GUILTY FL - Dan Markel, 41, FSU Law Professor, Tallahassee, 18 July 2014 *arrests* #12

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #221
  • #222
...The only person that could possibly explain these logical gaps is Katie Magbanua, and if she isn't testifying in the next trial for the Prosecution or the Defense, you can be damn sure Magbanua will be the target for the defense. And she wont have Kawass or Decoste there to sympathize for her.

Here's something that puzzles me. Perhaps people here know the answer or have an idea.

How does a good Jewish boy just happen to meet contract killers?

Prior to the conspiracy, Charlie is a traveling periodontist, happily travelling North-South on the local highways, schmoozing on the phone, putting in implants in people for dental practices that like to subcontract his services. The work is lucrative and allows him to buy fancy toys, invest in real estate, and please his parents. He was raised in a Jewish community, probably he was proudly introduced to his parent's large social circle, and has had all of the educational benefits and opportunities consistent with his family's wealth. He's a philanderer, and when he is not travelling to Vietnam or Thailand for sex tourism, he's dating intellectually-challenged single women in Miami who fawn over him. He's brilliantly Caucasian, wears scrubs in public, drives fancy cars (Mercedes, Ferrari, a limo, etc.), and fancies himself a dangerous person in his off hours when he can adopt his non-dental id. He looks Jewish and has speaking mannerisms supporting that assumption. From my experience in major US cities (but not Miami), a person like that does not just saunter in to the Hispanic 'hood and befriend people (cross the "tracks"). More likely, he gets jumped.

As Charlie is living his life, his family becomes stressed about an in-law and wants action. How does Charlie know whom to turn? As the story goes, Charlie doesn't know hit men, but being the uber-philanderer he meets Katie through a chance encounter at a dental office who does. They become intimate. On the face, Katie's not different than any other air-head Charlie has been dating. What are the chances that Charlie's next random love interest would happen to have ties to hit men at just the right time? Isn't the meeting of Charlie and Katie -who just happens to know hit men from the 'hood - too improbable to be occurring just as Charlie is trying to hatch a murder plan?

Maybe Charlie's not trying to hatch such a dastardly plan, but as he and Katie become intimate, she suggests it to him. Why? Because that's her way of taking care of "b...ches" and she knows how to "f.. people up." Also, because she's an opportunist, she knows how much it costs on the street and figures she can get paid.

It just seems so improbable (perhaps near impossible) that as Charlie is dealing with the vicissitudes of his life - including his private murder dream - he just happens to begin dating someone who has the means to bring his dream to life.

Alternatively, was Charlie directed to Katie by someone else - someone who knows Katie is just the person who could put together a plan (for the right $$)?

Oy vey.
 
Last edited:
  • #223
He's brilliantly Caucasian, wears scrubs in public, drives fancy cars (Mercedes, Ferrari, a limo, etc.), and fancies himself a dangerous person in his off hours when he can adopt his non-dental id. He looks Jewish and has speaking mannerisms supporting that assumption. From my experience in major US cities (but not Miami), a person like that does not just saunter in to the Hispanic 'hood and befriend people. More likely, he gets jumped.
JL "both sides of the tracks" quote below from Sun-Sentinel, October 16, 2016:
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot 2022-05-30 8.33.45 PM.png
    Screenshot 2022-05-30 8.33.45 PM.png
    167.7 KB · Views: 29
  • #224
I can totally see Katie suggesting the murder to CA! Although it seems he was looking for a hit man before he met Katie. I think the meeting between them was just happenstance. He’s always trolling and so is she I’m sure.
 
  • #225
This article in Rolling Stone indicates it is more available than previously thought by LE. FBI Document Says the Feds Can Get Your WhatsApp Data -- in Real Time. Why then did GC bring this topic up when questioning WA if they haven’t been able to find VALUABLE information?

From the Rolling Stones news article you've kindly linked:

"WhatsApp will produce certain user metadata, though not actual message content, every 15 minutes in response to a pen register, the FBI says."

In participating in the murder of Suzanne Morphew WS threads, we discussed her use of WhatsApp. We discovered that WhatsApp is beneficial in investigations only when LEO has the participant's phone. In Suzanne's murder, her phone was never located. The person she was communicating with deleted the app months before Investigators located that person.

