Gypsy Road
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2009
- Messages
- 7,641
- Reaction score
- 15,454
Very interesting; According to Vinelink, KM is still in Leon county.
Welcomr Snacky! So glad you are here! Thanks for teaching me a new word!Longtime lurker here.....my first post! If the goal of the state is to bring the entire family to justice, is it possible that if Charlie gives up the mishpucha, the state will guarantee that he and Wendi will avoid LWP? This is the only scenario I can imagine Charlie considering.
Donna’s attorneys will never allow her to be cold as a witness.I agree! And it’ll be interesting when the rest of the family is called as witnesses. Especially Donna. I wonder how she will hold up to being questioned?
Thanks, Goat! The yiddishism seemed appropriate given the context.Welcomr Snacky! So glad you are here! Thanks for teaching me a new word!
What do you mean by cold? Disposition? Or does it mean something else legally?Donna’s attorneys will never allow her to be cold as a witness.
*Called. It’s a typo I believe. Donna will have the right to remain silent if charged and will plead the 5th if not charged but subpoenaed. Georgia won’t question her unless she decides to testify. I believe the wire taps will def come in at her trial (if she’s charged).What do you mean by cold? Disposition? Or does it mean something else legally?
How will she hold up to Georgia’s questions? And will the jury get to see her nasty emails or hear her voice on the wire taps?
Thank you!!*Called. It’s a typo I believe. Donna will have the right to remain silent if charged and will plead the 5th if not charged but subpoenaed. Georgia won’t question her unless she decides to testify. I believe the wire taps will def come in at her trial (if she’s charged).
Thanks. Yes, that was a typo and you explained it beautifully.*Called. It’s a typo I believe. Donna will have the right to remain silent if charged and will plead the 5th if not charged but subpoenaed. Georgia won’t question her unless she decides to testify. I believe the wire taps will def come in at her trial (if she’s charged).
I don't believe it is correct that DA can plead the 5th and refuse to answer questions if called to testify in CA's trial. I believe that the state could force DA to testify in CA's trial. FL Stat. Sec. 914.04 provides that a witness may not refuse to testify on the grounds that her testimony may incriminate her, provided that such testimony may not be used against that witness except in a prosecution of that witness for perjury. This statute is the reason that the state was able to force WA to testify in the trials of LR and KM.*Called. It’s a typo I believe. Donna will have the right to remain silent if charged and will plead the 5th if not charged but subpoenaed. Georgia won’t question her unless she decides to testify. I believe the wire taps will def come in at her trial (if she’s charged).
914.04 Witnesses; person not excused from testifying or producing evidence in certain prosecutions on ground testimony might incriminate him or her; use of testimony given or evidence produced.—No person who has been duly served with a subpoena or subpoena duces tecum shall be excused from attending and testifying or producing any book, paper, or other document before any court having felony trial jurisdiction, grand jury, or state attorney upon investigation, proceeding, or trial for a violation of any of the criminal statutes of this state upon the ground or for the reason that the testimony or evidence, documentary or otherwise, required of the person may tend to convict him or her of a crime or to subject him or her to a penalty or forfeiture, but no testimony so given or evidence so produced shall be received against the person upon any criminal investigation or proceeding. Such testimony or evidence, however, may be received against the person upon any criminal investigation or proceeding for perjury committed while giving such testimony or producing such evidence or for any perjury subsequently committed.
Thank you for explaining. I was confused because Wendi had been called during KM’s trials, so I really didn’t understand when it was said here that Donna would not be called. Guess we will wait and see.I don't believe it is correct that DA can plead the 5th and refuse to answer questions if called to testify in CA's trial. I believe that the state could force DA to testify in CA's trial. FL Stat. Sec. 914.04 provides that a witness may not refuse to testify on the grounds that her testimony may incriminate her, provided that such testimony may not be used against that witness except in a prosecution of that witness for perjury. This statute is the reason that the state was able to force WA to testify in the trials of LR and KM.
Sure if the state grants her immunity then yes she could be forced to testify. But if CA is on trial and KM is singing and Donna has not been charged and is given immunity to testify, that would mean Donna is more than likely not going to be prosecuted EVER. Like many in this thread, I'm assuming (hoping!) Donna is going to be indicted soon and it's with that context that I answered the way I did and probably why @vislaw did as well.I don't believe it is correct that DA can plead the 5th and refuse to answer questions if called to testify in CA's trial. I believe that the state could force DA to testify in CA's trial. FL Stat. Sec. 914.04 provides that a witness may not refuse to testify on the grounds that her testimony may incriminate her, provided that such testimony may not be used against that witness except in a prosecution of that witness for perjury. This statute is the reason that the state was able to force WA to testify in the trials of LR and KM.
Yes, Wendi was given limited immunity that prohibits the State from using her testimony against her. However, this was a calculated decision based largely on the fact that she had been interviewed by the police so Georgia could craft questions knowing what the answers would be and limited her queries to those elements. Donna's situation is MUCH different inasmuch as she is party to recorded incriminating statements with Charlie. Unless Donna flips, we aren't going to see her on the witness stand.I don't believe it is correct that DA can plead the 5th and refuse to answer questions if called to testify in CA's trial. I believe that the state could force DA to testify in CA's trial. FL Stat. Sec. 914.04 provides that a witness may not refuse to testify on the grounds that her testimony may incriminate her, provided that such testimony may not be used against that witness except in a prosecution of that witness for perjury. This statute is the reason that the state was able to force WA to testify in the trials of LR and KM.
Thank you for jumping in. All ideas and opinions are appreciated (well unless they are pro-Adelson to keep it real, for me--I don't see myself appreciating those).Longtime lurker here.....my first post! If the goal of the state is to bring the entire family to justice, is it possible that if Charlie gives up the mishpucha, the state will guarantee that he and Wendi will avoid LWP? This is the only scenario I can imagine Charlie considering.
Nope, not happening. Call Donna to testify and all you will hear is a repeat of her Fifth Amendment.Thank you for explaining. I was confused because Wendi had been called during KM’s trials, so I really didn’t understand when it was said here that Donna would not be called. Guess we will wait and see.
Witnesses can be called by either side but calling a witness is no guarantee they will answer any questions. However, the TD report is correct: the prosecutor did call Wendi Adelson.Very confused why the Tallahassee Democrat wrote (beginning of year) that prosecutors may call the Adelson family members. I can’t link the article because I no longer subscribe, but the article was from Jan 19 of this year before CA was arrested.I guess that changed things.
Love me some Yiddish!Longtime lurker here.....my first post! If the goal of the state is to bring the entire family to justice, is it possible that if Charlie gives up the mishpucha, the state will guarantee that he and Wendi will avoid LWP? This is the only scenario I can imagine Charlie considering.