GUILTY FL - FSU Law Professor Dan Markel Murdered by Hitmen #19

[amicuscurie]

I love how defendants start TESTIFYING on their own behalf. I thought it was not common for this to happen in every murder trial.

It’s not. Another way these people are not normal, IMO.

 

[amicuscurie]

Is Wendy's friend Jane on the phone with Donna here? Reason I ask is that it sounds to me like Jane says "Bye Donna" at the end of the call. At 3:02:50. JMO.

I thought she said “bye John,” and maybe it was her husband. I love the way she says “I have suggested Jeff LaCasse,” like it’s official.

 

[amicuscurie]

I would be shocked if Donna's defense strategy is a redux of Charlie's extortion flop. Charlie's strategy was crafted because he had to explain his own words on Dolce Vita, his stapled money being used to payoff the actual killers and his gifts/love texts to Katie. Most of that evidence will be used in the Donna trial, but it doesn't have the same bite and she doesn't have to explain it all away.

If the State had pushed through with their investigative subpoena's in the weeks before Charlie's trial, they could have locked Donna and Harvey into a story. But as it stands, Donna's defense lawyers have an open canvass unfortunately.

ETA: There is one small catch here for Donna. The Markel children have likely been fed the extortion lies as the truth. So if grandma's defense gets up there with a new theory, the grandkids will know the Adelson's are all lying and are responsible for murdering their father. That said, I think the grandkids perception of her is second to her own self interest, which would be crafting a defense strategy that has any chance of success.

I think they will be told that the real story is whatever Donna’s defense is, and the extortion story was to protect Charlie and so they wouldn’t think bad of their uncle. Now they have to be told the real story, because Donna is in jail. Charlie is the black sheep, remember? JMO

 

[opt]

I’m going to disagree. The kids are very intelligent. You can lie to them once and they will buy it. When you change your story they will start questioning. They will quickly realize that there’s only one story which makes sense.

Once kids learn that Santa Claus isn’t real they aren’t going to believe in the Easter Bunny.

(ETA: Yes I know Jewish kids don’t believe in either one!)

 

[Blue Shakehead]

I think they will be told that the real story is whatever Donna’s defense is, and the extortion story was to protect Charlie and so they wouldn’t think bad of their uncle. Now they have to be told the real story, because Donna is in jail. Charlie is the black sheep, remember? JMO

Whatever her defense is, it won't be enough to overcome the evidence.

The reason KM and CA have had to take the stand is because the circumstantial evidence in this case is their own words and actions which happen to be exactly what we would expect from guilty people. I don't know if DA will take the stand, but she might have to. There are no other witnesses that will be able to explain why she would be telling Charlie that a newspaper article about Dan Markel's murder involves "the two of us" or "this TV is probably about 5". No witnesses that can tell a jury why Donna needed to meet in secret to discuss the murder/hitmen because she worried her apartment and phone were bugged by LE. Innocent people don't do any of these things and there's no explaining them away. I don't care if they hire Baez. The Adelson's are going down. But I really do hope they stick with this Marrissel Descalzo half-wit.

 

[Florida_marlin]

On the way from South Georgia to Mississippi to visit family for Thanksgiving. We stopped by our old stomping grounds in Tallahassee along the way. Went to eat a late lunch at Azu Lucy Ho’s. Cruised our old neighborhood. Leaving town up Capital Circle NE. Crossed over Centerville intersection. Thought, yea, right, navigating to ABC on Betton with a “shortcut” around Trescott. No freakin way!

 

[clearskies1]

Whatever her defense is, it won't be enough to overcome the evidence.

The reason KM and CA have had to take the stand is because the circumstantial evidence in this case is their own words and actions which happen to be exactly what we would expect from guilty people. I don't know if DA will take the stand, but she might have to. There are no other witnesses that will be able to explain why she would be telling Charlie that a newspaper article about Dan Markel's murder involves "the two of us" or "this TV is probably about 5". No witnesses that can tell a jury why Donna needed to meet in secret to discuss the murder/hitmen because she worried her apartment and phone were bugged by LE. Innocent people don't do any of these things and there's no explaining them away. I don't care if they hire Baez. The Adelson's are going down. But I really do hope they stick with this Marrissel Descalzo half-wit.

Yeah, IMO there's no hope for Donna. Witness stand or not -- totally hopeless. JMO.

 

[Orange Tabby]

Court TV tonight just had two segments on the DM murder case. There was nothing tremendously important, but there were a handful of things at least worth mentioning.

