GUILTY FL - FSU Law Professor Dan Markel Murdered by Hitmen #20

[cottonweaver]

Just a quick summary cause this is the first time I've managed to pay proper attention to these tapes.
I'm sticking with Gigi from Pretty Little Lies because the other channels are too confusing.
Gigi has uploaded 24 'episodes' so far. For example, there are 6 episodes all covering the 8 November calls.
At this rate we could all think we're discussing the same call, but we're not ( At some point after the holidays, as per @Gardenista & @Seattle1 posts, we can try & order them using a standalone thread)

Anyway, re 6th call on 8th Nov, working my way thru that call & making shorter points instead.

- IMO Wendi knows on 8th that DA & HA are flitting ( she knows by 8am that morning or earlier. )
- IMO, Charlie would have to be bonkers to allow Wendi any leverage over disbursements to his son & babymomma. Maybe he already knows that, he doesn't reply to Donna on this point.

At 3m-6mins- at the start of this episode - Donna outlines who's going to take responsibility for his son's trust and financial needs over the years. According to Donna, sequence is....
-Donna & Harvey now but ' if anything happens to us'...
- it's Michael M ( avoiding surname ) but cause he's old, next it's
- Wendi! Donna tells him '.... she's taking this very seriously and she knows and believe me she will do she will do everything right for them' ( for B & R)

This short sequence ends with....
DA: '...yeah but because of because of our ages we ain't going to be here when R is older ( she laughs) so especially the age that you set it up... so this way Wendy will take care of him ...her nephew... she'll take care of him...you don't have to even think twice about it trust me (she emphasises)....he'll be fine
CA: Pause....( light sobs and then a swerve) ... that's good that Mike is taking care of the both?? yeah that's nice that he's doing that really it's....

Can another WS check if Charlie says the both or the boat? ( Mike F is a different person to Mike M. Mike F is storing Charlie's boat for him. They discuss the boat around 2mins into the episode)
Another question we can only speculate about - DA & HA bought the tickets to flee on Nov 7th. Wendi already knows they are fleeing justice by early morning 8th Nov, or earlier. Did Wendi encourage that or did she try & stop them? Thoughts? One could argue that their flit benefitted her, at least in short term?

 

[clearskies1]

Mentour Lawyer focused tonight on something that struck me, also, as odd on one of those recordings. CA seems absolutely bewildered as to how/why WA just so happened to drive by the house so soon after the murder. Why is CA so bewildered about this? Could that have been a complete surprise to him whenever he found that out?

RSBM. BBM. Yes, I took it to mean that he did not know that she drove to Trescott. JMO.

 

[B4igo2it]

Mentour Lawyer focused tonight on something that struck me, also, as odd on one of those recordings. CA seems absolutely bewildered as to how/why WA just so happened to drive by the house so soon after the murder. Why is CA so bewildered about this?

Another thing that struck me is that in another call, DA claims emphatically that they have always been "protecting Wendi." How far does that "protection" extend? Everybody in the family has a high degree of resentment toward WA for all of the "protection" they feel that they have needed to give her.

good post. CA is working on his appeal and I can't wait to read it. He will probably publish a book and outdo WA in sales and interest, LOL. Speaking of WA, is DA envious and maybe a tad bit jealous of her.

 

[clearskies1]

At 3m-6mins- at the start of this episode - Donna outlines who's going to take responsibility for his son's trust and financial needs over the years. According to Donna, sequence is....
-Donna & Harvey now but ' if anything happens to us'...
- it's Michael M ( avoiding surname ) but cause he's old, next it's
- Wendi! Donna tells him '.... she's taking this very seriously and she knows and believe me she will do she will do everything right for them' ( for B & R)

This short sequence ends with....
DA: '...yeah but because of because of our ages we ain't going to be here when R is older ( she laughs) so especially the age that you set it up... so this way Wendy will take care of him ...her nephew... she'll take care of him...you don't have to even think twice about it trust me (she emphasises)....he'll be fine
CA: Pause....( light sobs and then a swerve) ... that's good that Mike is taking care of the both?? yeah that's nice that he's doing that really it's....

