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

[Knitpicker]

Almost fini

Totally agree. I did watch, because Cottonweaver mentioned it, a video from the lawyer you know because he is based in FL. He made it sound as though these conflicts happen frequently and that you need a written waiver with the caveat to the client that at some point, you may not be able to continue representation. I just cannot understand that at all.

I don't understand how at any point a defendant can rescind their waiver in writing and blow up the whole case. Everything that has been done to date goes out the window because then they have to retain new counsel. I just don't even understand how that can possibly be allowed. The State here could've been halfway through the trial and Charlie, let's assume he signed the waiver, then could put in writing that he's rescinding the waiver and so everyone would have to go home after a mistrial was declared. I just don't understand how that is even allowed.

As much as I am anxious to see Donna's trial fairly soon with Morris, I don't understand how he continues on without the tape. They have to do this all over again by bringing in another attorney, establishing the wall, and allowing that attorney to cross examine Charlie on the stand. I still think that is grounds for an appeal for Donna. If I am misunderstanding, something, I hope a FL criminal law attorney can correct me.

He did a good job showing the hearing and dissecting it with commentary.

 

[amicuscurie]

Well, we know that the judge held an in camera hearing about just what privileged info Morris was given. Presumably, he wouldn't allow Morris to continue if there was a conflict.


Let's say for argument's sake, Morris does have some privileged information. Unless Morris is dumb enough to let this info slip while cross-examining Charlie, then I don't see how it becomes an appealable issue. I mean in pretty much every trial lawyers are privy to information that they can't ask witnesses about. And if they do ask, then it's a potential mistrial. This doesn't seem to be all that different.

IMO, it's a completely different situation than with Rashbaum. As Charlie's former lawyer, he still has ethical obligations to his ex-client.

In my understanding, the appearance of impropriety is just as bad as impropriety, as far as the law is concerned, and any potential for a mistrial is generally to be avoided at the outset.

 

[Zedzded]

Yes, that’s accurate. I trust that an ethical wall exists, however, Carl Steinbeck argued that anyone part of the legal team should be considered tainted and the judge should err on the side of caution and remove Morris if he doesn’t withdraw from the case. Hard to argue with Carl when he’s been raising the issue of the Rashbaum conflict for the past year and look how quickly things unraveled because of that conflict.

He was bang on the money. I watched his dissection of the conflict of waiver he did many months ago and he very accurately foresaw this being an issue. One of the pertinent things he said was that DA can waive her rights and CA can waive his rights, but it might still not be accepted because it breaches the 6th amendment right of a person's right to conflict free counsel. That's something that can't always be waived.

 

[LinasK]

So either Morris stays on and there are appeal issues later, or all new lawyers and we are looking at 1.5-2 years till Donnas trial. Right?

Why should it take 11/2- 2 years for a new team to get up to speed? My cousin's murderer willingly changed lawyers 8 times in an attempt to delay his trial. It didn't take each of them that long.

 

[Knitpicker]

Appar

Why should it take 11/2- 2 years for a new team to get up to speed? My cousin's murderer willingly changed lawyers 8 times in an attempt to delay his trial. It didn't take each of them that long.

Apparently, all new lawyers would have to go through all the evidence etc. It took1.5 years for Charlie and a year for Donna (Rashbaum already knew the case. An attorney mentioned that yesterday. Not my opinion.

 

[Knitpicker]

I do not see it that way. I thought the Judge did his best to question Morris about the "wall" between he and Rash to avoid additional appeal issues later - didn't he?

Oh yes if Morris stays on. No idea how the one below is attached

Great questions! Only time will give us the answers...unless Steinbeck can see the writing on this wall as well

JMO but I think DA is much like CA was during his trial, she believes she is going to get off (although deep down she knows she is guilty) and it is my belief she wants to take the shortest route to accomplish that, which means keeping Morris.

Morris stays on . But if he doesnt and all new lawyers-would take 1.5 years according to Carl. He stated that yesterday.

 

[nodamselindistress]

Ok so since we do not now anything else, don't we just go on that for now? Oct 15 is the next pretrial hearing I think, so until that time we are dead in the water.

 

[LinasK]

Oh yes if Morris stays on. No idea how the one below is attached

Morris stays on . But if he doesnt and all new lawyers-would take 1.5 years according to Carl. He stated that yesterday.

1.5 years seems excessive, even though I know it's a complex trial with 5 defendants. Also, I haven't seen grounds to get rid of Morris completely yet.

 

[Knitpicker]

He could quit. Some think he will

1.5 years seems excessive, even though I know it's a complex trial with 5 defendants. Also, I haven't seen grounds to get rid of Morris completely yet

 

[IQuestion]

Public searches tonight and WOW! Look at the last man(far left) in this picture,the young dark-haired man walking into court with Tim Jansen!! Isn't the young man the same guy who came into court to be the "conflict free attorney" who supposedly spent a whopping 30 minutes with Donna? This sure looks like the guy on Donna's left. And YEP that is Tim J in front. (JT Burnette bribery extortion case)

 

[clearskies1]

So I will beat a dead horse. I think Rashbaum said that CA orally waived a conflict on Dec. 12 and 13. He seemed to say that there was a written waiver but CA never signed it. Was Rashbaum saying that CA was actually given the written waiver and refused to sign? If that's what he's saying, can CA's refusal to sign be seen as a revocation of the oral waiver -- meaning did he revoke the waiver occur awhile ago? JMO.