While I can't answer your question about GC's approaching the topic with WA due to possessing valuable data, LEO had access to her phone. Hence, if the app was on WA's phone, they garnered actual messages.
 
  • #226
Snip

And while we are on the topic of interesting facts: Wendi Adelson will be forced to testify as a State's witness against her favorite brother Charlie. She's technically the prosecution's witness but Cappleman has basically let the Defense attorney's smash her on the stand, never objecting to any line of inquiry as annihilating Wendi's character also helps the State's case and its some poetic justice. I wonder if Charlie's attorney's will go easy on Wendi or if they will need to point the finger at her, as the one with the motive.
This statement regarding forcing is not based on reality. Wendi could claim that since CJA is her brother and since there are known conversations between her and her brother her testimony could implicate her in a murder she knows nothing about. So she pleads the fifth amendment re self incrimination. She can't add any insights to the Dolce vita recordings and the phone taps that prosecutors can't hint at to a jury.


" Oh and furthermore, her laughable testimony can and will be used against her in any wrongful death civil case as an added bonus." I thought such a civil case was possible and in California it might be (cf. OJ Simpson) . Florida has a 4 year limit on starting civil actions. It's hard to see how that can be circumvented.
 
  • #227
This statement regarding forcing is not based on reality. Wendi could claim that since CJA is her brother and since there are known conversations between her and her brother her testimony could implicate her in a murder she knows nothing about. So she pleads the fifth amendment re self incrimination. She can't add any insights to the Dolce vita recordings and the phone taps that prosecutors can't hint at to a jury.


" Oh and furthermore, her laughable testimony can and will be used against her in any wrongful death civil case as an added bonus." I thought such a civil case was possible and in California it might be (cf. OJ Simpson) . Florida has a 4 year limit on starting civil actions. It's hard to see how that can be circumvented.
She can't plead the 5th if she is subpoenaed by the State to testify in CA's trial. It's the same as in the first 2 trials -- a subpoena by the State carries with it testimonial immunity, so she can't plead the 5th.

Regarding a wrongful death claim -- in May 2010, Florida enacted the Jeffrey Klee Memorial Act, which eliminated the statute of limitations for wrongful death actions involving murder and manslaughter.
 
Last edited:
  • #228
This statement regarding forcing is not based on reality. Wendi could claim that since CJA is her brother and since there are known conversations between her and her brother her testimony could implicate her in a murder she knows nothing about. So she pleads the fifth amendment re self incrimination. She can't add any insights to the Dolce vita recordings and the phone taps that prosecutors can't hint at to a jury.


" Oh and furthermore, her laughable testimony can and will be used against her in any wrongful death civil case as an added bonus." I thought such a civil case was possible and in California it might be (cf. OJ Simpson) . Florida has a 4 year limit on starting civil actions. It's hard to see how that can be circumvented.

On your first point: The State has been very careful in their public statements and charging documents about Wendi Adelson in identifying her as a witness. Prosecutors don't generally issue subpoenas to murder suspects because all State witnesses are granted immunity which means you can't use their testimony to prosecute them in the future for the same crime. You can charge them with perjury or obstruction of justice for their testimony, but not for the actual murder. You can still charge them with murder if other evidence surfaces implicating them, but you can't then use their protected testimony as a hammer against them. This is why Charlie, Donna and Harvey haven't been called as State witnesses while Wendi has been. Not only would the other Adelsons assert their 5th amendment rights, the State would never want to grant them the testimonial immunity.

Wendi is a key witness on motive who has already testified in two murder trials using the same evidence she would be testifying to again in any future trials. Her fifth amendment rights protect her against self-incrimination but those rights don't extend to her adult siblings or parents. She also gave recorded statements to the police about these potential suspects.

TL;DR: I don't see a scenario where she isn't compelled to testify in future trials against her own family. More poetic justice.

On your second point, the statute of limitations for wrongful death lawsuits is two years in Florida I believe. However, there are several exceptions to this; the principal exception being where the death was caused by a murder or other crimes. Which makes sense, because lets say someone is murdered and law enforcement doesn't solve the case , the case goes cold, but then 10 years later they get a DNA hit in CODIS identifying some drifter stranger from the other side of the country, completely unknown to the investigation. There's no court in the land that would put the onus on the victim's family to solve a crime that law enforcement couldn't - within two or five or even twenty-five years of the death.
 
