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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
On Descalzo

I can't link it because I'd never be able to find the time-stamp and FWIW caveats apply....

but somewhere in Mentour Lawyer's last ' Live' he mentioned poor relations between Descalzo and the SA's office because of Descalzo not being honest. ( Mentour Lawyer said this was happening around the time Descalzo filed that frivolous motion pertaining to Donna & Harvey being available for interview. He said that in contrast relations between Cappleman & Rashbaum had been good. )

Link to that pre-trial motion from Descalzo
 
On Descalzo

I can't link it because I'd never be able to find the time-stamp and FWIW caveats apply....

but somewhere in Mentour Lawyer's last ' Live' he mentioned poor relations between Descalzo and the SA's office because of Descalzo not being honest. ( Mentour Lawyer said this was happening around the time Descalzo filed that frivolous motion pertaining to Donna & Harvey being available for interview. He said that in contrast relations between Cappleman & Rashbaum had been good. )

Link to that pre-trial motion from Descalzo

Yes, I recall posting something about an email exchange with the prosecutors office on availability of the witnesses that Descalzo later played ignorant about.

IIRC, Rashbaum was a former federal prosecutor, and a worthy opponent to Cappleman -- given what he had to work with. JMO

 
Yes, I recall posting something about an email exchange with the prosecutors office on availability of the witnesses that Descalzo later played ignorant about.

IIRC, Rashbaum was a former federal prosecutor, and a worthy opponent to Cappleman -- given what he had to work with. JMO
Interesting.
ML didn't go into any detail so I wasn't sure.
 
Interesting.
ML didn't go into any detail so I wasn't sure.

Descalzo began playing word games when the defense decided to fall on Discovery Rules and alleged the request to depose the witnesses came after an arbitrary Discovery "deadline date." When the state responded that the dated Motion was NOT their first communication, the Court ruled in favor of the Prosecution and Ordered Descalzo/defense produce the witnesses for interviews or be held in contempt. Ultimately, the parties agreed off record to each remove the witnesses from the admitted witness list for trial, and DA/HA were never interviewed.
 
Last edited:
From the above article, she requested a Bible. I find this ridiculous- the woman who doesn't keep Kosher and threatened to convert her grandsons to Catholicism suddenly found Judaism??? Hope that she has a lousy Hanukkah in jail.
 
I agree re incarceration conditions. There are also allegations in that motion which are serious and need investigating.

However, it seems she's complaining about conditions particular to being on suicide watch. Similar inmates on suicide watch will get the same treatment.

Some examples of stuff she's complaining about
no book/Bible
no cutlery
stripped-down cells

IDK how full their 'protective' unit is & IDK their staff/inmate ratios - for safe monitoring 24/7- but there will be practical implications flowing from the stats
Also, claiming not to be receiving medication (for high blood pressure, as one example) she had been prescribed "on the outside."
 
I hate to be ignorant, but I didn't think there was a Jewish bible. Am I wrong (wouldn't surprise me if I was)?
The Jewish sacred text is called the Tanakh or the “Hebrew Bible.” It includes the same books as the Old Testament in the Christian Bible, but they're placed in a slightly different order.
 
I’m skipping way ahead here on this thread to post this, so apologies if this was discussed already. I’m watching WA’s cross in CA’s trial and watching her mannerisms (that head tilt for one, and very little emotion. It’s strange). It occurred to me what JL would think of her testimony and I’m wondering if he’s been interviewed anywhere (STS?) for his reaction to her testimony. It would be so interesting to hear his thoughts. He seemed to know her very well and he seemed to eventually see through her.
 
I’m skipping way ahead here on this thread to post this, so apologies if this was discussed already. I’m watching WA’s cross in CA’s trial and watching her mannerisms (that head tilt for one, and very little emotion. It’s strange). It occurred to me what JL would think of her testimony and I’m wondering if he’s been interviewed anywhere (STS?) for his reaction to her testimony. It would be so interesting to hear his thoughts. He seemed to know her very well and he seemed to eventually see through her.
I don't think he's been interviewed. An interview would be a very bad idea because he will likely testify again. I know some witnesses have done interviews, but I think JL is too smart to get involved in that. Anything you say can be twisted and can come right back at you.
 
I don't think he's been interviewed. An interview would be a very bad idea because he will likely testify again. I know some witnesses have done interviews, but I think JL is too smart to get involved in that. Anything you say can be twisted and can come right back at you.
Oh yes of course. Probably not a great idea. Just would love to get his take on W. Maybe some day.
 
One more intriguing question (to me), then I’ll be quiet for the rest of the night lol. Do you all think the adelson’s watched Charlie’s trial? All of it? Just certain parts/witnesses? Or were they too scared to watch and maybe just got recaps from their attorneys? TIA
 
One more intriguing question (to me), then I’ll be quiet for the rest of the night lol. Do you all think the adelson’s watched Charlie’s trial? All of it? Just certain parts/witnesses? Or were they too scared to watch and maybe just got recaps from their attorneys? TIA
I'll bet they watched every minute.
You needn't be quiet!
 
One more intriguing question (to me), then I’ll be quiet for the rest of the night lol. Do you all think the adelson’s watched Charlie’s trial? All of it? Just certain parts/witnesses? Or were they too scared to watch and maybe just got recaps from their attorneys? TIA

I think they may have watched moments of it. I think if the prosecution had been struggling and it was clear a conviction was unlikely they would have watched every moment, especially when the maestro took the stand. That would be his time to shine, his crowning glory, his simpering mother watching in delight as her son conducted proceedings, with GC wilting in the background. When it was abundantly clear to DA and HA that the trial was going pear-shaped, they would have switched over to the shopping channel.
 
And I don't think they will have any issues distancing themselves from WA or CA. There is no love in that family, only toxic bonds which can be easily broken. Look how easily they ejected Robert from the family.
 
The Old Testament is the "Jewish Bible". The 5 books, the Torah. I have more than one copy sitting on my shelves.

In my opinion, all evidence suggests she is not a particularly religious person, and so her request for a “Bible” may have been a scheme to make herself appear to fit in with the locals in order to gain some advantage. Remember, as part of a scheme to gain advantage in the divorce, she urged Wendi to say she was converting to Christianity to fit in in the “Bible Belt.” She also says in one email that the judge in the divorce would probably be happy to hear Wendi has found Christianity. It is possible Donna thinks asking for ”a Bible“ will get her better treatment by the people running the jail. JMO, of course.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
146
Guests online
2,979
Total visitors
3,125

Forum statistics

Threads
599,913
Messages
18,101,493
Members
230,955
Latest member
ClueCrusader
Back
Top