FL - FSU Law Professor Dan Markel Murdered by Hitmen *4 Guilty* #21

[cottonweaver]

Maybe LR or SG were not the intended recipients of her "visual?" How about the only contact was KM? (Remember GeoCap asking WA on the witness stand whether or not she had WhatsApp at that time or if she had kept in contact with KM. And I heard another one of WA's noncommittal answers, "Not that I can remember." (It reminded me of a man who was a fitness buff and he had just celebrated his birthday and someone asked, "How old are you? He replied, "I'll never see 45 again." So, everyone assumed he was now 46 years old.
But, I knew he was 54 years old!)
WA likes to keep secrets about a lot of things...except for the agenda of sharing how much "Danny hurt me."
As a woman who was close to WA stated...(paraphrasing) "I was close to her and never even knew she was writing a book."
She could have shared photos w/FB, INstaG, Twitter (now X), Photobucket, Flckr, Snapfish, Shutterfly, Drop Box, Google, Zoom, Text, Hello Cupid or other high tech process I haven't heard about yet.
Now we are hearing of WA contacting an attorney who is an expert on Kastigar (sp?). Hmm.. what part of WA's testimony would even have her concerned? Anybody got a clue? (Sometimes it is so hard to push that POST REPLY button...but here goes!)

All of your points in that post can be true but the Owl T shirt theory can still be problematic.

In the new scenario, how does it work if KM is the intended recipient of the owl T shirt message?
That's the boring bit, the step-by-step. Once you go down that road, don't you find you're in another cul de sac? ( Believing Wendi is the main contact for Katie during the murder means you next have to disregard most of other evidence which just convicted Charlie)

Yes I totally agree with your last point. One should feel comfortable thinking out loud on WS, comfortable posing unexpected ideas and wild twists but equally we should also feel okay asking wtte ' but what if something we've long believed to be true, is actually wrong?' (WS needs both, otherwise it gets very dry & boring)

IMO Websleuths - traditionally & at it's best - is also collaborative & substantiated ( source linked.) Ideally, we ' keep each other honest' as the saying goes or ask each other to double-check our homework. It's boring and a pain in the proverbial to track back to links & time stamps which appear to show, for example, that in 2014 the hirers didn't even know the nicknames of the assassins. ( Linked, previous page, Dulce Vita transcript.)
WS at it's worst can stray into point-scorey & sneery/censorious tones -but the Markel threads have largely avoided that too, imo.

The case is a beast. (Even Jeremy Kutz said he'd never attempt to write a book about it)
Almost 10 years, 3 trials, 7? co-conspirators, zillions hours of un-enhanced audio, a raft of dodgy Defense lawyers behind the scenes, 3 co-conspirators whose brains are mush, 4? co-conspirators who are BS-ers of the highest order, addicted to sub texts, coded language and elaborate manipulations.
Next, chuck into the mix so many case 'unknowables' and the tik-tok-ification of True Crime.
It's human nature that our brains want to fill gaps even if sometimes we're forcing square chunks into round holes.

So, circling back to the starting point, does the Owl T shirt work if Katie instead, is the intended recipient of Wendi's message? (I love ' out of the box' creative thinking but once we get the thing out of the box, we still have to assemble the pieces to see if they fit together)

Anyway, apologies for the long post - yes even I am bored re-reading it - but didn't want anybody to feel they're walking on eggshells on the Markel thread but also wanted to jump off your post to make some broader points for newbies who will join WS for this case as Donna's trial moves forward.

 

[Niner]

Anyone checking the Leon County court site? Any additional motions filed yet?

Just wondering! TIA if anyone can find anything. I have no access to Leon County...

 

[iusedtofloat]

BBMA: And sometimes a broken TV is just a broken TV? I'll have to stick with my suspicions/intuitions because sometimes clear thinking logic just doesn't trump "a hunch." There are hundreds of species of birds in Eastern Florida...did he take pictures of any others?
Never trying to offend,so I'll move on.... but it does "ruffle my feathers!"

Some people just like owls... lol... my mom has like 3 owl shirts. Many believe ghost stories originated from barn owls hooting loudly at night in barns.