Last edited:
  • #229
Here's something that puzzles me. Perhaps people here know the answer or have an idea.

How does a good Jewish boy just happen to meet contract killers?

Prior to the conspiracy, Charlie is a traveling periodontist, happily travelling North-South on the local highways, schmoozing on the phone, putting in implants in people for dental practices that like to subcontract his services. The work is lucrative and allows him to buy fancy toys, invest in real estate, and please his parents. He was raised in a Jewish community, probably he was proudly introduced to his parent's large social circle, and has had all of the educational benefits and opportunities consistent with his family's wealth. He's a philanderer, and when he is not travelling to Vietnam or Thailand for sex tourism, he's dating intellectually-challenged single women in Miami who fawn over him. He's brilliantly Caucasian, wears scrubs in public, drives fancy cars (Mercedes, Ferrari, a limo, etc.), and fancies himself a dangerous person in his off hours when he can adopt his non-dental id. He looks Jewish and has speaking mannerisms supporting that assumption. From my experience in major US cities (but not Miami), a person like that does not just saunter in to the Hispanic 'hood and befriend people (cross the "tracks"). More likely, he gets jumped.

As Charlie is living his life, his family becomes stressed about an in-law and wants action. How does Charlie know whom to turn? As the story goes, Charlie doesn't know hit men, but being the uber-philanderer he meets Katie through a chance encounter at a dental office who does. They become intimate. On the face, Katie's not different than any other air-head Charlie has been dating. What are the chances that Charlie's next random love interest would happen to have ties to hit men at just the right time? Isn't the meeting of Charlie and Katie -who just happens to know hit men from the 'hood - too improbable to be occurring just as Charlie is trying to hatch a murder plan?

Maybe Charlie's not trying to hatch such a dastardly plan, but as he and Katie become intimate, she suggests it to him. Why? Because that's her way of taking care of "b...ches" and she knows how to "f.. people up." Also, because she's an opportunist, she knows how much it costs on the street and figures she can get paid.

It just seems so improbable (perhaps near impossible) that as Charlie is dealing with the vicissitudes of his life - including his private murder dream - he just happens to begin dating someone who has the means to bring his dream to life.

Alternatively, was Charlie directed to Katie by someone else - someone who knows Katie is just the person who could put together a plan (for the right $$)?

Oy vey.

This post deserves far more attention. Its really baffling when you scroll out and look at the bigger picture of this crime and the key players. I don't want to rehash your bits on Charlie because you've covered it far more eloquently than I could but I would just add that in addition to Charlie Adelson throwing away his $3M/year Ferrari-driving, ocean-front living bachelor lifestyle, we also have the legacies of Harvey and Donna Adelson to contend with. They were also making $2M/year (Harvey was down to working 2 or 3 days a week by then) and were living in one of the most exclusive pieces of real estate in the world - to say nothing of their own portfolio of real estate properties. Don't quote me, but I thought I read somewhere that they were likely worth somewhere in the $30M range?

What could drive this otherwise (mostly) law-abiding and extremely well-connected family empire to throw everything away, including their own liberty, on a brutal murder of a Harvard-law grad who had no vices and by all accounts was a loving father of their grandkids/nephews? The Adelsons are evil but you can't say they never worked hard. Really hard. Their entire lives. How do you throw everything you've worked for your entire life away?

After the separation in 2012, this family had virtually no direct interaction with Dan Markel, aside from reading divorce proceedings and then having Wendi tell them just how awful he was. That is the key for me. What is Wendi telling them? She's 6 hours away and stuck in this place with this horrible monster who is doing everything he can to "terrorize her" (by not letting her take his kids away from him). And now she's clinically depressed. I mean, if all you have is Wendi's side of the story - and there's really no limits to her hatred for Dan Markel - it really just starts to take on a life of its own. So she's the fuse. But you still need someone to light it.

