FL - FSU Law Professor Dan Markel Murdered by Hitmen *3 guilty* #14

[Missyrocks5]

When WA lies saying the Markel’s could see the boys any time, GC should’ve asked if they were invited to the Bar Mitzvah. They weren’t, a huge affront.

The defense is ridiculous. On the wiretaps, CA is screaming at KM to call the number, find out who came up to his mom, and fix it. Who goes to your alleged extortionist to tell them that they need to go find out who the other extortionist is and fix it. The people who supposedly have their finger on the trigger threatening you? You’re screaming at her telling her what she needs to do to figure out who is extorting you? Laughable.

His paranoia, being afraid, went sky high with the arrest of the three. Once they were behind bars, why was he still afraid? Why didn’t he go to the police to say these people were threatening me? How did he allow his sister to move down to South Florida to be closer to the extortionist who were threatening everyone’s lives? He was so close to his family yet allowed his sister and his nephews to be in danger and not know it? It’s ludicrous.

The absolute most ridiculous was saying that she had no idea until trial that this was going on. And the defense attorney with his faux indignation, screaming about how Lacasse didn’t go. Tell the police after he heard about a past threat to potentially Dan yet his defense is his client didn’t go to the police for nine years when he was being extorted and his life threatened? Laughable.

On Dolce Vita, he spends how long coaching Katie how to call and what to say for the payoff? If she’s such a mastermind manipulator to set up a whole extortion plot against CA, why would he have to explain it to her? Very key in all of that is he asks KM if SG is angry with him for having dated her. He’s asking her-he knows that I didn’t wait around to go out with you, he knows that it wasn’t like that. So if the two hitman and katie were already threatening and extorting Charlie, why would he ask that if they already supposedly threatened to kill him? Laughable.

But Casey Anthony’s defense implausibility make me worried here. Several observers in the gallery reported that WA was doing her doe eyes and head tilt, smiling to the jurors while the lawyers were sidebar, and one male juror smiled back at her. That’s bad.

 

[Gypsy Road]

It’s really quite pathetic that JU still has feelings for CA after it’s obvious he had Dan murdered. Say - even if he didn’t, he’s still not exactly an upstanding gentleman. She does seem super shallow however, and materialistic…so maybe quality virtues in a man aren’t a priority for her.

 

[Blue Shakehead]

When WA lies saying the Markel’s could see the boys any time, GC should’ve asked if they were invited to the Bar Mitzvah. They weren’t, a huge affront.

So true! The Markels were actually invited to the Bar Mitzvah but that invitation was rescinded when they arrested Charlie a couple days before the event.

A really good line of questioning would've been to have asked Wendi if the Markels attended the Bar Mitzvah and then ask Wendi to explain to the jury whether the Bar Mitzvah is important in the Jewish faith or important for grandparents to attend? And then ask why their invitation was rescinded and whether it was because Ruth Markel was still "trying to put her kids in foster care" in 2022 when their invitation was rescinded? No Ok. so, was their invitation rescinded because Charlie was arrested? And isn't it true that you started refusing the Markels access to their grandsons at the same time that the first arrests were made in this case back in 2016?

 

[Oregonmama]

Hoping CA will flip soon and have everyone who has not been charged face their day in court. JMO

 

[Weki]

So true! The Markels were actually invited to the Bar Mitzvah but that invitation was rescinded when they arrested Charlie a couple days before the event.

A really good line of questioning would've been to have asked Wendi if the Markels attended the Bar Mitzvah and then ask Wendi to explain to the jury whether the Bar Mitzvah is important in the Jewish faith or important for grandparents to attend? And then ask why their invitation was rescinded and whether it was because Ruth Markel was still "trying to put her kids in foster care" in 2022 when their invitation was rescinded? No Ok. so, was their invitation rescinded because Charlie was arrested? And isn't it true that you started refusing the Markels access to their grandsons at the same time that the first arrests were made in this case back in 2016?

Right! I want to say GC went into this more in the 1st trial. But she just dropped it this time and let Wendi get away with that patently false assertion. Wendi’s bald face lying irks me so much. That’s why I wanted GC to declare her a hostile witness and GO AT HER!!