Can another WS check if Charlie says the both or the boat? ( Mike F is a different person to Mike M. Mike F is storing Charlie's boat for him. They discuss the boat around 2mins into the episode)

RSBM. At 6:29 it sounds like Harvey (not Charlie) says "that's good that Mike is taking care of the boat."

 

[stamplewie]

Mentour Lawyer focused tonight on something that struck me, also, as odd on one of those recordings. CA seems absolutely bewildered as to how/why WA just so happened to drive by the house so soon after the murder. Why is CA so bewildered about this? Could that have been a complete surprise to him whenever he found that out? DA seemed to be casually reinforcing him in his soliloquy on that topic, somewhat different than her active participation in CA's other complaints. CA admits it's a one-in-a-million chance that she'd be driving by that house just after the crime, and understands how that reflected so negatively on him.

So, what could that mean? Was CA out of the "knowledge loop?" Could he have been setup by WA and DA - to be an operational agent (i.e. a money mover) with limited "need-to-know" security clearance? Operating under some other story that they fed him? If true, that would give him plausible deniability and, once arrested, a need to come up with some type of Rube-Goldberg rationalization as to why he was moving the money that didn't involve admitting to a murder he didn't know about and/or flipping on his family. He would have been able to quickly figure he was used as a patsy once the murder happened, or when informed by KM the night before that the money was for a murder that he didn't know was inspired by his own family.

Or, alternatively, perhaps it went down exactly as the prosecution theorized, but CA never knew that WA had operational knowledge - I guess relayed from DA who obviously cannot stay silent. WA did tell JL about the upcoming hit, but perhaps she never told CA she knew the plan. IDK, this is confusing.

Another thing that struck me is that in another call, DA claims emphatically that they have always been "protecting Wendi." How far does that "protection" extend? Everybody in the family has a high degree of resentment toward WA for all of the "protection" they feel that they have needed to give her.

I am equally troubled by this. CA explains that he fully understands the unlikeliness that WA would drive past 4 liquor stores, out of her way, to take a longer route to a different liquor store that allows her to drive past Trescott at the scene that very morning of the murder. In one conversation he said he thought the police were making it up when he first heard, until WA admitted to the drive by. He seems bewildered by this and can't figure out how such a coincidence is possible since WA didn't know. What the heck?

 

[stamplewie]

good post. CA is working on his appeal and I can't wait to read it. He will probably publish a book and outdo WA in sales and interest, LOL. Speaking of WA, is DA envious and maybe a tad bit jealous of her.

This is not about an appeal. He knows he has nothing to appeal. He has said as much on the calls. This seems legitimately about CA trying to figure out how on gods green earth he could have gotten so unlucky that on the day of the murder, WA drives by the scene, implying that she did so not knowing what was going to go down, but by doing so, essentially sealed his fate.

 

[cottonweaver]

RSBM. At 6:29 it sounds like Harvey (not Charlie) says "that's good that Mike is taking care of the boat."

Thanks CS.
So it's a definite swerve from Charlie. ( He's not acknowledging Donna' s assurances wtte: Trust me! Wendi will look after Roman into the future.' Felt like a significant omission to me. No trust. No, I wouldn't trust Wendi either but it's great leverage for Wendi so I'd want to get out from under that. )

Back to the current topic on this page. I haven't seen MentourLawyer, am just doing Gigi's tapes & WS posts instead. Nevertheless, do we all think that Dumb Charlie realises his jail calls would be released to the public, ie. that Wendi would get to hear them within weeks of his conviction?

I just want to work out which audiences he's speaking to. (Obviously sometimes it's for the State/LE)

 

[cottonweaver]

good post. CA is working on his appeal and I can't wait to read it. He will probably publish a book and outdo WA in sales and interest, LOL. Speaking of WA, is DA envious and maybe a tad bit jealous of her.

Call I'm listening to while doing Christmas baking -

At 39m, he says ‘ The little author couldn’t help herself’ ( Help herself from turning up at the crime scene.) Reads like pure snark, he’s bitter.

and he's now got all the time in the world to ruminate and become more bitter. Watch-out Wendi!

