GUILTY FL - FSU Law Professor Dan Markel Murdered by Hitmen #18

[amicuscurie]

That judge was a federal judge in Miami. I am not sure how he would have had connections to a state prosecutor in Tallahassee, but I guess? I mean, if a federal judge called, Meggs would listen. But would he provide any info beyond case status? Federal and state are totally different systems. Maybe the federal judge Wendi worked for would’ve had access to FBI info, though, maybe that’s what he was looking into. At that time she probably presented to the judge she worked for as a victim of a crime, so maybe the judge was just inquiring about whether they’d made any additional progress in the investigation. Charlie and Donna weren’t charged yet. Is this on one of the phone calls during the bump? Maybe the judge wouldn’t have known just how much suspicion was on the family at that time. Anyway, this is Donna talking about how Wendi said the judge was looking into it, if I recall correctly. I wouldn’t believe either of them necessarily. JMO.

Also- if the judge was giving them inside info, you’d think he’d tell them they were under surveillance.

 

[Florida_marlin]

Yeah, I amended my post. I didn’t really want to get into the social justice stuff. But I thought that whole argument at trial was cheap. It’s Miami. The ethnic dynamics are complicated. The people who did this were poor, but that wasn’t a function of their ethnicity. (As Charlie said, it’s Miami. Everyone is Hispanic.) That said, it may be the case that the Adelsons weren’t charged because they were wealthy. But that was not because of their ethnicity either. In any murder for hire, youre going to hire people who are necessarily poorer or more desperate than you, I would think. So would that always be a defense, “why are the poor people in jail and not the rich ones?” Because they killed someone, that’s why.

Wow, the stuff you posted about Meggs and the case is so interesting! There is definitely something going on that we don’t know. So many missed opportunities! Why didn’t they send someone down to interview Charlie and/or some of his associates in the days after the murder? Both Wendi and Jeff gave them that lead. Katie might have talked, who knows? They might not have told her to lawyer up right away. Charlie might not have figured they’d connect her. But after the bump, and after Garcia was arrested, of course he did.

It could have come down to Meggs being afraid or intimidated by these rich Miami people with their high powered attorneys. It is a chiefly circumstantial case, maybe he just didn’t think it would be enough.

Maybe the police just should not have released the probably cause affidavit like they did.

Meggs was in the news alot. Very colorful. To me, seemed he liked the spotlight. Had some public controversies and run ins with TPD, especially around the Rachael Hodges case (TPD informant murdered during an op). RH’s body was dumped in Taylor County, not far from where I lived at the time. Also, an infamous GJ leak case. You can google and find lots of Meggs local info. I don’t want to impugn or discredit Meggs in any way. Having lived near or in Tally a long time, I personally think Meggs did alot of good during his career. However, it’s hard to be in elected office as long as he and not be near or involved in controversy. There was more than once I scratched my head and said, “wtx“ over his decisions. This was one. Reading the PCA in 2016, looked like a slam dunk to me for KM, CA, DA. There are things that we don’t know that Dist Atty’s know in any particular case. People are elected to this office. It necessarily involves the mix of business and politics. As far as I can tell, the politics side never has to make sense.

 

[Gypsy Road]

Also- if the judge was giving them inside info, you’d think he’d tell them they were under surveillance.

He may not have known, if indeed there was a judge helping the Adelsons. Judges all over the state know each other - especially judges at the Federal level. They aren’t suppose to talk about cases, but they sometimes do. Family member (now deceased) was a long time Federal Judge. He would often tell me it was a lonely place to be, but he also shared that other judges didn’t always keep things to themselves.

I was just speculating about why Meggs wouldn’t agree to prosecute The Adelsons. I have no idea. But it definitely seems odd.

 

[Laura930]

That judge was a federal judge in Miami. I am not sure how he would have had connections to a state prosecutor in Tallahassee, but I guess? I mean, if a federal judge called, Meggs would listen. But would he provide any info beyond case status? Federal and state are totally different systems. Maybe the federal judge Wendi worked for would’ve had access to FBI info, though, maybe that’s what he was looking into. At that time she probably presented to the judge she worked for as a victim of a crime, so maybe the judge was just inquiring about whether they’d made any additional progress in the investigation. Charlie and Donna weren’t charged yet. Is this on one of the phone calls during the bump? Maybe the judge wouldn’t have known just how much suspicion was on the family at that time. Anyway, this is Donna talking about how Wendi said the judge was looking into it, if I recall correctly. I wouldn’t believe either of them necessarily. JMO.

