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

[amicuscurie]

Yeah I'm confused as to why DR is even mentioning the Sunpass issue. It seems irrelevant. But I'm also confused as to why he is not going with the story that DA and HA did go to CA's house. It's something that can be easily explained. CA's parents popped in to say hello and check on him on their way to Tallahassee. It's not particularly incriminating. Why the hell would they lie about that and drop them all in the ?

Because assuming the State can show DA did go to CA's house then that really strengthens the argument that this was when the money drop happened.

For the defense to admit that Donna stopped at Charlie’s house is incriminating, in my opinion, for the reason you state, so I don’t know why the defense would go with that story no matter how it could be explained away.

In my opinion, one can argue either that one was already on the Turnpike at the time the text was sent and did not stop; OR that one left (either Miami or CS) at a later time more consistent with arriving in Orlando at 1:30 a.m., but not both. If the text doesn’t come in, this problem goes away.

 

[Zedzded]

For the defense to admit that Donna stopped at Charlie’s house is incriminating, in my opinion, for the reason you state, so I don’t know why the defense would go with that story no matter how it could be explained away.

In my opinion, one can argue either that one was already on the Turnpike at the time the text was sent and did not stop; OR that one left (either Miami or CS) at a later time more consistent with arriving in Orlando at 1:30 a.m., but not both. If the text doesn’t come in, this problem goes away.

Yeah they're kinda screwed whichever way they go. I guess DR is rolling the dice. If the state can't prove DA and HA went to CA's house then happy days, but oh boy if they prove it, that's DA screwed. CA even more screwed and HA also now screwed..

 

[61Montcalm]

Yeah they're kinda screwed whichever way they go. I guess DR is rolling the dice. If the state can't prove DA and HA went to CA's house then happy days, but oh boy if they prove it, that's DA screwed. CA even more screwed and HA also now screwed..

I've never been to Florida and I don't live in the USA, so I don't know any of these routes. But looking at this from the outside, it's very hard for me to imagine HA not being involved. To me, he seems like a CEO who says "get this done please" and while not involved in the intimate details, he's knew about and agreed with the general plan. Whether or not that can be proven is a different matter entirely and this is just my opinion. But for him to have been left out completely from the plan does not seem credible to me.

Using example from my language, if my parents text me to say "mi smo ispred tvoje kući" or in English "we are outside your house" I'd take that to mean that they were in my driveway or on the street outside. Not that they were on the Turnpike passing by.

If they were on the turnpike or highway why even bother to send such an inane text saying "we're just passing by" and then for Charlie to reply "10 minutes." It's just ridiculous and beggars belief that a jury could take it any other way than that they were in his driveway.

I think that the Sunpass records are irrelevant and that the text speaks for itself. IMO HA and DA were both there and he's just as guilty as she is.

 

[Zedzded]

I've never been to Florida and I don't live in the USA, so I don't know any of these routes. But looking at this from the outside, it's very hard for me to imagine HA not being involved. To me, he seems like a CEO who says "get this done please" and while not involved in the intimate details, he's knew about and agreed with the general plan. Whether or not that can be proven is a different matter entirely and this is just my opinion. But for him to have been left out completely from the plan does not seem credible to me.

Using example from my language, if my parents text me to say "mi smo ispred tvoje kući" or in English "we are outside your house" I'd take that to mean that they were in my driveway or on the street outside. Not that they were on the Turnpike passing by.

If they were on the turnpike or highway why even bother to send such an inane text saying "we're just passing by" and then for Charlie to reply "10 minutes." It's just ridiculous and beggars belief that a jury could take it any other way than that they were in his driveway.

I think that the Sunpass records are irrelevant and that the text speaks for itself. IMO HA and DA were both there and he's just as guilty as she is.

Yup fully agree.

And that's what I mean about dropping HA in it by denying they visited CA. If the state proves they lied then suddenly it becomes a lot more obvious that HA was involved. Even though visiting CA was incriminating, HA could argue he went with DA and stayed in the car or didn't know she had money or whatever. The lie buries him. He has no way out.

 

[Knitpicker]

For the defense to admit that Donna stopped at Charlie’s house is incriminating, in my opinion, for the reason you state, so I don’t know why the defense would go with that story no matter how it could be explained away.

In my opinion, one can argue either that one was already on the Turnpike at the time the text was sent and did not stop; OR that one left (either Miami or CS) at a later time more consistent with arriving in Orlando at 1:30 a.m., but not both. If the text doesn’t come in, this problem goes away.