Yes, it is my belief that Katie did not tell Charlie who was going to do the murder, and that even Katie did not know Sig took Rivera with him. Some of that I think based on her proffer, though, so I take it with a grain of salt. But to me it strains credulity that Charlie would have had any idea who Luis was, let alone that Wendi would. Luis refers to Charlie only as “the dentist.”

Tuto doesn't seem so smart. I feel like Katie knew it'd be Tuto and Luis because they were bffs, 2 peas in pod, and these 2 couples (S+K and L+his gf) raised their kids together. Also, Katie wouldn't tell Luis to take down the owl pic if she didn't know he was there right? I especially feel like after the first failed attempt Katie would know Luis was coming with.

Sorry for my pop in... i've followed this mostly on youtube but am a bit tired of the nonsensical blabber on that platform lately...

 

[amicuscurie]

Maybe LR or SG were not the intended recipients of her "visual?" How about the only contact was KM? (Remember GeoCap asking WA on the witness stand whether or not she had WhatsApp at that time or if she had kept in contact with KM. And I heard another one of WA's noncommittal answers, "Not that I can remember." (It reminded me of a man who was a fitness buff and he had just celebrated his birthday and someone asked, "How old are you? He replied, "I'll never see 45 again." So, everyone assumed he was now 46 years old.
But, I knew he was 54 years old!)
WA likes to keep secrets about a lot of things...except for the agenda of sharing how much "Danny hurt me."
As a woman who was close to WA stated...(paraphrasing) "I was close to her and never even knew she was writing a book."
She could have shared photos w/FB, INstaG, Twitter (now X), Photobucket, Flckr, Snapfish, Shutterfly, Drop Box, Google, Zoom, Text, Hello Cupid or other high tech process I haven't heard about yet.
Now we are hearing of WA contacting an attorney who is an expert on Kastigar (sp?). Hmm.. what part of WA's testimony would even have her concerned? Anybody got a clue? (Sometimes it is so hard to push that POST REPLY button...but here goes!)

In my opinion the same arguments with regard to the owl being a signal for Luis apply to it possibly being a signal for Katie. The randomness of the sighting of an owl in the very place Luis would be able to photograph it, and the unlikelihood of that happening, still holds. And, if the signal was for Katie as you suggest, then what does Luis’s photographing of an owl have to do with this at all? The evidence is that Wendi left her house wearing this shirt at around 12:30, long after the murder. The only record of it we have that she was even wearing the shirt is her mug shot. We have no reason to believe Katie planned on seeing the mug shot, or planned on there even being a mug shot.

Sure, Wendi COULD HAVE posted a photo on another medium such as the ones you suggest, but there is no evidence that she did, that we’ve seen so far. Given the many other logical leaps which have to be made for this owl thing to work, as I’ve already described, and now the need to imagine evidence we don’t know about, I’m inclined to let this one go. No need to imagine evidence or create conspiracies when there is so much incriminating evidence, in my opinion, that we DO know about.

As for Kastigar, in my opinion there may not be anything specific she said that she is concerned about. This issue has been analyzed to death (anyone seen Tim lately, btw? Hmmm…) on this and other forums, and the general conclusion is that what she said on the stand concerned things that the state could and did find out independently through other sources (the divorce, her activities that day), and/ or was self-serving and could not have led to any evidence which could be used against her. Under such circumstances it appears, to me, that Kastigar would not apply, as the state would not need to use anything she said against her or to use it to find other evidence.

In my opinion, she knows, or her attorney has told her, that her having told inconsistent stories in her testimony, combined with things like the drive-by and the text to Dan asking if he would be home, look bad for her. She knows, or has been told, that keeping this stuff out (possibly using Kastigar) is one of the only possible ways she can delay an eventual trial or try to defend herself. Any attorney with a client who had the type of immunity involved in the Kastigar case would at least make an attempt to determine whether Kastigar could be applicable in my opinion. It’s a no-brainer- why not try? Generally lawyers attempt to avail themselves and their client with any remedy or defense that might apply, it would be remiss not to. It doesn‘t mean it will work, or that there is an actual issue, or that they even believe it will work. Some of what attorneys do is posturing. All we know now is that she has retained an attorney specializing in Kastigar. That’s it. In the absence of any other information, that fact tells us nothing about why, or what issues there may be, or whether any arguments they might be considering have merit.

