GUILTY FL - Dan Markel, 41, FSU Law Professor, Tallahassee, 18 July 2014 - #7 *arrests*

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #1,181
yes i think the Dolce Vita restaurant witness and a recall of retired Detective Isom. we could hear closing arguments later today.


I thought both the defense people thought they were going to spend 1/2 day each on their Witnesses before closing arguments would start.
 
  • #1,182
Lmao,

Q.has DA been arrested, (by KM atty)
A. FBI guy said not yet
 
  • #1,183
  • #1,184
Another issue with a Borderline parent, they must always have control over there childrens' lives. If the child happens to marry a spouse that makes the decisions regarding the marriage, the borderline parent becomes resentful and actually despises the spouse because she feels a loss of control. If the child follows their spouse and not the boderline parent, he/she is ostracised from the family tree. I speak from my own experience.
 
  • #1,185
  • #1,186
  • #1,187
  • #1,188
Omg ...he said that? Lol! I’m
Just tuning in!

Unfortunately he just said "no" when asked the same question about Charlie and Wendi lol. I would have liked a "not yet" for them, too!
 
  • #1,189
We learned this morning something new to me, that the pole camera outside her apartment by law enforcement was up there for 8 months!

ETA outside KM's place
 
  • #1,190
LOL. Decoste just got rebuked by the judge for his "smart" remarks.
 
  • #1,191
Unfortunately he just said "no" when asked the same question about Charlie and Wendi lol. I would have liked a "not yet" for them, too!
Maybe he realized what he said...
 
  • #1,192
Decoste has got to be one of the most off putting attorneys I’ve seen in a long time. I almost can’t listen to this.
 
  • #1,193
Yes, but in flipping and telling the (alleged) story about CA she will likely also have to implicate SG. It's all one (alleged) integrated story. JMO.
S
Here’s another theory about why KM is not cooperating:

I wonder if KM is involved in other criminal activity? This can’t be her first crime. I mean, to jump from a life of no crime to arranging a murder-for-hire is quite a jump. I wonder if she’s been involved with CA or possibly others in some ongoing criminal activity. Maybe drugs or some other fraudulent crimes. And I wonder if Garcia knows about it. The way he talked to her on the wiretaps makes me think he was not completely whipped like I originally thought.

So if she flips and gives up SG then I wonder if she might be exposing herself and others in whatever criminal activity she’s been involved in (possibly including CA). Because SG might feel like he has nothing to lose and go all balls to the wall at that point.

Or she's promised alot of money from Charlie
No. J
Yes but flipping on CA necessitates flipping on SG. She would have to testify about the whole conspiracy. SG is a part of it.
I agree especially about the wiretap contents implicating KM.
They are suspicious as hell but yeah they could be reasonable doubt.

Three years ago when KM was charged I don't think the prosecution could predict where we are now. They really thought she would cooperate. But of course she didn't and over the past 3 years no other major new evidence has really been developed.
I am really curious to see how the verdict goes!
"Paludal comportement" - Harvard words - must be a friend of Dan's?
We learned this morning something new to me, that the pole camera outside her apartment by law enforcement was up there for 8 months!

ETA outside KM's place
What about the tracking devices they slip in their wheel wells that we may never know about... It was beyond their wildest dreams the FBI would ever be involved in this case. They know everything! Their just tying up a few loose ends. Bye Charlie. IMO
 
  • #1,194
Did DeCoste just admit CA and KM might have assumed they were being wiretapped? I was only half listening....
 
  • #1,195
Did DeCoste just admit CA and KM might have assumed they were being wiretapped? I was only half listening....


I may have missed it too, but a note that I wrote during the testimony was when they just brought up the phone call from Charlie to Donna right after the bump.

And Charlie said to her don't say anything in the apartment. In other words, he thought she might be bugged or the phone was tapped. Is that what you were referring to?

( this questioning is coming from Decosta)
 
  • #1,196
That looks awful to to jury! Witness says he can explain and Decoste says "no".
 
  • #1,197
I may have missed it too, but a note that I wrote during the testimony was when they just brought up the phone call from Charlie to Donna right after the bump.

And Charlie said to her don't say anything in the apartment. In other words, he thought she might be bugged or the phone was tapped. Is that what you were referring to?

( this questioning is coming from Decosta)

No, but that exchange kinda cleared it up for me.
 
  • #1,198
Lol, this defense attorney keeps bringing up stuff that I don't remember and points out stuff it is very important. When Charlie wanted her to come and meet with him after the bump, she was very reluctant to, and she asked him to contact her through WhatsApp.

And as we have learned in the last four days of testimony, WhatsApp is one thing that law enforcement apparently cannot get information on.

So yeah, I guess they all were concerned about being taped because why else would she not want to talk on the phone and ask him to contact her on WhatsApp?
 
  • #1,199
That looks awful to to jury! Witness says he can explain and Decoste says "no".
Right!

It was obvious —- he’s thinking “no ...don’t explain...it won’t fit what I’m trying to float to this jury”

Jeez!!
 
  • #1,200
Right!

It was obvious —- he’s thinking “no ...don’t explain...it won’t fit what I’m trying to float to this jury”

Jeez!!

And the expression on Sanford's face lol!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
104
Guests online
3,442
Total visitors
3,546

Forum statistics

Threads
632,971
Messages
18,634,336
Members
243,361
Latest member
Woodechelle
Back
Top