FL - FSU Law Professor Dan Markel Murdered by Hitmen *4 Guilty* #24

[IQuestion]

Perhaps we will see a message asking that she be buried in it.

OMG...you made me laugh out loud. (Before anyone thinks we are being obtusely morbid or cruel, I will explain) I had forgotten the text DA sent Wendi right after Charlie's conviction, telling her to bury her in the dress she purchased for the upcoming Barmitzvah . Then Wendi texting back wtte (words to the effect), "Your anger directed at me is unjustified. I testifed as I was required to do."

 

[IQuestion]

“Those messages, as I understand it, can come in if Donna’s defense is that Charlie told her he was extorted. It’s always been my feeling that she should have gone with the defense that he told her to write the checks because Katie needed them to get insurance for her kids. I’m wondering if she could still use that defense if Charlie doesn’t testify.”

That is REALLY why she needed to be on the payroll. To get gov assisted health insurance (about 22.00/month for a single mother in S FL with 2 small kids at that time) she has to show employment. And not over a certain amount..

Dhaang KP you are rockin' it this morning! (And I don't just mean the earthquake.) I would really like to know how far KM & A's went with this "employee scam." Did they (or payroll people) issue KM a W2? Did CA write it off on his company return? Did KM file a tax return on the "payroll checks?" Did she have to upload, mail, or provide copies of those checks to qualify for benefits? If DA did not have the same type records she had for the other employees, it would be a clear indication the whole process was not kosher, IMO.
Afterthought...was the insurance she purchased in Forida better than a plan for the indigent? Maybe more options/choices for medical care for the children?

 

[amicuscurie]

Dhaang KP you are rockin' it this morning! (And I don't just mean the earthquake.) I would really like to know how far KM & A's went with this "employee scam." Did they (or payroll people) issue KM a W2? Did CA write it off on his company return? Did KM file a tax return on the "payroll checks?" Did she have to upload, mail, or provide copies of those checks to qualify for benefits? If DA did not have the same type records she had for the other employees, it would be a clear indication the whole process was not kosher, IMO.
Afterthought...was the insurance she purchased in Forida better than a plan for the indigent? Maybe more options/choices for medical care for the children?

Even if it had been less than honest, it still is a lesser crime than murder, in my opinion. I believe that Charlie and Donna might have believed that the checks were not sufficient to tie Donna to the murder.

 

[Knitpicker]

ETA :I don’t know why this happens, with the orange block.

I have no recollection of Katie saying the checks were for the murder. I clearly remember her saying it was for health insurance for the kids. So I guess I have to revisit that.

 

[amicuscurie]

I have no recollection of Katie saying the checks were for the murder. I clearly remember her saying it was for health insurance for the kids. So I guess I have to revisit that.

Yes, I’d be curious - I distinctly remember her saying it was for the murder, but I do also remember her saying something about the insurance as well. It’s complicated, because in my opinion it’s possible it was both.

 

[Knitpicker]

Yes, I’d be curious - I distinctly remember her saying it was for the murder, but I do also remember her saying something about the insurance as well. It’s complicated, because in my opinion it’s possible it was both.

I’ll check. I’m assuming it was Georgias direct and not Rashbaum?

 

[amicuscurie]

I’ll check. I’m assuming it was Georgias direct and not Rashbaum?

I don’t remember, but probably?

 

[cottonweaver]

The Corbett motion continued, Corbett testifying, Dougan up.

very effective imo

One section:
Donna's Gmails.
Dougan: Are they Voluminous?
Corbett: Yes. WA has 87K, DA has 57K emails.
Dougan: We're only using around 5 emails in this Powerpoint

Dougan: Texts. Voluminous?
Corbett: Yes. ' Hundreds of thousands' in total. WA has 10K whatsapp chats & approx 20K instant messages. CA's ICloud has circa 280K messages
Dougan: We're only using around 20 message chats, totalling c 50 messages in this Powerpoint

double checking my earlier post with the replay videos


Texts
Corbett says Ms Adelson , he doesn't say WA

Ms Adelson ' has 10K whatsapp chats & approx 20K instant messages'
Who is Ms Adelson? I assumed it was Wendi but maybe he means Donna?
( the rest of the post is correct)

This has come up before. I hope the state just sticks to first and last names

ETA
To be clear, i have re listened to the sequence and added the correction in this post

 

[Knitpicker]

Just wanted to point out that months ago, I stated that I believed Harvey and Donna left from their Coral Springs home to “pass” Charlie (which was out of the way to Orlando). I did think it was possible Donna went alone-and that H was in Tallahassee. Prob wrong about that.

