GUILTY Fl - Dan Markel, 41, Fsu Law Professor, Tallahassee, 18 July 2014 - #5 *arrests*

[86Violet]

Please elaborate on how the optimal plan is to get someone to snitch *after* they have gone through jury trial, been convicted, and sentenced. Are you even aware of any legal mechanism to vacate a conviction and sentence, not based on any legal error like in an appeal, but based simply on the agreement of the parties due to subsequent cooperation by the defendant? There are laws and procedural rules that govern this kind of thing, you know.

Even assuming for purposes of argument that such a thing was possible, it makes zero sense. Cooperating witnesses are always subject to credibility attacks by defense attorneys due to the benefits they received for cooperation. It's hard enough for a prosecutor to bolster a witness's credibility when they received a plea to a lesser charge due to their cooperation. This challenge would be exponentially greater if a witness was literally convicted and sentenced to life in prison and then received a do-over and a few years because they decided "oh wait, yeah maybe I do have some valuable information to share..."

I'm not trying to be flippant here, I just really don't understand this line of thought, to say nothing of my inclination that it is legally, procedurally impossible in the first place.

Agreed - I've seen it happen post jury trial conviction before, but PRE-sentencing. Though I guess it is procedurally possible post-sentencing since someone posted a link. But like you said in paragraph 2, the credibility of incentivized post-conviction testimony lessens tremendously. When the defendant has been tried, convicted, and sentenced (presumably) to life - what incentive do they NOT have to try anything to better their situation, including concocting a story inculpating others? That's what the defense attorney in me would say.

 

[reallybusy]

Good point.
Also. Speaking of KM's lawyers, they are not "just out of law school" as I interpret the description "young lawyers". Not even close.

CD joined the bar in 2005 and TK joined in 2008 according to the floridabar.org website/lawyer search

I think Really Busy's statement ("but I can't fathom that two young lawyers would risk their careers and livelihood for KM and/or to placate another attorney") could be a reflection of his/her own professional integrity

AND

Yup it's about as far fetched as a young successful dentist (and his mother) risking his career livelihood freedom and possibly life to hire a hitman to kill his sister's ex-husband over a custody issue. Unfathomable!

We all want justice and to see movement in this long and slow moving process.


Not sure why we need to relitigate/rehash our views on KM's lawyers between each other like this. I have my views, and you have yours. I respect yours. We don't know the truth and are speculating here. That's what Webslueths is all about right?

Regarding the technicality of dates when KM's lawyers passed the bar, I was in the courtroom more than once and the lawyers appeared young to me, were corrected by the judge often in their defense and don't possess the "gray hair" aspect of a smooth, confident and experienced veteran.

Let me have my views, sheesh.

 

[nancydrew71]

Good point.
Also. Speaking of KM's lawyers, they are not "just out of law school" as I interpret the description "young lawyers". Not even close.

CD joined the bar in 2005 and TK joined in 2008 according to the floridabar.org website/lawyer search

I think Really Busy's statement ("but I can't fathom that two young lawyers would risk their careers and livelihood for KM and/or to placate another attorney") could be a reflection of his/her own professional integrity

HAHAHA, They ARE young.

 

[reallybusy]

So this is indeed the female inmate listed in discovery. The inmate numbers match. I can't think of any reason for this addition other KM confiding or confessing to this person. What I am most interested in is whether KM can confirm which family members knew or did not know about the plot. KM and Charlie were dating so think of the possible pillow talk. Was it just Charlie and "Don" as LE and evidence entered indicates? That is what I want to know. IMO.

http://www.dc.state.fl.us/offenderSearch/detail.aspx?Page=Detail&DCNumber=N09424&TypeSearch=AI

 

[GordonX]

IMO - the younger the lawyers, the more easily they are manipulated. down the hall? coincidence? are you f*****g kidding me?

 

[Marvin Berry]

IMO - the younger the lawyers, the more easily they are manipulated. down the hall? coincidence? are you f*****g kidding me?