 

[amicuscurie]

Seems to me the entirety of this case including the TV repair boil down to the Adelson code: Protect Wendi at all cost, and how since birth, Wendi was just a participant in her own life where all decisions were made by Donna. And if you couldn't live by the code, you were out. JMO

That’s absolutely the case, I think. That’s why I am willing to entertain the thought that they could have done this behind her back. I know I’m in the minority. Because the way they talk about her on the wiretaps is very much like they control her whole life and don’t believe she knows what best for herself. She might believe that, too. I’ve always believed that she does know now, and knew at least as soon as the initial arrests. And if so, she should have distanced herself from her family at that point, but I think she’s too enmeshed. These people, if they did this, not only ruined their grandchildrens’ lives, they ruined their daughter‘s, too. Allegedly. This is only my opinion. Innocent until proven guilty, of course.

 

[Seattle1]

Be sure to watch LR's glares toward CA on Monday during his cross by the defense.

I'm thinking CA better be watching his back even before he leaves county jail!

In LR's eyes, I'd say CA's theory by his defense is messing with LR's family and in this specific situation, family includes SG & KM. JMO

 

[amicuscurie]

Right! I want to say GC went into this more in the 1st trial. But she just dropped it this time and let Wendi get away with that patently false assertion. Wendi’s bald face lying irks me so much. That’s why I wanted GC to declare her a hostile witness and GO AT HER!!

Again, this indicates to me that they don’t want to ask too much while she still has immunity. The boys are 13 and 14 now and know only their maternal family. I don’t think they’re super close to the Markels. I don’t think there have been too many visits, except the ones right before the last trial. It’s hard for kids to get to know relatives they don’t see often. And they’re not babies anymore. I think they do know what happened, and what Charlie is accused of. They can read, and people talk. I think the family is letting ChArlie take the fall. Perhaps they told him a version of the extortion story, that it was bad guys who were involved with Charlie somehow.

 

[amicuscurie]

It's as if she were punishing them for even entertaining such a thought.

Or, she really had no idea why they would suspect her. Lol.

 

[SteelCity91]

Does anyone believe that it was Wendi who drove up to the road block and turned around? I wasn't sure if her cell data showed anything.

 

[amicuscurie]

Hoping CA will flip soon and have everyone who has not been charged face their day in court. JMO

I think he May be willing to flip on Donna. He can’t stop laughing every time she’s mentioned, about how nuts she is.

 

[amicuscurie]

Does anyone believe that it was Wendi who drove up to the road block and turned around? I wasn't sure if her cell data showed anything.

I thought the cop on the stand who was at the roadblock said he knew she drove that type of car. How would he know that?

 

[Mariposa]

I thought the cop on the stand who was at the roadblock said he knew she drove that type of car. How would he know that?

I don’t know if it was explained in any of the previous trials. The only thing I can think of —is the police at the scene had gotten that info over the radio or by report, as the vehicle associated with/registered to the victim’s ex-wife. Just in case she came to the house? Kind of like how around the same time Isom was figuring out where WA’s location was at the restaurant where she was having lunch that day.

 

[Mariposa]

Does anyone believe that it was Wendi who drove up to the road block and turned around? I wasn't sure if her cell data showed anything.

She has testified she was trying to take a shortcut down Trescott that day as she drove from her house on Aqua Ridge to a liquor store. She said she noticed tape up and thought maybe a tree had fallen from storms, and turned around. In the police interview she said she would take routes down Trescott to help emotionally deal with her divorce. On the stand she has never said that AFAIK, but has said it was just a route she took as a shortcut.

 

[SteelCity91]

I thought the cop on the stand who was at the roadblock said he knew she drove that type of car. How would he know that?

IMO..I took it as the cop noticed a van because it was similar to his family van and how suspicious the van acted about doing a uturn several houses down. He noticed how odd it was. I am guessing maybe at the time he didn't know the ex-wife had the same looking van until later on. Just IMO but I would be very curious to see if that was indeed her actual van.