Here is some more info re the Adelson’s connections!

Michael Weinstein, a lifelong friend and sometimes-lawyer of Charlie Adelson (suspected co-conspirator in the murder of Tallahassee law professor Dan Markel), announced last week that he is running for HD 81, the seat vacated by Rep. Tina Polsky.

Weinstein is the son of Peter Weinstein, a former chief judge and former state Senator, who also happens to be godfather to Wendi Adelson, Markel’s ex-wife.

Weinstein has appeared on “20/20” and other TV programs defending the Adelson family, saying that he was doing so not as their legal counsel, but as a friend. He would later appear to be listed as Charlie Adelson’s attorney in joint statements made by his family, denying their role in the 2014 murder of Markel.

He’s also represented Charlie Adelson in various minor infractions, such as driving 93 in a 45 zone. ...

Who else among Florida’s political and legal elite is connected to the Adelson family? Praising of them or worse, protecting them?

One curiosity relates to the mystery Tallahassee judge that matriarch Donna Adelson referenced to Charlie Adelson in a May 2016 call captured on a wiretap:

“ … she [Wendi] and the judge [her boss] are talking. He had some stuff to tell her yesterday because evidently, he knows the judge in Tallahassee and he was giving her some information from that [the murder case]. He’s been very nice to her.” ...

Who else among Florida’s political and legal elite is connected to the Adelson family? Praising of them or worse, protecting them? ...

The Markel case will likely bring additional arrests in the coming months, maybe even before the August primary or November election.

P.S. I heard on a podcast that some of the YouTube true crime people on this case, I believe Fanci Fiction was one, got together and created adds against his candidacy. He lost the election.

 

[Ferpo]

Here is some more info re the Adelson’s connections!

Michael Weinstein, a lifelong friend and sometimes-lawyer of Charlie Adelson (suspected co-conspirator in the murder of Tallahassee law professor Dan Markel), announced last week that he is running for HD 81, the seat vacated by Rep. Tina Polsky.

You couldn't have been more wrong, Michael Weinstein. Ouch.

Reference: South Florida Sun-Sentinel, June 4, 2016

 

[Laura930]

He may not have known, if indeed there was a judge helping the Adelsons. Judges all over the state know each other - especially judges at the Federal level. They aren’t suppose to talk about cases, but they sometimes do. Family member (now deceased) was a long time Federal Judge. He would often tell me it was a lonely place to be, but he also shared that other judges didn’t always keep things to themselves.

I was just speculating about why Meggs wouldn’t agree to prosecute The Adelsons. I have no idea. But it definitely seems odd.

Justice for Dan wrote an interesting blog post around the time of the election referring to Michael Weinstein as defense attorney for CA and also his father’s connection to MEGGS. The entire article is here and a few quotes are below: Michael Weinstein confirms former role as 'zealous advocate' for Charlie Adelson; raises new Qs

“Weinstein's response did not dispute his role a go-between for communications between Charlie, Katie, and Sigfredo just following Sigfredo’s arrest.

Attorney-to-attorney communications are common and perfectly proper. But, the impact of these conversations seemed to matter in this case: Weinstein “assured” Sigfredo Garcia’s then-lawyer Jim Lewis that Charlie and “the family” wouldn’t talk with law enforcement. Lewis then shared this with Katie Magbanua. From there, she and Sigfredo felt safe to avoid cooperating, too. This is reiterated here only to underscore that Weinstein’s early role wasn’t trivial. In this very definitional “Prisoner’s Dilemma,” law enforcement had an uphill battle in eliciting cooperation due to these assurances taking place. Yes, Weinstein was just doing his job – but in this case, that meant that Florida residents had to spend much more time and money to get less justice in this horrific murder case.