Most people thought they left from Miami.
Corbitt also on the stand suggested that.

Corbitt today stated that Harveys handset was in his office on July 18th. (Tamarac).
Harvey was not working Fridays at that time.
The family home was less than 3 miles from his office.
Rashbaum seemed shocked to hear that Corbitt had that information.

Are you sure? Corbitt said he had data that showed the original location (kind of vague). Could be Harvey was there at some point.

This can only prove that if D and H did stop at Charlies, coming from the area of the family home, it was for a purpose and they were not just “passing by”.

And would also prove they took the turnpike (the sunpass issue)

 

[Knitpicker]

double checking my earlier post with the replay videos


Texts
Corbett says Ms Adelson , he doesn't say WA

Ms Adelson ' has 10K whatsapp chats & approx 20K instant messages'
Who is Ms Adelson? I assumed it was Wendi but maybe he means Donna?
( the rest of the post is correct)

This has come up before. I hope the state just sticks to first and last names

I just heard it, says Miss Adelson.
@56:52 mark -Law and crime trials.

 

[amicuscurie]

Just wanted to point out that months ago, I stated that I believed Harvey and Donna left from their Coral Springs home to “pass” Charlie (which was out of the way to Orlando). I did think it was possible Donna went alone-and that H was in Tallahassee. Prob wrong about that.

Most people thought they left from Miami.
Corbitt also on the stand suggested that.

Corbitt today stated that Harveys handset was in his office on July 18th. (Tamarac).
Harvey was not working Fridays at that time.
The family home was less than 3 miles from his office.
Rashbaum seemed shocked to hear that Corbitt had that information.

Are you sure? Corbitt said he had data that showed the original location (kind of vague). Could be Harvey was there at some point.

This can only prove that if D and H did stop at Charlies, coming from the area of the family home, it was for a purpose and they were not just “passing by”.

And would also prove they took the turnpike (the sunpass issue)

As I recall Corbett did say the phone was at the office, but then when Rash kept asking about it, he sort of backtracked and said the phone had been at some location, he wasn’t sure, but I understood it to mean that this location, whether at his office or not, was not part of the drive they took that day and so he did not include it in his demonstrative aid. As I recall, under further questioning Corbett said he was not sure whether it was the office or somewhere else.

 

[Knitpicker]

As I recall Corbett did say the phone was at the office, but then when Rash kept asking about it, he sort of backtracked and said the phone had been at some location, he wasn’t sure, but I understood it to mean that this location was not part of the drive they took that day and so he did not include it in his demonstrative aid. The questioning, as I recall, was about whether he includes ever location for the phone when he is making his charts or graphs, and he said he doesn’t, and he gave Harvey’s location as an example of one he did not include.

He says it could have been a starting location. Thats my understanding.

He said “originated at his office”.

 

[JerseyPride]

The obvious problem with tailoring a convoluted defense to explain away every piece of incriminating evidence is that it's just not believable. Beyond that, once you've contorted your narrative to explain away everything, it becomes impossible to square that narrative with new evidence that comes out later.

What a tangled web has been woven.

 

[amicuscurie]

He says it could have been a starting location. Thats my understanding.

It was confusing for me. Should be interesting at trial. I believe he said that whatever this location was, he didn’t include it on the map, so I am thinking the state is not using it in their presentation.

 

[Knitpicker]

It was confusing for me. Should be interesting at trial.