Enter Donna Adelson. This is a woman who threatened to essentially ban her oldest son from the family because her and Harvey did not approve of his non-jewish girlfriend, an Indian-American doctor. Robert was still under he spell so he broke it off, married some nice jewish girl he never loved and then quickly recognized that this was entirely nuts - divorced that wife and went back to his soulmate. Now, we have since learned that Donna Adelson was willing to have her grandkids dress in Hitler Youth uniforms and convert to catholicism just to coerce Dan Markel to allow Wendi to move to Miami. So obviously, Jewish credentials aren't really THAT important to Donna Adelson, are they? Its all about control. If Harvey spent his life building a financial empire, Donna spent hers building a family empire: doctor, dentist, lawyer. And Donna was the emperor while Dan Markel, some poor serf with some snotty degrees could interfere (in his own family) with her family that she built up? She's the gasoline. And Charlie, well....there were some emails from Wendi's friends saying that Donna needs immediate medical assistance for her anxiety. Even to friendly outsiders, Donna had lost her mind. And so Charlie is watching his mother go insane while poor Wendi is getting emotionally abused all because of Dan Markel. All legal options have been exhausted. Charlie is the zippo lighter.

In my previous 3,000 word essay on Wendi, I said she was the most vile and evil character. And I still believe that. At least in Donna and Charlie's cases, you can say "well, what they did was absolutely horrific and quite possibly psychotic" but on some twisted level most of us will never understand, they were helping Wendi. In Wendi's case, she has no such claim. She shared a life and all kinds of memories and a bed and children with this man - who was desperately heartbroken at her decision to leave him. She may not have actively planned or even had advance knowledge of his murder (although the two long phone calls with Charlie on the morning of the murder and the TV repair suggest: maybe?)....but to speak of him the way she does, still to this day? To refuse visitation to the grandparents. That stuff is as cold as Ive ever seen.

As for what drove them to decide to go through with it? They really just thought they'd get away with it. Everyone thinks they can outsmart law enforcement and they usually cant but they REALLY almost did. For someone as anxious and certifiably insane as she is, look how guarded Donna Adelson was on the very first wire convo. Her next move was to plan a meeting outside her building to discuss it. No phones, no bugs in the apartment, nothing. Never discuss "it" again. Multi-layered conspiracy, where the killers can't connect the people hiring them? Then when you catch the middleman, they would rather risk life in prison than testify against the Adelsons. What in the world is going on here.
 
Last edited:
  • #230
On your first point: The State has been very careful in their public statements and charging documents about Wendi Adelson in identifying her as a witness. Prosecutors don't generally issue subpoenas to murder suspects because all State witnesses are granted immunity which means you can't use their testimony to prosecute them in the future for the same crime. You can charge them with perjury or obstruction of justice for their testimony, but not for the actual murder. You can still charge them with murder if other evidence surfaces implicating them, but you can't then use their protected testimony as a hammer against them. This is why Charlie, Donna and Harvey haven't been called as State witnesses while Wendi has been. Not only would the other Adelsons assert their 5th amendment rights, the State would never want to grant them the testimonial immunity.

Wendi is a key witness on motive who has already testified in two murder trials using the same evidence she would be testifying to again in any future trials. Her fifth amendment rights protect her against self-incrimination but those rights don't extend to her adult siblings or parents. She also gave recorded statements to the police about these potential suspects.

TL;DR: I don't see a scenario where she isn't compelled to testify in future trials against her own family. More poetic justice.

On your second point, the statute of limitations for wrongful death lawsuits is two years in Florida I believe. However, there are several exceptions to this; the principal exception being where the death was caused by a murder or other crimes. Which makes sense, because lets say someone is murdered and law enforcement doesn't solve the case , the case goes cold, but then 10 years later they get a DNA hit in CODIS identifying some drifter stranger from the other side of the country, completely unknown to the investigation. There's no court in the land that would put the onus on the victim's family to solve a crime that law enforcement couldn't - within two or five or even twenty-five years of the death.

You can google the statute of limitations issue and you will see that that was revised in FL years ago, not a thing, not a problem, a civil suit can still come, and probably will.

The scenario where WA does not testify in future trials = she is in Leon County Jail. WA is now officially a co-conspirator. The prosecutor began her questioning of WA by pointing out that WA can still be arrested and prosecuted. They just can't use her words on the stand against her. There are other witnesses on the list who could testify to most of what WA said. If Cappleman thought WA was totally innocent and a victim of circumstance, she probably wouldn't put her up there, she definitely wouldn't be asking her about immunity, and she'd object when DeCoste was tearing WA apart.
 