The Weinsteins and the Adelsons have been close family friends for your entire life. Your father is Wendi Adelson’s godfather and a former Senate Majority Leader and Senate Judiciary Committee chair who no doubt knows longtime State Attorney Willie Meggs. Meggs was the one who made the initial decision not to prosecute Charlie Adelson, despite the Tallahassee Police Department’s recommendation to move forward and the overwhelming evidence. Are you and your father willing to have an independent investigator look at your phone records and release a redacted version of any communications between your father and Meggs or his associates in Tallahassee so that voters can judge for themselves the extent of your family’s involvement or influence in the Markel case? “

 

[amicuscurie]

Here is some more info re the Adelson’s connections!

Michael Weinstein, a lifelong friend and sometimes-lawyer of Charlie Adelson (suspected co-conspirator in the murder of Tallahassee law professor Dan Markel), announced last week that he is running for HD 81, the seat vacated by Rep. Tina Polsky.

Weinstein is the son of Peter Weinstein, a former chief judge and former state Senator, who also happens to be godfather to Wendi Adelson, Markel’s ex-wife.

Weinstein has appeared on “20/20” and other TV programs defending the Adelson family, saying that he was doing so not as their legal counsel, but as a friend. He would later appear to be listed as Charlie Adelson’s attorney in joint statements made by his family, denying their role in the 2014 murder of Markel.

He’s also represented Charlie Adelson in various minor infractions, such as driving 93 in a 45 zone. ...

Who else among Florida’s political and legal elite is connected to the Adelson family? Praising of them or worse, protecting them?

One curiosity relates to the mystery Tallahassee judge that matriarch Donna Adelson referenced to Charlie Adelson in a May 2016 call captured on a wiretap:

“ … she [Wendi] and the judge [her boss] are talking. He had some stuff to tell her yesterday because evidently, he knows the judge in Tallahassee and he was giving her some information from that [the murder case]. He’s been very nice to her.” ...

Who else among Florida’s political and legal elite is connected to the Adelson family? Praising of them or worse, protecting them? ...

The Markel case will likely bring additional arrests in the coming months, maybe even before the August primary or November election.

P.S. I heard on a podcast that some of the YouTube true crime people on this case, I believe Fanci Fiction was one, got together and created adds against his candidacy. He lost the election.

Michael Weinstein was on the most recent 20/20, billed as a “former friend.”

 

[ChezSimone]

Weird. Do we know who they are? Did she even create the channel?

Yes she probably did. The channel is 13 years old. It was created and the video uploaded in 2010. I cannot think of anyone else creating a channel with a video of her personal life while back then none of what we know had happened yet. Up to two days ago she only had one subscriber. Now she has three but the last two subscribed following my posting of the video.

 

[Laura930]

For better context here is whole post:​

Michael Weinstein confirms former role as 'zealous advocate' for Charlie Adelson; raises new Qs​

Michael Weinstein submitted a formal reply, amended to to the Florida Politics column describing his relationship with the Adelson family. In this, Weinstein asserted that everything he did was within the law and his role as an attorney. That assertion does not contradict anything in the column.

But there’s a lot more to consider.

1) Weinstein’s response understates the role he played in defending Charlie Adelson and his family.

Weinstein didn’t just file motions and draft press statements. Well beyond that, Weinstein voluntarily appeared on local and major network television shows, presenting himself as a longtime family friend and spokesperson.

On ABC’s 20/20, Weinstein stressed that “the family had no involvement whatsoever” in Dan Markel’s murder and that Charlie, “a really easygoing, have a beer, relaxed kind of guy,” could never engage in such conduct.

Weinstein decided to play an important, public, and PERSONAL role in defending his friend. These television appearances were not protected by privilege. What national audiences saw was one man choosing to put his credibility and reputation on the line for another. At the time, the overwhelming evidence of Charlie’s lead role in murdering Markel had already been made public by law enforcement.

Which brings us to …

2) Weinstein’s response fails to differentiate between what might matter potential clients … and what matters to voters.

Surely, future clients would respect that Weinstein – in his own words – “acted as a zealous advocate” for Charlie Adelson. And the role of the criminal defense lawyer is critical in our legal system.

But we’re not talking about clients here. Because Michael Weinstein is running for State House, we’re talking about VOTERS.

