FL - FSU Law Professor Dan Markel Murdered by Hitmen *3 guilty* #16

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
BobbyLee said:
CA's big mistake trialwise was not realizing very early on his goose was cooked no matter what. He should've fallen on his sword for his family, claimed he was solely responsible for arranging the hit with KA and that the other Adelsons had no part. Maybe should've negotiated some reverse plea deal that they would be left alone. Now after he gets convicted, the state should and will go after WA and DA. They might not have enough to go after HA.

Unrelated note:

This post by DM from 2005 - The Adelsons put on a good front to attend RA's wedding to his Hindu doctor wife (apparently they didn't approve bc she wasn't Jewish which is laughable in retrospect). It has pics of everyone in happier times. CA's dead-eye looking stare into the camera is haunting)
Click to expand...
To me, DA looks not happy to be there.
 
Missyrocks5 said:
Tim Jansen said it takes a special skillset to be dating a dentist but get your baby daddy to go kill for you. He also said SG couldnt get thr phone numbet right to call the FBI plant much less for SG & LR to front the $ for the trip, know where DM lived, his name, and go kill someone for $. Also, i dont believe LR or SG had ever killed before.

<modsnip - not an approved source>
Click to expand...
He did file a disability claim, I think. Not sure when. He may not have been working.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Catching up once again, thank you to everyone who managed to sit through Charlie's testimony and post about it. It sounded bad, and I don't think I'll watch it yet. I can't wait until GC gets to ask him a few pointed questions.

It seems so strange to me, that HA and WA have a grandson, from Charlie, and other grandchildren, from Rob, that they have absolutely nothing to do with. I just don't get it!
 
CA testified that Katie asked him AFTER the murder to put her on the payroll for her kids insurance. He uses this to support his claim that he had to tell Donna and get her involved at that point. It was part of the extortion. AFTER the murder. Not payment for the murder. He also uses it to explain the post-bump calls to Donna, why she had to talk in code, etc. Because she was told to keep the extortion quiet, when he came to her AFTER the murder.

BUT- I thought the state showed a text from Katie BEFORE the murder reminding him that she needed to start getting those paychecks to show for the insurance, and he needed to get that started. BEFORE the murder. Do I remember that right?

If that text was before the murder, then Katie didn’t just mention it after the murder, like he said yesterday. That contradicts his whole explanation of why he told Donna and when. Puts the lie to the post-murder extortion story. The payroll deal with Katie was planned BEFORE the murder.

Sure hope the state brings this out on cross, and shows the text again.
 
Last edited:
Mariposa said:
I dislike how the A family just can’t admit they are wealthy.
Paying for hits and then the legal bills from dealing with the aftermath of that might indeed lead to postponed retirement!
In DAs divorce era emails to WA she goes on and on about paying WA’s grocery bills. WA was on the law faculty of FSU making well over 6 figures at the time.
Click to expand...

Lots of wealthy people only compare their wealth to those with more $. So a net worth of 20 mil is nothing compared to 200 mil.
 
minusfour said:
Catching up once again, thank you to everyone who managed to sit through Charlie's testimony and post about it. It sounded bad, and I don't think I'll watch it yet. I can't wait until GC gets to ask him a few pointed questions.

It seems so strange to me, that HA and WA have a grandson, from Charlie, and other grandchildren, from Rob, that they have absolutely nothing to do with. I just don't get it!
Click to expand...

Shows what kind of people DA/HA are - my way or the highway.
 
Weki said:
Chase Hughes from The Behavior Panel (on their Wendi video) said something very relevant to today’s events. He said that our brains are very good at seeing patterns and programming us to be productive. Driving, tying our shoe laces etc. The programming is automatic. Likewise, when we hear an attorney who is boring, our brain immediately picks up the pattern and associates the attorney’s voice with boredom and programs us to tune out, essentially. Now every time we hear that voice our brain automatically checks out and we may be planning our dinner etc in our heads.

This for sure happened to me today. I literally couldn’t focus on either Rashbaum or Charlie’s voices after about 2 hours or so! Hughes also added something really interesting - that people watch trials to “discover” something. Like all those people who came in the morning and cleared out after lunch when they realized there was nothing to discover.

JMO
Click to expand...
very interesting show and observations

I appreciate that BL analysis is often called junk science but I still felt their show was worth watching.
Also when they covered Wendi's cross and her use of the phrase ' Absolutely not' I realised that Charlie also used that at the start of his testimony yesterday.

'Absolutely not'/ '100% no' vs 'No'
and
'Absolutely. Not.'
 
Last edited:
Rash seems off.

ETA. very off. Lots of fumbling and stammering and hesitating in the questions. He seems deflated and unsure this morning. Seems much less confident in the story. Wonder what happened last night.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 123 more.
Total: 331 (members: 124, guests: 207)

Online statistics

Members online
124
Guests online
207
Total visitors
331
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
608,569
Messages
18,241,439
Members
234,401
Latest member
CRIM1959
Back
Top