FL - FSU Law Professor Dan Markel Murdered by Hitmen *4 Guilty* #23

[amicuscurie]

Just taking one point because I have too many thoughts on all the rest of your interesting post. Don't get me started.


I thought ex p was being deployed in order to get this granted by the judge without a hearing,
(without requiring state to be present to any dispute or comment. Rather than principally deployed in Florida to play 'secret subpoenas' with the intent to keep the other side in the dark.

( I'm also trying to imagine a scenario where a Florida SAOffice doesn't monitor LCC site but instead might only stumble across Def filings should the public/press spot something on the docket. I can't make that add up on a realistic level but IANAL so...)

You could be correct. It’s been a while.

 

[amicuscurie]

Wouldn’t Jorge Estrada be on the states witness list?
W’s boyfriend but wondering, if he is a realtor, if he was to be handling their properties when they left. Seems she called on him when Wendi was ghosting her? What did he know?

When you’re married, you don’t have to testify about communications which occurred during the marriage. Just a thought. If they do get married, days and weeks could be spent litigating whether certain communications took place during the marriage or not, thereby holding things up considerably in terms of the spouse eventually testifying. Hypothetical, of course. Do I hear wedding bells?

 

[watergirl62]

I’m talking about court documents/evidence.
Not chatter on the internet.

Couldn't the judge seal them, or do Florida sunshine laws have strict criteria for designating a document to be confidential or needing to be sealed?

Are some documents getting intercepted before the judge sees them, implying there may be a workflow issue or undue burden on judges because of the sunshine laws?

 

[Knitpicker]

Couldn't the judge seal them, or do Florida sunshine laws have strict criteria for designating a document to be confidential or needing to be sealed?

Are some documents getting intercepted before the judge sees them, implying there may be a workflow issue or undue burden on judges because of the sunshine laws?

View attachment 522480

That’s interesting!

 

[Knitpicker]

When you’re married, you don’t have to testify about communications which occurred during the marriage. Just a thought. If they do get married, days and weeks could be spent litigating whether certain communications took place during the marriage or not, thereby holding things up considerably in terms of the spouse eventually testifying. Hypothetical, of course. Do I hear wedding bells?

Good thought! People have been saying she was going to marry him and may be living with him. Is he a fool?

 

[amicuscurie]

Good thought! People have been saying she was going to marry him and may be living with him. Is he a fool?

Manipulative people find people who are easy to manipulate, speaking hypothetically. Wasn’t it PT Barnum who said there’s one born every minute?

 

[cottonweaver]

Wouldn’t Jorge Estrada be on the states witness list?
W’s boyfriend but wondering, if he is a realtor, if he was to be handling their properties when they left. Seems she called on him when Wendi was ghosting her? What did he know?

Yes he might end up on there even if not called.
@ Seattle1 posted the deadlines on WS. ( Maybe first few pages of this WS thread)
IIRC the deadline is something like 12 August

 

[cottonweaver]

Good thought! People have been saying she was going to marry him and may be living with him. Is he a fool?

Whoever he is..... imagine being the BF and not being tempted to do some research on your prospective bride or GF?

Research. For example listening to Wondery's OMDB or ordering the Steven Epstein book on the sly where you'd find out that in her last marriage the couple gave the impression of being head over heels and then you keep reading and find she's said she'd never found her husband sexually attractive but married him anyway.
I'd find that off-putting even if I was sold on her innocence

 

[Seattle1]

https://cvweb.leonclerk.com/public/online_services/search_courts/search_by_name.asp?case_search_type=criminal

Case updates ending July 31, 2024:

Depositions:

 

[Seattle1]

Updates ending July 31, 2024:

EX PARTE MOTION FOR ORDER TO ISSUE SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM - AT&T:




Also, I'm surprised defense would claim 'No Third Party Considerations" for the landline given Harvey resided in the residence with landline...

Nonetheless, the Motion was granted on 7/30/24:

https://cvweb.leonclerk.com/public/online_services/search_courts/search_by_name.asp?case_search_type=criminal

 

[Seattle1]

7/30/24: Sun Pass / Transponder


Motion Granted 7/30/24:

https://cvweb.leonclerk.com/public/online_services/search_courts/search_by_name.asp?case_search_type=criminal

 

[Zedzded]

I would think it would be hard to force a client to take a plea deal if they don’t want to. I would,doubt that it hasn’t been mentioned at least once.

Rashbaum says jump and the Adelsons say how high. They think he's some kind of legal genius. I think if he had turned round to them said you have zero chance, they would have been tempted to make a deal? I don't know.

Once DA is convicted, one would think WA would be extremely concerned about her arrest and likely conviction and be tempted to make a deal, but she won't.

 

[Zedzded]

7/30/24: Sun Pass / Transponder

View attachment 522570
Motion Granted 7/30/24:

View attachment 522572

https://cvweb.leonclerk.com/public/online_services/search_courts/search_by_name.asp?case_search_type=criminal

Is this the defence trying to obtain information that the State already have? I thought the State would have requested it already are obligated to share it?

 

[amicuscurie]

Whoever he is..... imagine being the BF and not being tempted to do some research on your prospective bride or GF?

Research. For example listening to Wondery's OMDB or ordering the Steven Epstein book on the sly where you'd find out that in her last marriage the couple gave the impression of being head over heels and then you keep reading and find she's said she'd never found her husband sexually attractive but married him anyway.
I'd find that off-putting even if I was sold on her innocence

Water seeks its own level. Someone who would do that that, hypothetically, would probably not be the boyfriend at all.

 

[cottonweaver]

Is this the defence trying to obtain information that the State already have? I thought the State would have requested it already are obligated to share it?

During CA's trial I am 99% certain I heard Rashbaum tell the court that he'd tried to get the records but they had no longer held 2014 records.
( Sig & Luis Sunpass data was requested closer to the date of the crime)

Anyway, this is why I was asking , last week, why he's requesting something he already knows is unavailable. ( This is one of reasons I next wondered about delay ploys but it's just my baffled speculation)