 

[IQuestion]

I don't know how to post side-by-side photos....but here he is in court with Donna. What gives folks? Edited to add his name is Adam Komisar (from the newspaper article.) Now look at next post!!o

 

[clearskies1]

Public searches tonight and WOW! Look at the last man(far left) in this picture,the young dark-haired man walking into court with Tim Jansen!! Isn't the young man the same guy who came into court to be the "conflict free attorney" who supposedly spent a whopping 30 minutes with Donna? This sure looks like the guy on Donna's left. And YEP that is Tim J in front. (JT Burnette bribery extortion case)
View attachment 532181

The photo is a few years old. Maybe he previously worked at Jansen's firm? It looks like Adam Komisar now has his own firm. William N. Spicola | Komisar And Spicola

 

[IQuestion]

This is the next post...following?
So the picture with Donna is Adam Komisar. I kept wondering, is this guy a doppleganger for the man walking into court with T. J. Burnett and Tim Jansen?? So kept researching and voila Adam Komisar and Tim Jansen were both on the case defending TJBurnett.
"Defense attorneys Tim Jansen, right, and Adam J. Komisar in federal court in Tallahassee on May 9, 2019." You can see the court artist Marina Brown drawing of Jansen & Komisar sitting together, May 9, 2019. (The info is the 5th sketch from the end of the article.)

Courtroom sketches from J.T. Burnette trial, related cases

Artist Marina Brown has followed and drawn cases in federal court for the Tallahassee Democrat.

www.tallahassee.com

 

[IQuestion]

The photo is a few years old. Maybe he previously worked at Jansen's firm? It looks like Adam Komisar now has his own firm. William N. Spicola | Komisar And Spicola

Small world in Tally, huh? TJ Burnett was sentenced in Nov. 2021...so you are right...a few years ago. I just was surprised...AGAIN!
In search of prior connections, I go down the rabbit hole, often. (Too often and too deep, lol.) Always looking past the first page of browser suggestions. Give you an example of unbelievable paths crossing in the news. Attorney Morvillo of — Morvillo Abramowitz Grand Iason & Anello PC. died in a yacht accident last month shortly after winning a big Silicon Valley case.

Hotshot NYC lawyer missing in Bayesian yacht disaster had just made good on dad’s life’s work with victory in Mike Lynch fraud case

“It doesn’t happen that often — the son is able to play in the same league as their dad,” a longtime family friend and attorney said.

nypost.com

Ironically DanR used to work with/for the same firm." Dan began his career at Skadden, Arps and later worked at Morvillo, Abramowitz, Grand, Iason & Anello, P.C."

 

[clearskies1]

So I will beat a dead horse. I think Rashbaum said that CA orally waived a conflict on Dec. 12 and 13. He seemed to say that there was a written waiver but CA never signed it. Was Rashbaum saying that CA was actually given the written waiver and refused to sign? If that's what he's saying, can CA's refusal to sign be seen as a revocation of the oral waiver -- meaning did he revoke the waiver occur awhile ago? JMO.

Responding to my own post...I'm seeing that the defense attributed the lack of a signed waiver to CA being in "close custody". So I guess they are not saying that he refused to sign, but rather that they didn't have ready access to him. JMO.

 

[IQuestion]

The photo is a few years old. Maybe he previously worked at Jansen's firm? It looks like Adam Komisar now has his own firm. William N. Spicola | Komisar And Spicola

Back to the rabbit hole searches: From the website 9 years at a high-profile (unnamed) criminal defense firm.
"Before founding Komisar Spicola PA, Adam worked at a high-profile Tallahassee criminal defense firm. He spent nine years strategizing, negotiating, and litigating on behalf of the firms' clients, including collegiate and professional athletes', businesspersons, and politicians."

Adam J. Komisar | Komisar & Spicola

www.komisarspicola.com

Tim J just mentioned connection on STS when asked by Joel....sounds like no love lost. Hmmm. "Well in all due fairness he used to work in my office. And I do not want to make any comments regarding him at this point." Watch/listen beginning at 1:06 of STS link. PS. Kudos & respect to Tim J. for the prompt answer...It makes me like you even more!!

 

[cottonweaver]

Responding to my own post...I'm seeing that the defense attributed the lack of a signed waiver to CA being in "close custody". So I guess they are not saying that he refused to sign, but rather that they didn't have ready access to him. JMO.

It's all very odd.
See the 1hr 11m timestamp in the STS episode which IQuestion has linked to in the WS post below yours.
It's a clip of Dan on the infamous STS show from Jan 2024

( BTW re the secondary point - at 1hr 12 - about Donna not having spoken to ' independent counsel'. According to Morris in court, that was himself in Jan 2024 so I don't think Dan was lying about that aspect)

 

[amicuscurie]

Public searches tonight and WOW! Look at the last man(far left) in this picture,the young dark-haired man walking into court with Tim Jansen!! Isn't the young man the same guy who came into court to be the "conflict free attorney" who supposedly spent a whopping 30 minutes with Donna? This sure looks like the guy on Donna's left. And YEP that is Tim J in front. (JT Burnette bribery extortion case)
View attachment 532181

Yes, Tim said on STS that the guy used to work for him.

ETA- I imagine Tallahassee is a relatively small town and a lot of lawyers cross paths

 

[I am not Sherlock H.]

He was bang on the money. I watched his dissection of the conflict of waiver he did many months ago and he very accurately foresaw this being an issue. One of the pertinent things he said was that DA can waive her rights and CA can waive his rights, but it might still not be accepted because it breaches the 6th amendment right of a person's right to conflict free counsel. That's something that can't always be waived.

Yes, fully agree here @Zedzded ……. And it begs the bigger unanswered question IMO. Why would defense counsel want to even be in that position? Even if a client had insisted? Why? …….

I can only think of one. And it is not good. If someone had said possibly deliberate subterfuge, I couldn’t disagree. I sure hope that the Florida courts, legal bar, and Florida Office of Disciplinary Council (or equivalent) have an open investigation and case on this matter. MOO