Think of it this way: Rudy Giuliani is a “zealous advocate” for HIS client, President Trump. That’s certainly a legal, lawyerly thing to do. Everyone deserves representation. But if Mr. Giuliani ran for office again, voters would also be right to consider if they’d want to vote for a man who chose to align … to defend … to represent the interests of this particular client.

Likewise, the voters of District 81 deserve the chance to ask these kinds of questions, and wouldn’t be wrong to do so.

3) Weinstein's response did not dispute his role a go-between for communications between Charlie, Katie, and Sigfredo just following Sigfredo’s arrest.

Attorney-to-attorney communications are common and perfectly proper. But, the impact of these conversations seemed to matter in this case: Weinstein “assured” Sigfredo Garcia’s then-lawyer Jim Lewis that Charlie and “the family” wouldn’t talk with law enforcement. Lewis then shared this with Katie Magbanua. From there, she and Sigfredo felt safe to avoid cooperating, too. This is reiterated here only to underscore that Weinstein’s early role wasn’t trivial. In this very definitional “Prisoner’s Dilemma,” law enforcement had an uphill battle in eliciting cooperation due to these assurances taking place. Yes, Weinstein was just doing his job – but in this case, that meant that Florida residents had to spend much more time and money to get less justice in this horrific murder case.

Given Mr. Weinstein’s desire to earn the trust of voters, here’s a few questions that might help to start with:

1) Everyone would love to know why you “cut ties with the family.” You could have just declined to be his lawyer – why end a relationship with your groomsman and his entire family, too? And when did you “cut ties with the family” – immediately after David Markus took over Charlie’s defense, or some period of time after that?

2) Do you still stand by the statement you made on 20/20, regarding Charlie’s good nature and the impossibility of his family having played a role in Dan’s murder? If not, why did you go on national TV and say this then, even though law enforcement released the overwhelming evidence of Charlie and Donna’s involvement a week before this segment aired?

3) Based purely on the publicly available evidence, do you think that members of the Adelson family should be prosecuted for the murder of Dan Markel?

4) There is currently a grandparents’ rights bill before the legislature that would allow people like Dan Markel’s parents to petition the courts – what is your position on such a bill, and what has your family communicated to their close friends the Adelsons about their decision to cut off their grandchildren from their other grandparents?

5) The Weinsteins and the Adelsons have been close family friends for your entire life. Your father is Wendi Adelson’s godfather and a former Senate Majority Leader and Senate Judiciary Committee chair who no doubt knows longtime State Attorney Willie Meggs. Meggs was the one who made the initial decision not to prosecute Charlie Adelson, despite the Tallahassee Police Department’s recommendation to move forward and the overwhelming evidence. Are you and your father willing to have an independent investigator look at your phone records and release a redacted version of any communications between your father and Meggs or his associates in Tallahassee so that voters can judge for themselves the extent of your family’s involvement or influence in the Markel case?

 

[Wishbone]

Here is some more info re the Adelson’s connections!

Michael Weinstein, a lifelong friend and sometimes-lawyer of Charlie Adelson (suspected co-conspirator in the murder of Tallahassee law professor Dan Markel), announced last week that he is running for HD 81, the seat vacated by Rep. Tina Polsky.

Weinstein is the son of Peter Weinstein, a former chief judge and former state Senator, who also happens to be godfather to Wendi Adelson, Markel’s ex-wife.

Weinstein has appeared on “20/20” and other TV programs defending the Adelson family, saying that he was doing so not as their legal counsel, but as a friend. He would later appear to be listed as Charlie Adelson’s attorney in joint statements made by his family, denying their role in the 2014 murder of Markel.

He’s also represented Charlie Adelson in various minor infractions, such as driving 93 in a 45 zone. ...

Who else among Florida’s political and legal elite is connected to the Adelson family? Praising of them or worse, protecting them?

One curiosity relates to the mystery Tallahassee judge that matriarch Donna Adelson referenced to Charlie Adelson in a May 2016 call captured on a wiretap:

“ … she [Wendi] and the judge [her boss] are talking. He had some stuff to tell her yesterday because evidently, he knows the judge in Tallahassee and he was giving her some information from that [the murder case]. He’s been very nice to her.” ...