 

[amicuscurie]

Some people just like owls... lol... my mom has like 3 owl shirts. Many believe ghost stories originated from barn owls hooting loudly at night in barns.

Tuto doesn't seem so smart. I feel like Katie knew it'd be Tuto and Luis because they were bffs, 2 peas in pod, and these 2 couples (S+K and L+his gf) raised their kids together. Also, Katie wouldn't tell Luis to take down the owl pic if she didn't know he was there right? I especially feel like after the first failed attempt Katie would know Luis was coming with.

Sorry for my pop in... i've followed this mostly on youtube but am a bit tired of the nonsensical blabber on that platform lately...

Good point, I think she could have known he was there at least as of when he posted the owl pic.

 

[Missyrocks5]

I enjoyed seeing your opinions. It seems pretty unanimous here that you all feel like Wendi’s drive to Trescott was not pre-approved nor discussed with DA & CA. The next question I am not sure we will ever know the answer to is if she had a burner phone & contacted CA to say it was done. He then contacted KM, which would explain her saying “I know” when SG called her. Of course, as people have said, she likely just assumed that‘s why he was calling and maybe said I know, but he called her like a zillion times in general. I am not sure on that. I am in the camp that think WA had a burner phone.

But I would have loved to have heard the conversations in person and on the phone between CA, DA & HA after they found out WA drove there if they didn’t know she was doing it. Can you imagine? Or did they think there is no way they will be caught so they were unbothered. Or she convinced them her excuse was great.

 

[amicuscurie]

I enjoyed seeing your opinions. It seems pretty unanimous here that you all feel like Wendi’s drive to Trescott was not pre-approved nor discussed with DA & CA. The next question I am not sure we will ever know the answer to is if she had a burner phone & contacted CA to say it was done. He then contacted KM, which would explain her saying “I know” when SG called her. Of course, as people have said, she likely just assumed that‘s why he was calling and maybe said I know, but he called her like a zillion times in general. I am not sure on that. I am in the camp that think WA had a burner phone.

But I would have loved to have heard the conversations in person and on the phone between CA, DA & HA after they found out WA drove there if they didn’t know she was doing it. Can you imagine? Or did they think there is no way they will be caught so they were unbothered. Or she convinced them her excuse was great.

The timing as presented at trial, makes the idea of Wendi confirming it had been done and calling Charlie before Sig called Katie difficult to square for me. The evidence as I recall from Charlie’s trial is that Wendi left her home at around 12:30 and her phone was pinging off a cell tower near Trescott at 12:35. (As I recall, she says in her police interview that she left at 12:27 based on looking at her phone and seeing that she had made a call at that time as she was leaving the house. I believe there is a second call at 12:30, based on the records shown at trial, and I believe this is the long call she has testified she was on while driving to the liquor store.)

The evidence at Charlie’s trial showed that Sig called Katie at 12:30, and according to Luis‘s testimony, that call is when she said “I know.” It is possible Wendi left at 12:27 and sped to Trescott so that she got there only minutes after she had left, (let’s say 12:30), though that seems unlikely given the distance. Still, it seems to me that she would have had to make a very speedy call to Charlie, who would have had to make a very speedy call to Katie, for Katie to have been informed prior to Sig’s 12:30 call. Maybe Einstein has a theory that could make all this work, but to me it’s extremely unlikely that Wendi left her house around 12:30 or a little before, was able to speed to Trescott and call Charlie, who then called Katie, all before Sig’s 12:30 call.


To me it makes more sense that someone called Wendi after Sig’s call, and she raced out of the house at that time. (12:30 or a little after). However, this is inconsistent with her claim in her police interview that she left at 12:27.

 

[amicuscurie]

I enjoyed seeing your opinions. It seems pretty unanimous here that you all feel like Wendi’s drive to Trescott was not pre-approved nor discussed with DA & CA. The next question I am not sure we will ever know the answer to is if she had a burner phone & contacted CA to say it was done. He then contacted KM, which would explain her saying “I know” when SG called her. Of course, as people have said, she likely just assumed that‘s why he was calling and maybe said I know, but he called her like a zillion times in general. I am not sure on that. I am in the camp that think WA had a burner phone.