I just edited. I just listened again. He said “Originated at his office”. “The data session continue to show the original locations”....then he says “earlier”.

R- “Harvey Adelson? It showed him in his office that day”?
C- “Yes it did- On July 18”

 

[opt]

I can’t imagine what a different defense might be, but there was a “surprise” defense in Charlie’s trial,

It was a surprise because it was so stupid.

Murder on spec was not credible in Charlie's trial. It won't be any more credible in Donna's trial. Unless she argues that it's one of those things so stupid that only a super smart person could believe it.

 

[amicuscurie]

I just edited. I just listened again. He said “Originated at his office”. “The data session continue to show the original locations”....then he says “earlier”.

R- “Harvey Adelson? It showed him in his office that day”?
C- “Yes it did- On July 18”

It would appear to me from his testimony today that he did not think it was important enough to include this location on the map he prepared regarding their trip to Tallahassee. My impression was that he created a map of their locations starting later in the day when they left to go up there. I suppose it is certainly possible he was at the office that morning, but it does not necessarily mean that they left from there when they made the trip up.

 

[amicuscurie]

It was a surprise because it was so stupid.

Murder on spec was not credible in Charlie's trial. It won't be any more credible in Donna's trial. Unless she argues that it's one of those things so stupid that only a super smart person could believe it.

As someone said above, it would appear from today’s hearing that the state has evidence that can be used to counter the extortion defense, and so I’m wondering if it’s possible the defense might come up with something else, which I think would be a surprise.

 

[Going Rogue]

Just wanted to point out that months ago, I stated that I believed Harvey and Donna left from their Coral Springs home to “pass” Charlie (which was out of the way to Orlando). I did think it was possible Donna went alone-and that H was in Tallahassee. Prob wrong about that.

Most people thought they left from Miami.
Corbitt also on the stand suggested that.

Corbitt today stated that Harveys handset was in his office on July 18th. (Tamarac).
Harvey was not working Fridays at that time.
The family home was less than 3 miles from his office.
Rashbaum seemed shocked to hear that Corbitt had that information.

Are you sure? Corbitt said he had data that showed the original location (kind of vague). Could be Harvey was there at some point.

This can only prove that if D and H did stop at Charlies, coming from the area of the family home, it was for a purpose and they were not just “passing by”.

And would also prove they took the turnpike (the sunpass issue)

May I ask what you are basing your theory on that they left from Coral Springs? I am almost positive that Corbitt already testified that Donna and Harvey left from ‘Miami’ before stopping or ‘passing by’ Charlie’s house. Its possible they left from Miami AND Harvey was also at his office earlier that day – both can be true. It’s also possible Corbitt misspoke today because Rashbaum challenged him when he said Harvey’s cell records show him at his office earlier that day and Corbitt didn’t seem to be certain. Corbitt even said he wasn’t sure and would to refer to him notes or the data after he was challenged. Both sides already know what the data shows and the fact that Rashbaum challenged him, I have to assume Corbitt probably misspoke today OR as I said both can be true. I think everyone agrees that if the data shows they left from Coral Springs, its another nail in the coffin BUT based on previous testimony that does not appear they left from Coral Springs.

 

[Knitpicker]

May I ask what you are basing your theory on that they left from Coral Springs? I am almost positive that Corbitt already testified that Donna and Harvey left from ‘Miami’ before stopping or ‘passing by’ Charlie’s house. It’s possible they left from Miami AND Harvey was also at his office earlier that day – both can be true. It’s also possible Corbitt misspoke today because Rashbaum challenged him when he said Harvey’s cell records show him at his office earlier that day and Corbitt didn’t seem to be certain. Corbitt even said he wasn’t sure and would to refer to him notes or the data after he was challenged. Both sides already know what the data shows and the fact that Rashbaum challenged him, I have to assume Corbitt probably misspoke today OR as I said both can be true. I think everyone agrees that if the data shows they left from Coral Springs, it’s another nail in the coffin BUT based on previous testimony that does not appear they left from Coral Springs.

“That can only prove that IF……”