  • #231
Woke up here on the west coast ready for an arrest today! Let's go!
.
 
  • #232
I noted the following post and response from Ms. Kawass' Instagram account today:

lardbrick
You do realize that some of your clients are guilty, don't you? It is impractical to think otherwise. And how do you reconcile your feelings if later your convicted clients try to get a reduced sentence and provide information implicating themselves after you stuck out your neck proclaiming their innocence? I did not say all, but “some” and my question relates to a client that might want to pursue a reduced sentence after conviction under 921.186 and they would have to recant their earlier statements of innocence. How would you or any defense attorney feel about that?

tarakawass
... as to your question … If that were to happen with one of my clients I would surely understand why they would. All I know is that in this situation that’s all she has told me for 6 six years and I believe her. I am so vocal about her particular situation because I believe in her 100% and her case has been so misrepresented in the media and I wanted everyone to have all the information and all the facts. Each case is very different and unique. Thank you so much for your comment.


I find very fascinating her claim that she believes Katie 100% because this is "all she has told me for six years." Even the most charitable assessment of Katie's version of events must acknowledge enormous holes and problems with her testimony (not to mention the massive independent evidence against her). Even Katie herself admitted how bad everything looked as well as her inability to explain what occurred.

The jails are full of convicted felons who adamantly claim their innocence and any honest defense attorney will admit this is part of human behavior. Hell, John Wayne Gacy vigorously claimed all those bodies in his basement were put there by somebody else. If nothing else, the first trial proved how tenuous Katie's claims were in a court of law and the state had more to work with this time around.

I respect zealous a zealous defense and it is fair game to always argue the state failed to prove its case. However, her statements make me seriously question whether Katie was ever given a fair assessment of the evidence against her and the likelihood that she would be convicted. Frankly, I think Kawass owes a bit of an explanation as to how this all went down rather than doubling down on what Katie told her.

p.s. ... her opening comment "If that were to happen with one of my clients I would surely understand why they would" is telling.
 
Last edited:
  • #233
Here's something that puzzles me. Perhaps people here know the answer or have an idea.

How does a good Jewish boy just happen to meet contract killers? (snipped)

Maybe Charlie's not trying to hatch such a dastardly plan, but as he and Katie become intimate, she suggests it to him. Why? Because that's her way of taking care of "b...ches" and she knows how to "f.. people up." Also, because she's an opportunist, she knows how much it costs on the street and figures she can get paid.

It just seems so improbable (perhaps near impossible) that as Charlie is dealing with the vicissitudes of his life - including his private murder dream - he just happens to begin dating someone who has the means to bring his dream to life.

Alternatively, was Charlie directed to Katie by someone else - someone who knows Katie is just the person who could put together a plan (for the right $$)?

Oy vey.
Sorry, I went off on my own tangent on Donna and Wendi, and just skipped right past the central theme of your post. How did this plot take shape, and who initiated it?

On the one hand, Charlie and Donna are extremely brazen in that they would agree to a plot to kill Dan and not expect any blowback by law enforcement or public suspicion. On the other hand, these are incredibly smart and cautious people who analyze every possible scenario and how to protect themselves before acting. It seems more likely to me that they factored in the costs of law enforcement blowback and public perception and then determined that the price of suspicion from local law enforcement and whispers about their involvement was worth it. Crazy. I don't think they expected the story to be covered on CNN or be the subject of Dateline. And they certainly didn't expect that the FBI would be already onto them....they underestimated Tallahassee Police Department.

So whats the timing? If Charlie and Katie began dating in late 2013, just the idea that they would trust Magbanua enough in the few months of knowing her to not only pull it off by stay quiet in the aftermath....is incredibly bizzare.

I'm struck by one of Lacasse's statements to police about how "the Adelson family had an obsession which was hating Danny." Lacasse also mentioned that Wendi told him the TV joke on the first time he went to her house in the fall of 2013, likely right around the time Charlie and Katie started dating. There's also a rumor that Charlie may have actually hired some other killers who just stole his money and never went through with it.