But I would have loved to have heard the conversations in person and on the phone between CA, DA & HA after they found out WA drove there if they didn’t know she was doing it. Can you imagine? Or did they think there is no way they will be caught so they were unbothered. Or she convinced them her excuse was great.

Dbm

 

[Honeynut]

To me, the owl is a NON issue. Can it just be as simple as this...a city dwelling gang member, was buzzed on pot, coke & liquor, saw an owl out his hotel window in a new northern location, thought it was cool, snapped a pic & thoughtlessly posted it on social media????

 

[Knitpicker]

In Wendi's police interview, the boys came up and they were still at pre-school. She mentioned being worried for their safety (because, who did this to Danny? She actually says they must hate his children, too. It's an odd thing to say when at that point it is completely unknown who did it) and the detective reassures her they are safe and police are at the school. As the interview is running with no definite end, she has to arrange for someone to pick them up, all of which is arranged while she is at the station. She will also end up going to stay with the same people at least overnight as she does not want to be alone.

You just got into this case so give it time. This is of course all my opinion, based on deep diving/reviewing information and evidence, and the expertise of others. Wendi is complicit. This was done with her knowledge, approval, if not actual instigation. She is an actress. She is also a high-functioning sociopath. She is described as very smart and because she is a lawyer, she has done well to try and ensure that the dots and evidence do not concretely connect to her. This includes digital trails and so forth. Her problems with Danny (and her not being able to move to south Florida with them) became her family's problem. It is said that their (Adelsons) favourite thing was to hate Danny and they were obsessed with that hatred. Both the initial attempt on Danny's life (June 2014) and the actual murder of Dan (July 18, 2014) coincided with Jeffrey Lacasse's (her then boyfriend) out of town trips. She was trying to at least throw suspicion on him. The first attempt was aborted for various reasons (hit men were substance abusing, Luis struggled with taking out a father of young kids, rental car company flagged their vehicle for being out of local area, i.e. they would have been clearly tracked/located and attached to the crime, had they done it then) and then they went back the second time. Lacasse knew at the beginning of that week that he and Wendi were done (watch/listen to his police interviews) after the yoga class and the parking lot parting, but he'd hoped that he'd see her one last time with the boys--that maybe she'd invite him to say good-bye--because he had grown very attached to them. It was over but weirdly she wanted to reaffirm his Friday departure plans as they were walking away from each other. But he left it open, not really confirming. He knew it was odd. Then she sent the "no contact for a week" email, meanwhile, she'd just been away for two weeks. He basically said to h3ll with it, there's no reason for him to delay his trip (he was hurt and sad but had already accepted it was over), so left on the Thursday night for Tennessee, not the Friday, late morning as originally planned.

I got into this case in the last few weeks, I didn't know anything about it and didn't realize how long it had been going on, and the various people implicated/arrested/convicted. I watched the Wendi interview and the Jeff Lacasse interviews: he's a good guy, articulate, caring and thoughtful. Totally lovestruck by her and even though he knew she was erratic and difficult in many ways, I get the sense that he thought he could bring some stability to her life, and that of the boys (on her side, anyway, as Danny was a devoted father when he had them). Jeff too was divorced and he mentions really wanting a family; he was attached to the boys and Wendi knew this (and also manipulated that attachment, he recognized later). I've watched various other interviews. (I do not have time to watch all of the trials/testimonies, but have watched some, as well as highlights.) There is credence to the testimony of Luis Rivera regarding "the lady" that Katie M. referred to was Wendi. There were burner phones (Katie M. did use one at one point) and there is the question of WhatsApp, but perhaps Wendi used it on another phone (I don't think there is evidence that anyone saw her with a second phone).

I recommend The Wondery "Over My Dead Body" podcast (it's on YouTube) there's a 6-7 part deep dive, it's really good, even includes an interview with estranged son Rob Adelson and his wife; Gigi from "Pretty Lies & Alibis" (she is actually just summarizing a lot of the case now but does an excellent job; she is also posting jail house phone calls...frankly, I do not have THAT much time lol); "Dr. G Explains" psychologist and body language expert, and "Surviving the Survivor", Joel has some great interviews/guests, and even "The Behavior Panel" (body language experts. I really like Chase Hughes and Greg Hartley). All of those are on YouTube.