Tim Jansen was the first guest and he told Michael Ayala (substituting for Vinnie Politan):

—Donna will get a new booking photo in Tallahassee [more to mock!];

—Charlie’s last meal before being arrested was at McDonald’s;

—If Donna arrives early enough tonight for an arraignment tomorrow, she will appear before Judge Jones via video;

—After LE heard Donna tell Charlie that she contemplated flight from the jurisdiction, she was put on 24-hour surveillance;

—“She [DA] was clearly the impetus, she got her son to do it”;

—The “consciousness of guilt evidence” [her attempted flight from the jurisdiction] will be very strong evidence in her trial.

There was less of interest in the following segment, but there were a few moments I’ll mention:

Commenting lawyer Darnell Crosland was astonished by Wendy’s attempt to flee the jurisdiction at such a late juncture in the proceedings and stated (the obvious) that she should have left far earlier and with a “two-way” ticket. (I assume he meant “round-trip” ticket; or a “return ticket” for our British and Commonwealth friends.)

Another commenting lawyer, Al Wunsch, III also stated the obvious with his nonetheless amusing point: speaking in code is a bad idea when you leave a paper trail (referring to the KM checks).

Host Michael Ayala evaluated the three completed trials by saying “it has been a masterful prosecution.”

Surprisingly, no one told us to tune in to Court TV for the arraignment tomorrow. I can only assume the probable 11am time is EST. Is Tally in the Eastern Time Zone? I’m actually embarrassed to have to ask, and too tired to look it up.

 

[Zedzded]

Whatever her defense is, it won't be enough to overcome the evidence.

Yeah, which is why I asked whether there was anything to gain by DA pleading guilty. Various legal experts have pretty much given DA no chance of winning, would there be a plea deal available to her? Is her legal team going to be straight with her i.e telling her what her chances of winning actually are? CA seemed convinced he was going home, where did he get that idea from? His lawyers?

 

[Zedzded]

I’m going to disagree. The kids are very intelligent. You can lie to them once and they will buy it. When you change your story they will start questioning. They will quickly realize that there’s only one story which makes sense.

Once kids learn that Santa Claus isn’t real they aren’t going to believe in the Easter Bunny.

(ETA: Yes I know Jewish kids don’t believe in either one!)

We don't know their state of minds. They were very young when their Dad died, they've grown up being smothered by toxic and manipulative relatives as well as a mother who is clearly unwell and troubled. Now their Uncle is in jail for killing their Dad, their Grandma is in jail and their Grandad and own mother are also suspects in the murder of their Dad and also looking at potential jail sentences. They are facing losing their entire family and going to live with virtual strangers.

The truth may be blatantly obvious to them, but they may choose not to believe it, because if they do, the family they know is dead to them. Much easier to believe a bunch of lies.

 

[Weki]

Her first appearance is likely to be very similar to the one in Miami. It’ll be a couple minutes long formality. There’s no CourtTV - it’s gonna be on Zoom/she will appear from the jail via video. I’m surprised CourtTV did a whole show on the Adelsons, what is there to cover? Charlie’s last bowel movement before his arrest? Lol.

Anyway, after tomorrow the next we’ll see Donna will be some kind of pre-trial status conference to figure out when this will go to trial. The most interesting thing will be the identity of her defense atty!

JMO

 

[amicuscurie]

We don't know their state of minds. They were very young when their Dad died, they've grown up being smothered by toxic and manipulative relatives as well as a mother who is clearly unwell and troubled. Now their Uncle is in jail for killing their Dad, their Grandma is in jail and their Grandad and own mother are also suspects in the murder of their Dad and also looking at potential jail sentences. They are facing losing their entire family and going to live with virtual strangers.

The truth may be blatantly obvious to them, but they may choose not to believe it, because if they do, the family they know is dead to them. Much easier to believe a bunch of lies.

Agree, couldn’t have said it better.

 

[legalmomma]

I love how defendants start TESTIFYING on their own behalf. I thought it was not common for this to happen in every murder trial.

Just the guilty, arrogant, wealthy defendants.

 

[clearskies1]

Yeah, which is why I asked whether there was anything to gain by DA pleading guilty. Various legal experts have pretty much given DA no chance of winning, would there be a plea deal available to her? Is her legal team going to be straight with her i.e telling her what her chances of winning actually are? CA seemed convinced he was going home, where did he get that idea from? His lawyers?

