie's attorneys almost certainly are making certain he understands how strong the case is against him and that the penalty on conviction will be life without parole. That prospect surely is weighing heavily on his mind now. I wonder what visitors he receives these days. ...

 

[Blue Shakehead]

In my experience, all of the deception shown by Katie is not that different than most people. The big difference is the murder part. But the greed, the dishonesty, the manipulation, the narcissism, the deception, infidelity....it's most humans. Men and women. It's the nature of our species.

Right. We are all capable of those behaviors but I tend to think of it as a spectrum. So on a scale of 1-10 with 10 being the highest and worst, what does Katie score on greed vs. the average population? Her capacity for dishonesty? Manipulation? Narcissism? Infidelity?

And yes, the murder itself is what obviously puts her in an extreme minority. But even amongst murderers, a good portion of them actually feel extreme guilt and confess. And then another sub-section will recognize the evidence against them and cut a deal for a slightly reduced sentence. Very few people charged with 1st degree murder are fortunate enough to be in her spot where the terms of that deal are extremely favorable: plead guilty, turn on the Adelsons and go home to your kids (or your dying mother). And she rejected all of those offers. She pointed the finger directly at Garcia in the 1st trial, and then tried to manipulate him to save her in the 2nd trial. This is not normal, imo.

 

[Deleted member 302228]

Of course she has corroborating evidence, multiple sources were hinted at over the past few years, and that explains her decision to go to trial against all odds.

 

[opt]

Of course she has corroborating evidence, multiple sources were hinted at over the past few years, and that explains her decision to go to trial against all odds.

She went to trial because she knew that she had enough valuable information to make a good deal if she lost at trial? That doesn't explain her willingness to spend 6 years in jail pre-trial, with most of that delay caused by "her" lawyers. Her decision is still a mystery to me.

 

[Deleted member 302228]

She went to trial because she knew that she had enough valuable information to make a good deal if she lost at trial? That doesn't explain her willingness to spend 6 years in jail pre-trial, with most of that delay caused by "her" lawyers. Her decision is still a mystery to me.

In Florida, it takes 2-3 years to get to trial for murder, longer if defense wants to drag it out

Update froM earlier thread--

2016 OCT, KM arrested
2017-2018, defense continuance, Kawass had bad cancer
2019, 6 month continuance from SAO
2019, still had trial ahead of schedule, in OCT 2019- Mistrial for KM

Retrial scheduled APR 2020 but canceled by COVID until 2021
FALL 2021, defense continuance because SAO disclosed evidence late (MENtour lawyer covered)
SPRING 2022, continuance from SAO to look at the restaurant tape more closely (paid off)

Defense never filed another delay
Jun 2022 trial, KM convicted

KM went to trial for a reason
she knew she can prove some things later
her lawyers didn't drag things out really and there was no advantage in doing so

 

[TheLoadedGoat]

The kids. My heart hurts for them. First and foremost, Dan's kids of course because they lost their father, who by all accounts was devoted and present. And because not only did their mother cause it, but I am sad because she is their mother. KM's kids too. They did not ask to be born into this horrible group of murderers and gang members. These women were supposed to raise good citizens and loving human beings. But they didn't have a chance since their mothers weren't either of those things. Those children will grow into their own and be able to see for themselves the choices their mothers made.

 

[Dorothy Jane]

I would love to know what is going through Donna Adelson's mind right now. If she really was the super, duper, loving, perfect mother she portrays herself as being, she would be going forward and falling on her sword and offering herself up to life in prison with the hope that she could convince the state that Charlie was just her fulcrum and that it was her idea and try to get him some sort of deal that would get him out before he dies. That's what a GOOD mother would do. But, I think they are a batch of hard core narcissists and I wonder if it's now each man for themselves at this point.

I read that Tallahassee Dem article last night and also thought DeCoste was groveling in his praise for the jury and the prosecution. I personally thought Cappleman and her partner were brilliant, but DeCoste seemed like he wanted their law licenses on a plate before it was over. So, I am also very curious about the seeming about face. My initial thought was that he was angling for leniency in the sentence for KM. But, honestly, after the La Dolce Vita tape, I don't know what good she would be. I doubt she ever directly discussed anything with Donna. And Georgia Cappleman kind of shot down any notion of any more dealing with KM in her really, really enjoyable closing argument. As she stated rather sarcastically, "Maybe if she gets convicted she'll offer to do something for me then, we'll see how that goes..." It was so good. And if I had been KM I would have had that sinking feeling.

So, I think ol' Charlie is between a rock and a hard place and Georgia Cappleman can take as long as she needs to work up to another trial.

 

[Sherubbian]

Yes, “Only a defendant can make the decision regarding whether they take a plea deal (just like testifying).” However, a skillful but dishonest (disposed to deceive) lawyer could incurvate the “legal situation” with swirling “white noises” to the point that the defendant thinks that it is detrimental to take a plea deal, in any criminal case.

I do not know what happened behind doors but DeCoste’s questions in court make me feel dizzy! Listening to DeCoste’s examination with his “You would agree …” statements makes me think of Asmodeus lusting on unnecessary busy work to look useful and continue milking someone else cow for free! To the point that one of the FBI agents stopped answering question until DeCoste unpacked his “You would agree …” statement into a question accessible to a 5th grader.

Defense lawyers are important elements of our Judiciary System. However, the Kawass sisters do not inspire trust, IMO. The defense strategy of Tara Kawass from Trial #1 (SG and CA are enemies, thus SG would not help CA in anything) to her “work products” for the Trial #2 (SG and CA are best friends who conspired to kill DM unbeknownst to KM) are analogies of how a “pretty plea deal” could be twisted 180 degrees into an “ugly plea deal” by a skillful demon or goddess, your choice in which side you are.

When Kristen Kawass, self described as “an experienced appellate attorney who focuses on post-trial litigation”, appeared in the ante-trial proceedings, I knew that KM is doomed. KM was almost convicted in the Trial #1. Then, a “post-trial litigation” artist is recruited to … prepare ex ante? I was not there while they devise their “work products” but I suspect Kristen Kawass’ presence multiplied KM’s legal fees by 1.5, for a negative result! Importantly, we will see in 4 to 5 weeks, but it is my "educated speculation" that some dramatic changes will occur!

Obviously, “Only a defendant can make the decision regarding whether they take a plea deal (just like testifying).” The two trials have shown that the Kawass and DeCoste are full of ideas. Unfortunately for KM, the negative result demonstrates that their ideas are bad.

In hindsight, (1) DeCoste’s aggressiveness may have offended some members of the Jury. I am offended by the haughty tone DeCoste cross-examined the FBI agents.

(2) Tara Kawass’ untruthfulness may have destroyed any credibility she have had prior to the trial. When you make so many untrue statements, your true statements have lesser value.

(3) Kristen Kawass’ moody behavior was setting the tone at the defendant’s bench. I wonder what has Kristen Kawass specifically contributed to the defense’s tactics and strategy?

Katherine Magbanua has lost A LOT, as compared to her convicted accomplices as summarized by the score card attached. It seems fair to say that these amateurish 3 attorneys did not help much the desperate Magbanua case.