It's probably not a coincidence and the case was in all likelihood referred to the attorneys down the hall. But that in no way means that there is something untoward going on. Referrals down the hall happen all the time. For your theory to be correct, all attorneys involved, including CA's who by all accounts is preeminent in his field, would be guilty of career-ending ethics violations. Your attempt to prove your theory through some sort of twist on the transitive property (i.e. that because CA and his family are capable of terrible things so must their attorneys) falls flat. In reality, there is no evidence that KM's attorneys are doing anything wrong. They asked for a speedy trial to get the state's case on the table, and when it got close they delayed. This is standard in criminal defense. Your supposition that they are 'definitely taking the case to trial' is belied by what has actually happened. I don't mean to sound harsh, but there is absolutely no reason to defame people when you have no basis that they have done anything wrong besides their address.

 

[GordonX]

we shall see!

 

[DexterMorgan]

BBM JMO, her demeanor in the interview was very telling. She immediately presumed someone wanted Dan dead, rather than suspecting he was killed secondary to road rage or an armed robbery. When assuming a premeditated murder, she didn't suspect a former UF student as other UF employees and students did; but readily made reference to her own family as potential suspects. WA was very quick to distance herself from the rest of her family, at their expense.

IMO, this is why the prosecution has refrained from implicating WA despite the info on Dan's schedule supplied to SG and LR, and WA's failure to contact Dan about a disturbance on the street where her children were staying during an out-of-the-way excursion to a liquor store, among other things. GC knows that CA and DA are unwilling to implicate WA. IMO, enough evidence of WA's involvement will trickle out as the case proceeds through the justice system. JMO

My thing with the Wendi interview that told me she knew something; Was when she allowed herself to be interviewed for 7 hours or so while being very polite and comical on the day of the murder after getting swooped up during a luncheon.

So its like she expected this somewhat.

Also she knew that the kids was very worried once they got out of school. But she decided to joyfully stay in the interrogation room for many more hours as if she was Jodie Arias. Jmo.

I would have cut that interview quick fast if I was innocent and my kids were getting out of school to learn that their mother was killed. Jmo.

 

[DexterMorgan]

Bottomn line is CA/DA going down. Wendi walks.

The Paternal side of the Adelsons will force CA to take the blame to save mom and sis and dad. Especially since CA has no Adelsons heirs. Jmo.

He will get more respect in the household plus in prison if he simply decides to take the hit before others in his family have to go to trial. Jmo.

So Donna and Wendi should be okay. Especially if he doesn't want his nephews to know that mom and grandma are evil and helped kill their dad as well. Jmo.

 

[DexterMorgan]

Please elaborate on how the optimal plan is to get someone to snitch *after* they have gone through jury trial, been convicted, and sentenced. Are you even aware of any legal mechanism to vacate a conviction and sentence, not based on any legal error like in an appeal, but based simply on the agreement of the parties due to subsequent cooperation by the defendant? There are laws and procedural rules that govern this kind of thing, you know.

Even assuming for purposes of argument that such a thing was possible, it makes zero sense. Cooperating witnesses are always subject to credibility attacks by defense attorneys due to the benefits they received for cooperation. It's hard enough for a prosecutor to bolster a witness's credibility when they received a plea to a lesser charge due to their cooperation. This challenge would be exponentially greater if a witness was literally convicted and sentenced to life in prison and then received a do-over and a few years because they decided "oh wait, yeah maybe I do have some valuable information to share..."

I'm not trying to be flippant here, I just really don't understand this line of thought, to say nothing of my inclination that it is legally, procedurally impossible in the first place.

Totally agree. If KM is convicted and sentenced and then decides to offer goods on others. Then she still up craps creek.

Because the justice system and tax payers would be even more mad that she decided to go the entire way while wasting everyone's time and money before telling the truth.

Plus lets not forget that Garcia may take a deal before trial to implicate her as well.

So what are her lawyers waiting on? Jmo.

 

[Cannonball3804]

My thing with the Wendi interview that told me she knew something; Was when she allowed herself to be interviewed for 7 hours or so while being very polite and comical on the day of the murder after getting swooped up during a luncheon.