Why couldn’t they stop for dinner after Charlie? Just another possibility.(after the money drop).
(I’d like to know when Charlie called KM to come over or if there was a preplanned time.)
After all they were waiting for that Wendi call (I believe it was 7 PM)
Probably couldn't eat all day, waiting..

 

[Knitpicker]

So we don't know which house DA and HA were in on the day of the 18th of July? It would be great if it was Coral Springs.

Thats what I believe. I don’t believe they went straight from Tallahassee to Miami. Wendi would have dropped off at the house a lot of stuff from her place. And then herHS teacher friend go stuff and probably also brought it to the family house.
I sent Georgia a map and the highways they would have taken, etc about 10 months ago and she thanked me. Because I believe in Charlies trial it was mentioned that they would have left from Miami and it didn’t seem Coral Springs was even a possibility. I think it was Corbitt who mentioned they left from Miami. So perhaps he knows this for sure but didn’t give the cell phone records at Charlies trial.
Hopefully soon we will have all he answers.

 

[Knitpicker]

I'm not sure I understand you. DA was at CA's house or passing by his house at 9PM then arrived in Orlando at 1.30AM. It only takes 2.55 to get from CA's house on Whale Harbour Lane to Orlando which means DA's phone should have first registered with an Orlando cell tower at around 12.00am not 1.30am.

They could have stopped to get something to eat as they were awaiting Wendi’s call that came at 7 PM. I don't find that hour and a half an issue at all. Theres plenty of places to eat near Charlies on 441. One that he ate at with June ..it’s a Mexican/spanish place called Vilas. It was a Friday night. They could have grabbed a bite and eaten in less than an hour.
I don’t have the time’s written down, but we’d need to know when the call was made to Katie and when she showed up at Charlie’s. I forgot those details. I used to have everything written up in a notebook I misplaced.

 

[Knitpicker]

Dbm

 

[Florida_marlin]

‘Oh what a tangled web we weave/When first we practice to deceive’

I know this a worn cliché, and here it be on full display.

The plain meaning of “The Text” is simple, straightforward and any jury will know exactly what it means. So, how does one address?

Attempt to exclude. The “unfair” due to “delayed charging” is an attempt to have this significant evidence excluded. Eliminate evidence to support the money drop.

Attempt to confuse. As stated, the text is simple to interpret. So, throw out an alternate interpretation of the text and introduce “nonevidence” to get the jury arguing among themselves about evidence that doesn’t exist just to create doubt in one or more individuals. All the discussions the last few days here is a demo of that. Quite a web we are weaving from the defense attempt to deceive.

Attempt to gain sympathy. The mean old State is unfair to this nice old lady by not allowing her the availability of exculpatory evidence. I have no doubt that the “nice old lady” will be quite animated and probably obnoxious at trial, which will certainly negate any impact from the sympathy attempt.

My 2c, and moo.

 

[Knitpicker]

‘Oh what a tangled web we weave/When first we practice to deceive’

I know this a worn cliché, and here it be on full display.

The plain meaning of “The Text” is simple, straightforward and any jury will know exactly what it means. So, how does one address?

Attempt to exclude. The “unfair” due to “delayed charging” is an attempt to have this significant evidence excluded. Eliminate evidence to support the money drop.

Attempt to confuse. As stated, the text is simple to interpret. So, throw out an alternate interpretation of the text and introduce “nonevidence” to get the jury arguing among themselves about evidence that doesn’t exist just to create doubt in one or more individuals. All the discussions the last few days here is a demo of that. Quite a web we are weaving from the defense attempt to deceive.

Attempt to gain sympathy. The mean old State is unfair to this nice old lady by not allowing her the availability of exculpatory evidence. I have no doubt that the “nice old lady” will be quite animated and probably obnoxious at trial, which will certainly negate any impact from the sympathy attempt.

My 2c, and moo.

Right. Confuse and diffuse.
Last paragraph -the reason why I want to be sitting home not sitting on a bench there. I don’t want to miss any of Donnas facial expressions in real time.
Hopefully it will be the same courtroom.

 

[Knitpicker]

Yeah I'm confused as to why DR is even mentioning the Sunpass issue. It seems irrelevant. But I'm also confused as to why he is not going with the story that DA and HA did go to CA's house. It's something that can be easily explained. CA's parents popped in to say hello and check on him on their way to Tallahassee. It's not particularly incriminating. Why the hell would they lie about that and drop them all in the ?

Because assuming the State can show DA did go to CA's house then that really strengthens the argument that this was when the money drop happened.