Source: Call 6 of the 8th Nov's calls

 

[Knitpicker]

I am equally troubled by this. CA explains that he fully understands the unlikeliness that WA would drive past 4 liquor stores, out of her way, to take a longer route to a different liquor store that allows her to drive past Trescott at the scene that very morning of the murder. In one conversation he said he thought the police were making it up when he first heard, until WA admitted to the drive by. He seems bewildered by this and can't figure out how such a coincidence is possible since WA didn't know. What the heck?

Acting as if he didn’t know would insulate him from a possible call made to him after she drove by, telling him the “deed” was accomplished ,which he may have relayed to Katie.
Katie would not admit she said “I know” when SG finally called her at 12:30, 90 minutes after he shot DM.
How did she find out?
Wendi’s drive by?
I think he’s mentioning this for a reason, not bc he didn’t know she drove by. Theres got to be a reason he keeps repeating it. Perhaps bc of that call (if it happened-and it had to be a burner phone)

 

[cottonweaver]

RSBM. BBM. Yes, I took it to mean that he did not know that she drove to Trescott. JMO.

I'm not sure if I believe him.

At 48m - 50m, in the same call ( linked above on this WS page) he's claiming that he'd never heard of this evidence until he heard Officer Brannon testify to it , he thought Brannon was 'was making S--- up.... an A Hole...'
( I'm assuming he means Brannon in trial 1? 2019. )
Ok, he may not have had access to Discovery ( on the sly via KM's lawyer) but when did MentourLawyer first upload that Isom interview?

Surely it was pre Trial 1? Any ' case oldies' know or recall which year they first watched that?

( Charlie would've watched her Isom interview as soon as it was uploaded. Plus Wendi told her pals in 2014 that she'd driven down Trescott, it beggars belief that she didn't tell Mum & Dad too. He could be lying)

Have a listen and see what y'all think when you get time, or perhaps, somebody who's pals with Mentour Lawyer can ask him?

either - he's lying OR
it's another black mark against Wendi who withheld key evidence from him, for years. Evidence which sunk him, he feels.

 

[Knitpicker]

RSBM. BBM. Yes, I took it to mean that he did not know that she drove to Trescott. JMO.

Because perhaps Wendi made the call to Charlie after the drive by,to let him know it happened?
I say that bc of LR's statement that Katie said “I know” when SG called Katie at 12:30 PM 90 minutes after the hit.
How did Katie know?
could be WA had a burner and called Charlie who then called Katie.
so CA is protecting himself from knowing about her drive by, and the call to him.

 

[Knitpicker]

I'm not sure if I believe him.

At 48m - 50m, in the same call ( linked above on this WS page) he's claiming that he'd never heard of this evidence until he heard Officer Brannon testify to it , he thought Brannon was 'was making S--- up.... an A Hole...'
( I'm assuming he means Brannon in trial 1? 2019. )
Ok, he may not have had access to Discovery ( on the sly via KM's lawyer) but when did MentourLawyer first upload that Isom interview?

Surely it was pre Trial 1? Any ' case oldies' know or recall which year they first watched that?

( Charlie would've watched her Isom interview as soon as it was uploaded. Plus Wendi told her pals in 2014, it beggars belief that she didn't tell Mum & Dad too. He could be lying)

Have a listen and see what y'all think when you get time, or perhaps, somebody who's pals with Mentour Lawyer can ask him?

either - he's lying OR
it's another black mark against Wendi who withheld key evidence from him, for years. Evidence which sunk him, he feels.

I think ML uploaded it within the last year and a half bc I have been following this case since 4/2022 and I remember seeing it uploaded a bit after I started intently following the case. I may be wrong.

 

[clearskies1]

Because perhaps Wendi made the call to Charlie after the drive by,to let him know it happened?
I say that bc of LR's statement that Katie said “I know” when SG called Katie at 12:30 PM 90 minutes after the hit.
How did Katie know?
could be WA had a burner and called Charlie who then called Katie.
so CA is protecting himself from knowing about her drive by, and the call to him.