Who else among Florida’s political and legal elite is connected to the Adelson family? Praising of them or worse, protecting them? ...

The Markel case will likely bring additional arrests in the coming months, maybe even before the August primary or November election.

P.S. I heard on a podcast that some of the YouTube true crime people on this case, I believe Fanci Fiction was one, got together and created adds against his candidacy. He lost the election.

that's what I'm talkin about

 

[ChezSimone]

I’m starting to think I have a problem! I am completely obsessed by this case. I’m listening to Georgia’s closing again, it just never gets old. As far as Donna is concerned, I wonder whether there will even be a trial. It would have been great if all of them had been rounded up and grilled in separate rooms. Law enforcement could have bluffed telling them that the others were flipping. Get them singing like songbirds. I’m probably crazy but it’s fun to fantasize about.

I too have been feeling obsessed by this case for a long time. One way that i recently found to balance it out was to get RM's book. I allowed me to take my focus away from the harsh crime and it's cold perpetrators, and turn it equally toward the victims of it and their kind and loving souls. It is a very good read.

 

[Blue Shakehead]

An excerpt from Florida Politics' article on Donna's arrest:
--
Donna’s arrest is a game-changer in a case brought by the State Attorney’s Office in a methodical, yearslong effort to deliver justice, and marks another step toward the innermost “layer” of the crime.

“I suspect that Wendi may be preparing to express shock and horror at what her family did, but in actuality, Wendi took great measures to conceal the truth of who killed Ben and Lincoln’s loving father,” said Karen Cyphers of Justice for Dan. “She provided misdirection during her one and only police interview, hung up on law enforcement, plead the fifth a few hundred times in a defense deposition, fought hard to avoid testifying and then lied under oath in three trials when forced to appear, led investigators down bizarre rabbit holes, and isolated Dan’s children away from the Markel family for years on end. If Wendi attempts to turn on her family now that Donna has been arrested, perhaps this is Charlie’s chance to provide receipts — if he has them — about his sister’s involvement in the conspiracy.”

Or there’s always an extra, unclaimed one-way ticket to Vietnam.

 

[LinasK]

KM testified that as it came out of CA's home safe, it was damp and smelled mouldy. I have no idea how effective putting money through a clothes washer or a dishwasher is in removing or obfuscating fingerprints.

Apparently there was not enough time to run it through the drier, or drying cycle, as applicable. LOL

Literal money laundering. We used to joke about this when we accidentally leave money in our pockets.

 

[Tanager]

Oh dear. I am getting behind in the thread, so please forgive me for revisiting a few items.

I think they are prosecuting the co-conspirators in the same train car fashion that they operated in the conspiracy. It makes sense to me. They clean up the confusion around each "train car" so that they have a tidy package to connect to the connecting train car, staring with the hit men. I think it prevents some of the ability to cast doubt on some of the issues resolved in previous trials, and it also establishes that they only need to connect the adjacent cars, rather than connecting car "A" to car "G". I think there is new evidence that is more appropriately delivered in trials 4,5,6, partly because of WA's limited immunity, and also because it more specifically involves the cars farther from the hit men.

On an unrelated note- I think WA drove past the crime scene for A) sadism and B) to confirm the hit prior to anyone dispersing $ to the killers. She was the only one close enough to complete this task, and I think SG, LR, and KM were exerting tremendous pressure to be paid immediately. It was a collect-on-delivery arrangement for both sides of the transaction, and the A family would be furious to find out that they paid for a plan that was not "executed," which was a distinct possibility.

A C) possibility is that WA felt like she had to make a contribution to the crime. I think CA's comments to DA about how WA does not know how "good she has it" are just the tip of that emotional iceberg, and I bet he implied as much to WA routinely. That is a big shiny red button to push on CA.

I think the Bourbon in the car was the ready excuse if WA needed to explain her presence in the area if she needed to be the one to make the discovery of DM, or if there was another record of her presence in the area. For each planned element of the plot, they had an alternate explanation for their behavior at that time. It is actually these alternate explanations like the TV repair that will trip them up because they are trying to fit them into the narrative unnaturally. WA was smart enough to make use of the pre-existing errand involving the liquor.