A lot of people have just come on this case and havent even seen the Full Isom interview.Prior to the last few months there was a small community who knew the details.Its exhausting correcting people. so many are saying “she didn’t ask about the kids” bc they are just parroting what others are saying.

 

[Misy]

In Wendi's police interview, the boys came up and they were still at pre-school. She mentioned being worried for their safety (because, who did this to Danny? She actually says they must hate his children, too. It's an odd thing to say when at that point it is completely unknown who did it) and the detective reassures her they are safe and police are at the school. As the interview is running with no definite end, she has to arrange for someone to pick them up, all of which is arranged while she is at the station. She will also end up going to stay with the same people at least overnight as she does not want to be alone.

You just got into this case so give it time. This is of course all my opinion, based on deep diving/reviewing information and evidence, and the expertise of others. Wendi is complicit. This was done with her knowledge, approval, if not actual instigation. She is an actress. She is also a high-functioning sociopath. She is described as very smart and because she is a lawyer, she has done well to try and ensure that the dots and evidence do not concretely connect to her. This includes digital trails and so forth. Her problems with Danny (and her not being able to move to south Florida with them) became her family's problem. It is said that their (Adelsons) favourite thing was to hate Danny and they were obsessed with that hatred. Both the initial attempt on Danny's life (June 2014) and the actual murder of Dan (July 18, 2014) coincided with Jeffrey Lacasse's (her then boyfriend) out of town trips. She was trying to at least throw suspicion on him. The first attempt was aborted for various reasons (hit men were substance abusing, Luis struggled with taking out a father of young kids, rental car company flagged their vehicle for being out of local area, i.e. they would have been clearly tracked/located and attached to the crime, had they done it then) and then they went back the second time. Lacasse knew at the beginning of that week that he and Wendi were done (watch/listen to his police interviews) after the yoga class and the parking lot parting, but he'd hoped that he'd see her one last time with the boys--that maybe she'd invite him to say good-bye--because he had grown very attached to them. It was over but weirdly she wanted to reaffirm his Friday departure plans as they were walking away from each other. But he left it open, not really confirming. He knew it was odd. Then she sent the "no contact for a week" email, meanwhile, she'd just been away for two weeks. He basically said to h3ll with it, there's no reason for him to delay his trip (he was hurt and sad but had already accepted it was over), so left on the Thursday night for Tennessee, not the Friday, late morning as originally planned.

I got into this case in the last few weeks, I didn't know anything about it and didn't realize how long it had been going on, and the various people implicated/arrested/convicted. I watched the Wendi interview and the Jeff Lacasse interviews: he's a good guy, articulate, caring and thoughtful. Totally lovestruck by her and even though he knew she was erratic and difficult in many ways, I get the sense that he thought he could bring some stability to her life, and that of the boys (on her side, anyway, as Danny was a devoted father when he had them). Jeff too was divorced and he mentions really wanting a family; he was attached to the boys and Wendi knew this (and also manipulated that attachment, he recognized later). I've watched various other interviews. (I do not have time to watch all of the trials/testimonies, but have watched some, as well as highlights.) There is credence to the testimony of Luis Rivera regarding "the lady" that Katie M. referred to was Wendi. There were burner phones (Katie M. did use one at one point) and there is the question of WhatsApp, but perhaps Wendi used it on another phone (I don't think there is evidence that anyone saw her with a second phone).

I recommend The Wondery "Over My Dead Body" podcast (it's on YouTube) there's a 6-7 part deep dive, it's really good, even includes an interview with estranged son Rob Adelson and his wife; Gigi from "Pretty Lies & Alibis" (she is actually just summarizing a lot of the case now but does an excellent job; she is also posting jail house phone calls...frankly, I do not have THAT much time lol); "Dr. G Explains" psychologist and body language expert, and "Surviving the Survivor", Joel has some great interviews/guests, and even "The Behavior Panel" (body language experts. I really like Chase Hughes and Greg Hartley). All of those are on YouTube.