I don't think there was enough time for WA to have called CA about Trescott before the SG/KM 12:30pm call. I think phone records show WA in her driveway area (had not left her home yet) at 12:27 pm. I don't think she could have gotten to Trescott and contacted CA by 12:30pm. I'm also not convinced that LR accurately remembers/heard the "I know" part. JMO.

 

[cottonweaver]

I think ML uploaded it within the last year and a half bc I have been following this case since 4/2022 and I remember seeing it uploaded a bit after I started intently following the case. I may be wrong.

Good! I want her to have lied to him for years (withheld vital info)

 

[clearskies1]

I am equally troubled by this. CA explains that he fully understands the unlikeliness that WA would drive past 4 liquor stores, out of her way, to take a longer route to a different liquor store that allows her to drive past Trescott at the scene that very morning of the murder. In one conversation he said he thought the police were making it up when he first heard, until WA admitted to the drive by. He seems bewildered by this and can't figure out how such a coincidence is possible since WA didn't know. What the heck?

I'm not surprised by it. One could argue that it seems that he's saying that Wendi went rogue -- could not control herself -- and stupidly drove to Trescott, and then did not admit to CA that she did that. JMO.

 

[Knitpicker]

Good! I want her to have lied to him for years (withheld vital info)

Just checked- Deep Dive true crime-states 1 year ago

 

[Knitpicker]

I don't think there was enough time for WA to have called CA about Trescott before the SG/KM 12:30pm call. I think phone records show WA in her driveway area (had not left her home yet) at 12:27 pm. I don't think she could have gotten to Trescott and contacted CA by 12:30pm. I'm also not convinced that LR accurately remembers/heard the "I know" part. JMO.

In the earlier trials,I believe Det Corbitt said he believed she left her house 12:15. I remember being surprised when it seemed changed to 12:30.and I also remember in the first or second trial Wendi being asked when she left the house and she confirmed it was 12:15. That stayed in my mind but would take rewatching a lot of testimony!

 

[Knitpicker]

I don't think there was enough time for WA to have called CA about Trescott before the SG/KM 12:30pm call. I think phone records show WA in her driveway area (had not left her home yet) at 12:27 pm. I don't think she could have gotten to Trescott and contacted CA by 12:30pm. I'm also not convinced that LR accurately remembers/heard the "I know" part. JMO.

When was it mentioned she was in her driveway area?I remember the cell tower mention but it extended down Centerville and could have put her in a range between her house and where Trescott starts.With so many details and trials it's hard to know where I remember this! I don’t want to mistate anything.

 

[Knitpicker]

Has anyone seen the one with CA talking about that guy Ryan, and something about an investigator, a picture near a Publix or something, and how he wants Rausch to go after him? Any idea what that is all about? I know Ryan is the one from trial, former business partner he said stole from him.

Didn’t Ryan say the lawsuit was frivolous?
Maybe to now pursue it?

 

[Zedzded]

I'm not sure if I believe him.

At 48m - 50m, in the same call ( linked above on this WS page) he's claiming that he'd never heard of this evidence until he heard Officer Brannon testify to it , he thought Brannon was 'was making S--- up.... an A Hole...'
( I'm assuming he means Brannon in trial 1? 2019. )
Ok, he may not have had access to Discovery ( on the sly via KM's lawyer) but when did MentourLawyer first upload that Isom interview?

Surely it was pre Trial 1? Any ' case oldies' know or recall which year they first watched that?

( Charlie would've watched her Isom interview as soon as it was uploaded. Plus Wendi told her pals in 2014 that she'd driven down Trescott, it beggars belief that she didn't tell Mum & Dad too. He could be lying)

Have a listen and see what y'all think when you get time, or perhaps, somebody who's pals with Mentour Lawyer can ask him?

either - he's lying OR
it's another black mark against Wendi who withheld key evidence from him, for years. Evidence which sunk him, he feels.

He's a pathological liar, but I actually believe him when he says he didn't know she drove to the crime scene. She wasn't supposed to, that wasn't part of the plan and messed up her stupid alibis. She couldn't help herself though, drove past, but kept it quiet from CA and DA, knowing they wouldn't be best pleased. CA really does throw her under the bus.