The TV stuff is a mess. Whose elderly out-of-town mother makes their (apparently) non-urgent TV repair appointments? If WA did not know about the conspiracy how did they convince her to let this appointment get scheduled at that very specific time after a long delay with a busted TV. Nope. nope. nope.

I'd love a spreadsheet presentation of all of the varied TV references. I think the key to convicting WA is in the TV. I've spent far too much time trying to pull together a "transitive property" equation that explains the behaviors and codespeak of the conspirators in math terms, but the neurons in that part of my brain are damp and moldy.

This case, like so many others, highlights for me the danger involved in families with a fixation with the external appearance of things at the expense of the authentic experience and doing the right thing. When families have CONTROL and APPEARANCE OVER SUBSTANCE as their enduring theme songs, I feel like it is the crockpot for horrific behavior.

Thanks for your continued patience with my chattiness!

 

[clearskies1]

Oh dear. I am getting behind in the thread, so please forgive me for revisiting a few items.

I think they are prosecuting the co-conspirators in the same train car fashion that they operated in the conspiracy. It makes sense to me. They clean up the confusion around each "train car" so that they have a tidy package to connect to the connecting train car, staring with the hit men. I think it prevents some of the ability to cast doubt on some of the issues resolved in previous trials, and it also establishes that they only need to connect the adjacent cars, rather than connecting car "A" to car "G". I think there is new evidence that is more appropriately delivered in trials 4,5,6, partly because of WA's limited immunity, and also because it more specifically involves the cars farther from the hit men.

On an unrelated note- I think WA drove past the crime scene for A) sadism and B) to confirm the hit prior to anyone dispersing $ to the killers. She was the only one close enough to complete this task, and I think SG, LR, and KM were exerting tremendous pressure to be paid immediately. It was a collect-on-delivery arrangement for both sides of the transaction, and the A family would be furious to find out that they paid for a plan that was not "executed," which was a distinct possibility.

A C) possibility is that WA felt like she had to make a contribution to the crime. I think CA's comments to DA about how WA does not know how "good she has it" are just the tip of that emotional iceberg, and I bet he implied as much to WA routinely. That is a big shiny red button to push on CA.

I think the Bourbon in the car was the ready excuse if WA needed to explain her presence in the area if she needed to be the one to make the discovery of DM, or if there was another record of her presence in the area. For each planned element of the plot, they had an alternate explanation for their behavior at that time. It is actually these alternate explanations like the TV repair that will trip them up because they are trying to fit them into the narrative unnaturally. WA was smart enough to make use of the pre-existing errand involving the liquor.

The TV stuff is a mess. Whose elderly out-of-town mother makes their (apparently) non-urgent TV repair appointments? If WA did not know about the conspiracy how did they convince her to let this appointment get scheduled at that very specific time after a long delay with a busted TV. Nope. nope. nope.

I'd love a spreadsheet presentation of all of the varied TV references. I think the key to convicting WA is in the TV. I've spent far too much time trying to pull together a "transitive property" equation that explains the behaviors and codespeak of the conspirators in math terms, but the neurons in that part of my brain are damp and moldy.

This case, like so many others, highlights for me the danger involved in families with a fixation with the external appearance of things at the expense of the authentic experience and doing the right thing. When families have CONTROL and APPEARANCE OVER SUBSTANCE as their enduring theme songs, I feel like it is the crockpot for horrific behavior.

Thanks for your continued patience with my chattiness!

You are wise and eloquent.

 

[amicuscurie]

Oh dear. I am getting behind in the thread, so please forgive me for revisiting a few items.

I think they are prosecuting the co-conspirators in the same train car fashion that they operated in the conspiracy. It makes sense to me. They clean up the confusion around each "train car" so that they have a tidy package to connect to the connecting train car, staring with the hit men. I think it prevents some of the ability to cast doubt on some of the issues resolved in previous trials, and it also establishes that they only need to connect the adjacent cars, rather than connecting car "A" to car "G". I think there is new evidence that is more appropriately delivered in trials 4,5,6, partly because of WA's limited immunity, and also because it more specifically involves the cars farther from the hit men.