Also, if they were at the family home in Coral Springs, it would be unusual, as they stayed at the condo in Miami Thursday to Sunday. Stayed in Coral Springs M-W which were the days Harvey was working in the practice close to the family home. They would 99.9% have taken the Turnpike/Sunpass to get to Charlies from the house.
Do we know for sure that the state doesn’t have the Sunpass records?
There are statements they send to the home when you have an account with them. Especially if you don’t have money left in the account and you go through a toll collection.
They send you a charge in the mail.

 

[BobbieJ]

Also, if they were at the family home in Coral Springs, it would be unusual, as they stayed at the condo in Miami Thursday to Sunday. Stayed in Coral Springs M-W which were the days Harvey was working in the practice close to the family home. They would 99.9% have taken the Turnpike/Sunpass to get to Charlies from the house.
Do we know for sure that the state doesn’t have the Sunpass records?
There are statements they send to the home when you have an account with them. Especially if you don’t have money left in the account and you go through a toll collection.
They send you a charge in the mail.

If the State had the Sunpass records then so would the defence.

 

[amicuscurie]

Yeah they're kinda screwed whichever way they go. I guess DR is rolling the dice. If the state can't prove DA and HA went to CA's house then happy days, but oh boy if they prove it, that's DA screwed. CA even more screwed and HA also now screwed..

But- if you argue that it can’t even come in, because maybe there was some evidence hypothetically that would resolve this inconsistency but can’t be searched for anymore…..

 

[amicuscurie]

I've never been to Florida and I don't live in the USA, so I don't know any of these routes. But looking at this from the outside, it's very hard for me to imagine HA not being involved. To me, he seems like a CEO who says "get this done please" and while not involved in the intimate details, he's knew about and agreed with the general plan. Whether or not that can be proven is a different matter entirely and this is just my opinion. But for him to have been left out completely from the plan does not seem credible to me.

Using example from my language, if my parents text me to say "mi smo ispred tvoje kući" or in English "we are outside your house" I'd take that to mean that they were in my driveway or on the street outside. Not that they were on the Turnpike passing by.

If they were on the turnpike or highway why even bother to send such an inane text saying "we're just passing by" and then for Charlie to reply "10 minutes." It's just ridiculous and beggars belief that a jury could take it any other way than that they were in his driveway.

I think that the Sunpass records are irrelevant and that the text speaks for itself. IMO HA and DA were both there and he's just as guilty as she is.

I completely agree about it speaking for itself.

 

[amicuscurie]

Why couldn’t they stop for dinner after Charlie? Just another possibility.(after the money drop).
(I’d like to know when Charlie called KM to come over or if there was a preplanned time.)
After all they were waiting for that Wendi call (I believe it was 7 PM)
Probably couldn't eat all day, waiting..

The defense could argue that, certainly. I would assume but don’t know that if cell tower records can show the car in Orlando, they would show the car wherever it was, restaurant, Turnpike rest stop, wherever. I am surprised that this wasn’t argued when it came up at Charlie’s trial, was it? My understanding is that if you have a cell phone on your person, its location can be tracked unless it is completely turned off, like with Sig and Luis and their drives back and forth.

 

[amicuscurie]

They could have stopped to get something to eat as they were awaiting Wendi’s call that came at 7 PM. I don't find that hour and a half an issue at all. Theres plenty of places to eat near Charlies on 441. One that he ate at with June ..it’s a Mexican/spanish place called Vilas. It was a Friday night. They could have grabbed a bite and eaten in less than an hour.
I don’t have the time’s written down, but we’d need to know when the call was made to Katie and when she showed up at Charlie’s. I forgot those details. I used to have everything written up in a notebook I misplaced.

My understanding is that the issue is not what they may have done while hypothetically waiting for the call from Wendi at around 7, it’s the time between when the text was sent and when cell tower records have the car in Orlando.

 

[amicuscurie]

‘Oh what a tangled web we weave/When first we practice to deceive’

I know this a worn cliché, and here it be on full display.

The plain meaning of “The Text” is simple, straightforward and any jury will know exactly what it means. So, how does one address?

Attempt to exclude. The “unfair” due to “delayed charging” is an attempt to have this significant evidence excluded. Eliminate evidence to support the money drop.

Attempt to confuse. As stated, the text is simple to interpret. So, throw out an alternate interpretation of the text and introduce “nonevidence” to get the jury arguing among themselves about evidence that doesn’t exist just to create doubt in one or more individuals. All the discussions the last few days here is a demo of that. Quite a web we are weaving from the defense attempt to deceive.

Attempt to gain sympathy. The mean old State is unfair to this nice old lady by not allowing her the availability of exculpatory evidence. I have no doubt that the “nice old lady” will be quite animated and probably obnoxious at trial, which will certainly negate any impact from the sympathy attempt.

My 2c, and moo.

Agreed on all points.