If Donna has any brain cells she knows it's hopeless. I think the State believes that she basically put the wheels in motion for Dan to be murdered and I think the State wants her behind bars for life. In terms of a plea deal, Donna has no cards to play -- unless she flips on WA or HA, and that's not going to happen. Don't know what the lawyer she chooses will tell her, but Donna isn't stupid and should know it's over. JMO.

 

[amicuscurie]

If Donna has any brain cells she knows it's hopeless. The State thinks she put the wheels in motion for Dan to be murdered -- I think the State wants her behind bars for life. In terms of a plea deal, Donna has no cards to play -- unless she flips on WA or HA, and that's not going to happen. Don't know what the lawyer she chooses will tell her, but Donna isn't stupid and should know it's over. JMO.

I’m still not sure whether Donna put pressure on Charlie to find someone to do this, or whether Donna was so unhappy that Charlie found someone to do this and then presented it to Donna as a solution, like The Maestro he is.

 

[clearskies1]

I’m still not sure whether Donna put pressure on Charlie to find someone to do this, or whether Donna was so unhappy that Charlie found someone to do this and then presented it to Donna as a solution, like The Maestro he is.

Regardless, she's at/near the top of the food chain in terms of culpability from the State's perspective (they made that clear in CA's case -- going after her big time) and will never be a free woman again IMO.

 

[LinasK]

Yeah, which is why I asked whether there was anything to gain by DA pleading guilty. Various legal experts have pretty much given DA no chance of winning, would there be a plea deal available to her? Is her legal team going to be straight with her i.e telling her what her chances of winning actually are? CA seemed convinced he was going home, where did he get that idea from? His lawyers?

What would be the prosecution's motivation to offer her a plea deal? Unless she's going to flip on Harvey or Wendy, they've already gotten Dan's body and the hitmen. The only other possible reason that I can think of would be to spare the cost of a trial/if they had a weak case. None of the above seems likely to me.

 

[Gypsy Road]

I'll get a swanky bar cart and pose with a jeroboam!
Dictionary.com | Meanings & Definitions of English Words

I actually will once in awhile clear off a rolling cart I use for craft and sewing supplies and turn it into a bar cart. It ain’t swanky at all, but it’s still fun! My favorite thing to make in the autumn is an Iowa City Oatmeal meal cookie cocktail. THE BEST! Google the recipe. Sorry OT!

So glad Donna is on her way to Tally!

 

[Gypsy Road]

Court TV tonight just had two segments on the DM murder case. There was nothing tremendously important, but there were a handful of things at least worth mentioning.

Tim Jansen was the first guest and he told Michael Ayala (substituting for Vinnie Politan):

—Donna will get a new booking photo in Tallahassee [more to mock!];

—Charlie’s last meal before being arrested was at McDonald’s;

—If Donna arrives early enough tonight for an arraignment tomorrow, she will appear before Judge Jones via video;

—After LE heard Donna tell Charlie that she contemplated flight from the jurisdiction, she was put on 24-hour surveillance;

—“She [DA] was clearly the impetus, she got her son to do it”;

—The “consciousness of guilt evidence” [her attempted flight from the jurisdiction] will be very strong evidence in her trial.

There was less of interest in the following segment, but there were a few moments I’ll mention:

Commenting lawyer Darnell Crosland was astonished by Wendy’s attempt to flee the jurisdiction at such a late juncture in the proceedings and stated (the obvious) that she should have left far earlier and with a “two-way” ticket. (I assume he meant “round-trip” ticket; or a “return ticket” for our British and Commonwealth friends.)

Another commenting lawyer, Al Wunsch, III also stated the obvious with his nonetheless amusing point: speaking in code is a bad idea when you leave a paper trail (referring to the KM checks).

Host Michael Ayala evaluated the three completed trials by saying “it has been a masterful prosecution.”

Surprisingly, no one told us to tune in to Court TV for the arraignment tomorrow. I can only assume the probable 11am time is EST. Is Tally in the Eastern Time Zone? I’m actually embarrassed to have to ask, and too tired to look it up.

It’s in the Eastern time zone yes.

 

[Gypsy Road]

What would be the prosecution's motivation to offer her a plea deal? Unless she's going to flip on Harvey or Wendy, they've already gotten Dan's body and the hitmen. The only other possible reason that I can think of would be to spare the cost of a trial/if they had a weak case. None of the above seems likely to me.

There’s a recent interview a reporter did with Jack Campbell after Donna’s arrest, and the reporter asked him if there might be a possible plea deal in Donna’s case and he said something to the effect that it likely not a possibility.