On an unrelated note- I think WA drove past the crime scene for A) sadism and B) to confirm the hit prior to anyone dispersing $ to the killers. She was the only one close enough to complete this task, and I think SG, LR, and KM were exerting tremendous pressure to be paid immediately. It was a collect-on-delivery arrangement for both sides of the transaction, and the A family would be furious to find out that they paid for a plan that was not "executed," which was a distinct possibility.

A C) possibility is that WA felt like she had to make a contribution to the crime. I think CA's comments to DA about how WA does not know how "good she has it" are just the tip of that emotional iceberg, and I bet he implied as much to WA routinely. That is a big shiny red button to push on CA.

I think the Bourbon in the car was the ready excuse if WA needed to explain her presence in the area if she needed to be the one to make the discovery of DM, or if there was another record of her presence in the area. For each planned element of the plot, they had an alternate explanation for their behavior at that time. It is actually these alternate explanations like the TV repair that will trip them up because they are trying to fit them into the narrative unnaturally. WA was smart enough to make use of the pre-existing errand involving the liquor.

The TV stuff is a mess. Whose elderly out-of-town mother makes their (apparently) non-urgent TV repair appointments? If WA did not know about the conspiracy how did they convince her to let this appointment get scheduled at that very specific time after a long delay with a busted TV. Nope. nope. nope.

I'd love a spreadsheet presentation of all of the varied TV references. I think the key to convicting WA is in the TV. I've spent far too much time trying to pull together a "transitive property" equation that explains the behaviors and codespeak of the conspirators in math terms, but the neurons in that part of my brain are damp and moldy.

This case, like so many others, highlights for me the danger involved in families with a fixation with the external appearance of things at the expense of the authentic experience and doing the right thing. When families have CONTROL and APPEARANCE OVER SUBSTANCE as their enduring theme songs, I feel like it is the crockpot for horrific behavior.

Thanks for your continued patience with my chattiness!

Can you schedule a TV repair for a specific day and time? How much advance notice do you need? What if Best Buy had said they were not available on that Friday? I wonder about that.

Your theory makes sense to me that she went by the scene to verify. Evidence suggests she left her home right after Sig called Katie.

 

[alexwood]

Maybe he was up for re-election? How could he have been personally sued, that’s really difficult to do. If he’s afraid of wealthy individuals, does that mean he just never prosecutes them? The whole thing is weird.

I think Meggs was due to retire in December 2016.

 

[IQuestion]

Not able to contribute any "oh-wow-info" today. But have questions:
IE: Did HA & DA take an Uber to airport and leave keys in an envelope at home with instructions on what to do with their belongings? It would be silly to park vehicle (that no doubt had a tracker on it by now, right?)
How much cash, if any was in their possession?
Who was the first person (besides a defense atty for DA) did HA call?
Did HA set up any crypto accounts thereby exempting the need for lots of cash?
Could DA & HA have exited the plane in Dubai? ie Jump off the plane? (also a non extradition treaty country, coincidentally)
Did HA & DA mail items (I'm thinking they did) to a foreign locale in anticipation of their departure?
And of course realizing GC is working her way up the conspiracy chain...and thinking "the weakest links" (the ones who could benefit from reduced sentences) would be the first to prosecute and roll-over on their financial benefactors? IE: You never start with the CEO, (SBF?)
There are so many different ways to leave a state surrounded by 1350 miles of coastline, geez lahweez. (Remember the man who escaped a country by hiding in a piano crate?)
Anyway...this is a tragedy that still has a lot of road ahead.

 

[clearskies1]

Can you schedule a TV repair for a specific day and time? How much advance notice do you need? What if Best Buy had said they were not available on that Friday? I wonder about that.

Your theory makes sense to me that she went by the scene to verify. Evidence suggests she left her home right after Sig called Katie.

With at-home services like that I think it's normal to schedule for a specific date and a time window e.g., 9am-12pm. I don't know how far in advance you can schedule with Best Buy.

 

[Gypsy Road]

Awesome posts today! I’m enjoying everyone’s input!

I agree that Wendi went to the crime scene to see if the deal was done, and I have a feeling the money was washed soon after that info was relayed back to Donna.

I also agree that there were SO MANY other creative ways DA and HA could have left the country, but I have a feeling that someone like Donna Adelson always insists on flying first class!

Such dumb people.