Love the summary! I wouldn’t be able to compress and articulate this case as you have! I’ve been dying to bring this up so figure this is a good spot to do that. WA is a seasoned, very accomplished liar. When she lies she looks at you (the questioner) straight in the eyes, barely blinking. I can hear her inner congratulatory I’m so convincing. With the head tilt. Miss innocent, someone referred to her as a pretty robot with head tilting as the reset lol.

Huge example for me … it’s in KM/SG trial that GC brings up the derogatory name “Jibbers”. (She says it was not derogatory but never referred to him that way directly). The judge asks WA how do you spell Jibbers. WA turns to look at him, looking a little puzzled like he’s stumped here there a little (insert eye roll emoji) and says, looking directly at the judge, wtte hmm I don’t really know. I’ve never written it. I guess you could spell it with a J or a G. In comes GC who says (paraphrasing) Miss Adelson, DM was programmed into your phone as JIBBERS. WA looks directly at GC, and with for eyes says “that’s right”. Very matter of factly like she didn’t just get caught lying. Pregnant pause by GC to let that hopefully sink in to the jury. I’ve watched that whole Jibbers exchange several times and the ease in which WA lies… there is nothing behind those doe eyes… it’s frankly chilling to me. So creepy.

 

[fabvab]

A lot of people have just come on this case and havent even seen the Full Isom interview.Prior to the last few months there was a small community who knew the details.Its exhausting correcting people. so many are saying “she didn’t ask about the kids” bc they are just parroting what others are saying.

I am one of the people new to this trial and have been trying to catch up as much as possible. The amount of info out there is overwhelming and although I had seen parts of Wendi’s interview with Isom, I could not recall specifically what Wendi asked/stated concerning the boys in the interview. I could have rewatched the interview but wanting to interact immediately with other members, I requested corrections or clarification on anything I said.

I’ve followed other cases, Scott Peterson, Casey Anthony, Jodi Arias, from the very beginning and recall new members to the thread asking questions that had been dealt with on the first thread of the case.

It’s uncomfortable posting as a newbie to this thread and I do appreciate members who have been helpful helping me understand and remember things more clearly.

I’ve decided to mainly gather written info from Websleuths as my memory can become very convoluted reading info from other sites.

Not trying to be argumentative just trying to relay from my now “new” perspective.

 

[Marysmith]

To me, the owl is a NON issue. Can it just be as simple as this...a city dwelling gang member, was buzzed on pot, coke & liquor, saw an owl out his hotel window in a new northern location, thought it was cool, snapped a pic & thoughtlessly posted it on social media????

I agree and KM asked him to take it down because it could be used to show where he was at that time.

 

[fabvab]

IMO if Wendi did not know about the hit happening and she randomly drove by Dan’s house (for whatever reason) and then saw police tape and police, she would have stopped to find out what was going on to ensure her 2 boys were safe.

Plus, I think if the police were talking to me right after my ex husband had been murdered, I would ask that the police either bring my boys to me at the police station or go to their preschool and provide protection. (She may have asked the police this and I missed it. I just got into this case this week and am trying to read and watch videos to get caught up!)

A lot of people have just come on this case and havent even seen the Full Isom interview.Prior to the last few months there was a small community who knew the details.Its exhausting correcting people. so many are saying “she didn’t ask about the kids” bc they are just parroting what others are saying.

I do think it’s very telling that when Wendi turned around at Trescott that she did not ask LE for info as to why the crime tape was up OR call Dan to ensure the boys were still at preschool and were okay or if he needed her help with the boys if he was not ok. Couldn't a tree from a random Florida summer storm have fallen on his car or house and changed their plans?

 

[Misy]

To me, the owl is a NON issue. Can it just be as simple as this...a city dwelling gang member, was buzzed on pot, coke & liquor, saw an owl out his hotel window in a new northern location, thought it was cool, snapped a pic & thoughtlessly posted it on social media????

Well… not sure about this but I’ve read/heard that an owl is a symbol for death in some cultures. Cannot verify. But one thing I do believe is that, as someone here posted recently (I apologize, I forget who) I think this was a private little “dupers delight” thing by Wendi for Wendi… like wearing your teams jersey on game day. MOO

 

[B4igo2it]

To me, the owl is a NON issue. Can it just be as simple as this...a city dwelling gang member, was buzzed on pot, coke & liquor, saw an owl out his hotel window in a new northern location, thought it was cool, snapped a pic & thoughtlessly posted it on social media????