 

[Tapeartree]

She has testified she was trying to take a shortcut down Trescott that day as she drove from her house on Aqua Ridge to a liquor store. She said she noticed tape up and thought maybe a tree had fallen from storms, and turned around. In the police interview she said she would take routes down Trescott to help emotionally deal with her divorce. On the stand she has never said that AFAIK, but has said it was just a route she took as a shortcut.

I can't imagine taking Trescott as a shortcut. It's close to Thomasville Rd and Betton intersection. It gets backed up from the light and difficult to make the right turn onto Betton from Trescott Rd. So much easier to just stay on the main road, but just another odd explanation out of many in this case.

 

[amicuscurie]

She has testified she was trying to take a shortcut down Trescott that day as she drove from her house on Aqua Ridge to a liquor store. She said she noticed tape up and thought maybe a tree had fallen from storms, and turned around. In the police interview she said she would take routes down Trescott to help emotionally deal with her divorce. On the stand she has never said that AFAIK, but has said it was just a route she took as a shortcut.

It’s just so strange that her story changes about this depending on when she’s asked. Why doesn’t she just say she took her usual shortcut and saw the tape and turned around? Why insist she didn’t go that far down Trescott? She told the police she was on Trescott. Then other times she says she only went to the corner. Is it because she knows it looks weird if she saw the crime scene and didn’t stop? I mean, it’s true. She did see the scene and didn’t stop. Why not just say she went down Trescott, saw the tape, thought it was a downed tree, and turned around? She lies when she doesn’t need to.

 

[Mariposa]

I can't imagine taking Trescott as a shortcut. It's close to Thomasville Rd and Betton intersection. It gets backed up from the light and difficult to make the right turn onto Betton from Trescott Rd. So much easier to just stay on the main road, but just another odd explanation out of many in this case.

Yeah not familiar with the area at all but I think the prosecution has suggested it was not a logical route to take. Thus GC posing it to WA as “did you drive by the crime scene”.

If the prosecutor theory is right and WA did that drive to see if the deed was done, I wonder if she planned that in advance or did it impulsively. Neither was too smart.

 

[Mariposa]

It’s just so strange that her story changes about this depending on when she’s asked. Why doesn’t she just say she took her usual shortcut and saw the tape and turned around? Why insist she didn’t go that far down Trescott? She told the police she was on Trescott. Then other times she says she only went to the corner. Is it because she knows it looks weird if she saw the crime scene and didn’t stop? I mean, it’s true. She did see the scene and didn’t stop. Why not just say she went down Trescott, saw the tape, thought it was a downed tree, and turned around? She lies when she doesn’t need to.

I think maybe this whole tale of her drive by gets close to her having knowledge of the hit and is a touchy area for her. JMO.

Looking at the police interview within the first 5 minutes she brings this up to Isom. And says she did not leave her house until 1215. Then listed errands she needed to do including getting bourbon, buying gas, picking up superglue for a kids toy, before meeting friends for lunch at 1. Later in the interview said something about not having time to shower before leaving her house. Really weird, because she describes a rather leisurely morning at home once the repair guy leaves by 10 and she’s just working on her laptop and sending emails.

Wonder if the idea was, do not leave your house before noon that day under any circumstances.

 

[Twister2]

I think maybe this whole tale of her drive by gets close to her having knowledge of the hit and is a touchy area for her. JMO.

Looking at the police interview within the first 5 minutes she brings this up to Isom. And says she did not leave her house until 1215. Then listed errands she needed to do including getting bourbon, buying gas, picking up superglue for a kids toy, before meeting friends for lunch at 1. Later in the interview said something about not having time to shower before leaving her house. Really weird, because she describes a rather leisurely morning at home once the repair guy leaves by 10 and she’s just working on her laptop and sending emails.

Wonder if the idea was, do not leave your house before noon that day under any circumstances.

I think she didn't have time to take a shower because she was busy constantly creating an electronic trail that she was at home by sending emails, making phone calls, etc. If she took the time to take a shower, that would have been a blank period of time with nothing to prove she was at home. It's another slipup of hers, IMO, that shows she knew the murder was happening that morning.