So its like she expected this somewhat.

Also she knew that the kids was very worried once they got out of school. But she decided to joyfully stay in the interrogation room for many more hours as if she was Jodie Arias. Jmo.

I would have cut that interview quick fast if I was innocent and my kids were getting out of school to learn that their mother was killed. Jmo.

For every person like yourself who thinks her willingness to stay for hours is suspicious, I could find another person who, if the interview had been cut short, would think THAT was suspicious. After all, if she was innocent, why not stay as long as LE wanted her to, and have someone else pick up the kids?

So I think it's confirmation bias (respectfully). I don't know if she had anything to do with the murder - I just don't think that spending a lot or a little time in the interview room is going to tell us much.

 

[Razz]

For every person like yourself who thinks her willingness to stay for hours is suspicious, I could find another person who, if the interview had been cut short, would think THAT was suspicious. After all, if she was innocent, why not stay as long as LE wanted her to, and have someone else pick up the kids?

So I think it's confirmation bias (respectfully). I don't know if she had anything to do with the murder - I just don't think that spending a lot or a little time in the interview room is going to tell us much.

(Respectfully) Wendi's interview and everything before and after confirms she's in it up to her eyeballs.

Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk

 

[DexterMorgan]

For every person like yourself who thinks her willingness to stay for hours is suspicious, I could find another person who, if the interview had been cut short, would think THAT was suspicious. After all, if she was innocent, why not stay as long as LE wanted her to, and have someone else pick up the kids?

So I think it's confirmation bias (respectfully). I don't know if she had anything to do with the murder - I just don't think that spending a lot or a little time in the interview room is going to tell us much.

So your kids are getting out of school to find out that their dad has been killed via someone else.

But you would decide to crack jokes for 8 hours in the interrogation room on said day while the kiddies are scared?

 

[Cannonball3804]

So your kids are getting out of school to find out that their dad has been killed via someone else.

But you would decide to crack jokes for 8 hours in the interrogation room on said day while the kiddies are scared?

The kids were 4 and 5? She could have arranged for them to not know until she could be with them. It's what I would have done.

And she didn't spend 8 hours cracking jokes. I'm far from a WA apologist, but that's just not accurate IMHO.

 

[Oregonmama]

<mod snip>

Any update on how the children are doing? My priority is being a mother/wife. If LE was at my door, my family would come first. Maybe there was an audition at the police station and the roles were going fast......

 

[Cannonball3804]

<mod snip>

First, if you have a 4 and 5 year old at day care, nobody has to tell them the news except for YOU - regardless of whether you are the one picking them up or not. They're pre-schoolers. You have someone trustworthy pick them up and tell them Mommy had to take care of something. You keep their environment normal until she picks them up.

Second, again - wasn't joking around for 8 hours. Was THERE for 8 hours. And she didn't just "decide to hang around." She stayed until they told her she could go.

 

[Cannonball3804]

(Respectfully) Wendi's interview and everything before and after confirms she's in it up to her eyeballs.

Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk

Might want to tell that to LE. They have a lot more than we do, but haven't arrested her. Not even sure they're going to arrest anyone else besides the three they have.

 

[TTF14]

You need to read the reply more closely.

First, if you have a 4 and 5 year old at day care, nobody has to tell them the news except for YOU - regardless of whether you are the one picking them up or not. They're pre-schoolers. You have someone trustworthy pick them up and tell them Mommy had to take care of something. You keep their environment normal until she picks them up.

Second, again - wasn't joking around for 8 hours. Was THERE for 8 hours. And she didn't just "decide to hang around." She stayed until they told her she could go.

I don't have a law degree, but my understanding from watching Law & Order is that she was free to leave at any time since she was not under arrest. Isn't Wendi an attorney?

 

[nancydrew71]

Might want to tell that to LE. They have a lot more than we do, but haven't arrested her. Not even sure they're going to arrest anyone else besides the three they have.

Please! They might not even arrest the perpetrators of this crime!? That is unconscionable.

 

[DeeMarie]