LR may be superstitious, like me. Maybe it is another coincidence.

Did WA "text" a whatsapp selfie re: the Trescott visit? An owl symbol would need no words to express its meaning and get the point across. IDK, I suspect Team Adelson was on pins and needles and anxious to learn of a successful hitjob. They are truly sick people. IMO

Maybe there will be owl discussion during WA's trial.

o/t: Owls

• Throughout history, owls have often been associated with death and considered to be of impending doom. Across various and belief systems, there have been numerous accounts of owl sightings being linked to unfortunate events or even predicting death. Let’s explore some historical examples that demonstrate the connection between owls and death.

The Superstitions And Symbolism Surrounding Owls And Death​

innerhunches.com/owls-and-death/

 

[ch_13]

A lot of people have just come on this case and havent even seen the Full Isom interview.Prior to the last few months there was a small community who knew the details.Its exhausting correcting people. so many are saying “she didn’t ask about the kids” bc they are just parroting what others are saying.

And then there are some like me, who has seen the whole interview, but it was long enough ago that I've forgotten many of the details. I know I have to go back and rewatch. I want to know not just if she asked about the kids, but also when, what and how she asked about them.

 

[clearskies1]

All of your points in that post can be true but the Owl T shirt theory can still be problematic.

In the new scenario, how does it work if KM is the intended recipient of the owl T shirt message?
That's the boring bit, the step-by-step. Once you go down that road, don't you find you're in another cul de sac? ( Believing Wendi is the main contact for Katie during the murder means you next have to disregard most of other evidence which just convicted Charlie)

Yes I totally agree with your last point. One should feel comfortable thinking out loud on WS, comfortable posing unexpected ideas and wild twists but equally we should also feel okay asking wtte ' but what if something we've long believed to be true, is actually wrong?' (WS needs both, otherwise it gets very dry & boring)

IMO Websleuths - traditionally & at it's best - is also collaborative & substantiated ( source linked.) Ideally, we ' keep each other honest' as the saying goes or ask each other to double-check our homework. It's boring and a pain in the proverbial to track back to links & time stamps which appear to show, for example, that in 2014 the hirers didn't even know the nicknames of the assassins. ( Linked, previous page, Dulce Vita transcript.)
WS at it's worst can stray into point-scorey & sneery/censorious tones -but the Markel threads have largely avoided that too, imo.

The case is a beast. (Even Jeremy Kutz said he'd never attempt to write a book about it)
Almost 10 years, 3 trials, 7? co-conspirators, zillions hours of un-enhanced audio, a raft of dodgy Defense lawyers behind the scenes, 3 co-conspirators whose brains are mush, 4? co-conspirators who are BS-ers of the highest order, addicted to sub texts, coded language and elaborate manipulations.
Next, chuck into the mix so many case 'unknowables' and the tik-tok-ification of True Crime.
It's human nature that our brains want to fill gaps even if sometimes we're forcing square chunks into round holes.

So, circling back to the starting point, does the Owl T shirt work if Katie instead, is the intended recipient of Wendi's message? (I love ' out of the box' creative thinking but once we get the thing out of the box, we still have to assemble the pieces to see if they fit together)

Anyway, apologies for the long post - yes even I am bored re-reading it - but didn't want anybody to feel they're walking on eggshells on the Markel thread but also wanted to jump off your post to make some broader points for newbies who will join WS for this case as Donna's trial moves forward.

What a great post! Thank you.

 

[IQuestion]

All of your points in that post can be true but the Owl T shirt theory can still be problematic.

In the new scenario, how does it work if KM is the intended recipient of the owl T shirt message?
That's the boring bit, the step-by-step. Once you go down that road, don't you find you're in another cul de sac? ( Believing Wendi is the main contact for Katie during the murder means you next have to disregard most of other evidence which just convicted Charlie)

Yes I totally agree with your last point. One should feel comfortable thinking out loud on WS, comfortable posing unexpected ideas and wild twists but equally we should also feel okay asking wtte ' but what if something we've long believed to be true, is actually wrong?' (WS needs both, otherwise it gets very dry & boring)

IMO Websleuths - traditionally & at it's best - is also collaborative & substantiated ( source linked.) Ideally, we ' keep each other honest' as the saying goes or ask each other to double-check our homework. It's boring and a pain in the proverbial to track back to links & time stamps which appear to show, for example, that in 2014 the hirers didn't even know the nicknames of the assassins. ( Linked, previous page, Dulce Vita transcript.)
WS at it's worst can stray into point-scorey & sneery/censorious tones -but the Markel threads have largely avoided that too, imo.

The case is a beast. (Even Jeremy Kutz said he'd never attempt to write a book about it)
Almost 10 years, 3 trials, 7? co-conspirators, zillions hours of un-enhanced audio, a raft of dodgy Defense lawyers behind the scenes, 3 co-conspirators whose brains are mush, 4? co-conspirators who are BS-ers of the highest order, addicted to sub texts, coded language and elaborate manipulations.
Next, chuck into the mix so many case 'unknowables' and the tik-tok-ification of True Crime.
It's human nature that our brains want to fill gaps even if sometimes we're forcing square chunks into round holes.

So, circling back to the starting point, does the Owl T shirt work if Katie instead, is the intended recipient of Wendi's message? (I love ' out of the box' creative thinking but once we get the thing out of the box, we still have to assemble the pieces to see if they fit together)

Anyway, apologies for the long post - yes even I am bored re-reading it - but didn't want anybody to feel they're walking on eggshells on the Markel thread but also wanted to jump off your post to make some broader points for newbies who will join WS for this case as Donna's trial moves forward.

SNIPPED FOR FOCUS bbm:
All of your points in that post can be true but the Owl T shirt theory can still be problematic.
( I guess T-shirt or not,) this entire case has taken 9 years, of overcoming problematic issues. Piecing together
SunPass, car rentalrecords, phone records, CCTV's, wire taps, checks to KM etc., etc. A successful family who paid to kill their marital relative....very problematic. Just because something, someone, or a criminal is "problematic" it doesn't mean you avoid or runaway from the issue.

In the new scenario, how does it work if KM is the intended recipient of the owl T shirt message? Forgive me for answering a question with a question: Why did GC (prosecutor) ask WA if she had been in contact with KM since meeting her in So Fla? Why does WA write a book, thinly veiled a fictional character, a public interest attorney who eerily mimics her life? (Some say problematic, some claim cosmic coincidence and some say just darned nuts.) Am I wrong in stating/assuming there still the issue of Cellbrite(?) info from WA's phone that has still not been released?

JL said she blurts out things "not in her best interest." Said she is "disorganized" and a lot of other politically correct and academically accepted nice words "bizarre amount of interest," (.... Lol, my Florida client just says "Bat *advertiser censored* crazy!")
So, will move it to the back burner of interesting cosmic coincidences, just as this childhood poem suggests:
A Wise Old Owl
A wise old owl lived in an oak
The more he saw the less he spoke
The less he spoke the more he heard.
Why can’t we all be like that wise old bird?

 

[B4igo2it]

Speaking of owls, during KM's trial, DeCoste, Defense questions Newlin about LR plea deal:

A fourth investigator, Jason Newlin, was called next. Newlin assists prosecutors including Cappleman with follow-up investigations. “Law enforcement puts the puzzle together,” Newlin explained, “We kinda put the glue.”

“Do you think someone becomes a boss of the Latin Kings by being stupid?” DeCoste challenged.
.... “Let’s talk about Facebook, Instagram, and owls. You know what I’m going to ask?” DeCoste asked.
“I’ll let you do it,” Newlin replied.
“Is there a difference between an owl and a lion?” DeCoste asked, referring to Rivera’s error in his testimony about which animal he had posted on Instagram, followed by a series of questions about why investigators didn’t ask the social media company for evidence of this.
“If you don’t send a preservation letter within 7 days, you don’t get it,” Newlin said, “It’s gone,” noting that they learned of the Instagram issue a good two years after the fact.
(I wonder if "anyone" ever took a screenshot of the text and still has it?)

Markel Trial Day 9: Defense tries stoking sympathies, Magbanua on the stand, resting its case

Motion for judgment of acquittal is denied

floridapolitics.com