So Katie comes into the picture in the fall of 2013....she is thrown into this strange dynamic of hatred and obsession with Dan Markel. My guess is she hears talk about about hitmen or a genuine willingness to kill him from Charlie and Donna and then tells Charlie that if he's serious she can really make this happen because of her bona fide connections to the underworld. I dunno?
 
  • #234
@vislaw law how do Kawass's statement affect KM's ability to now make a deal?
 
  • #235
On the one hand, Charlie and Donna are extremely brazen in that they would agree to a plot to kill Dan and not expect any blowback by law enforcement or public suspicion. On the other hand, these are incredibly smart and cautious people who analyze every possible scenario and how to protect themselves before acting. It seems more likely to me that they factored in the costs of law enforcement blowback and public perception and then determined that the price of suspicion from local law enforcement and whispers about their involvement was worth it. Crazy. I don't think they expected the story to be covered on CNN or be the subject of Dateline. And they certainly didn't expect that the FBI would be already onto them....they underestimated Tallahassee Police Department.

It's almost like an attorney was involved in the planning.
 
  • #236
@vislaw law how do Kawass's statement affect KM's ability to now make a deal?
They have no effect whatsoever. It shall indeed be interesting to see what transpires in the next week or so.
 
  • #237
It is interesting to imagine how things would have proceeded had Dan's neighbors not been at home to make the quick report of seeing a "Prius-like vehicle." Certainly, that helped law enforcement immensely, but in its absence wouldn't the police have pulled the CCTV footage from Premier Gym to see Markel being stalked by the Prius? And aside from that, the bitter divorce and acrimony among the Adelsons would have led the investigation down that path anyway. There literally isn't any other plausible motive. My point is that I believe the identify of Garcia and Rivera would have been learned eventually along with Katie's link to Charlie.

It amazes me that Charlie and Donna would believe they could commission a hit through such amateurs and get away with it. With a motive so obvious and a victim so prominent and clean, wouldn't almost anybody intelligent figure there is a strong likelihood of being caught? I mean, an execution???? You would think they would have tried a break-in at night in a burglary-gone-wrong scenario. Break a window and steal some stuff etc.
 
  • #238
You would think they would have tried a break-in at night in a burglary-gone-wrong scenario. Break a window and steal some stuff etc.
Weren’t the kids in there house the night before?
 
  • #239
It is interesting to imagine how things would have proceeded had Dan's neighbors not been at home to make the quick report of seeing a "Prius-like vehicle." Certainly, that helped law enforcement immensely, but in its absence wouldn't the police have pulled the CCTV footage from Premier Gym to see Markel being stalked by the Prius? And aside from that, the bitter divorce and acrimony among the Adelsons would have led the investigation down that path anyway. There literally isn't any other plausible motive. My point is that I believe the identify of Garcia and Rivera would have been learned eventually along with Katie's link to Charlie.

It amazes me that Charlie and Donna would believe they could commission a hit through such amateurs and get away with it. With a motive so obvious and a victim so prominent and clean, wouldn't almost anybody intelligent figure there is a strong likelihood of being caught? I mean, an execution???? You would think they would have tried a break-in at night in a burglary-gone-wrong scenario. Break a window and steal some stuff etc.
Had LR's and SG's phones not been powered on in the vicinity of Premiere gym the morning of the murder I don't know if this would have been solved. They couldn't make out the license plate on the Prius from the Premiere security camera. But the motive was obvious and the risk was great. JMO.
 
  • #240
It is interesting to imagine how things would have proceeded had Dan's neighbors not been at home to make the quick report of seeing a "Prius-like vehicle." Certainly, that helped law enforcement immensely, but in its absence wouldn't the police have pulled the CCTV footage from Premier Gym to see Markel being stalked by the Prius? And aside from that, the bitter divorce and acrimony among the Adelsons would have led the investigation down that path anyway. There literally isn't any other plausible motive. My point is that I believe the identify of Garcia and Rivera would have been learned eventually along with Katie's link to Charlie.

It amazes me that Charlie and Donna would believe they could commission a hit through such amateurs and get away with it. With a motive so obvious and a victim so prominent and clean, wouldn't almost anybody intelligent figure there is a strong likelihood of being caught? I mean, an execution???? You would think they would have tried a break-in at night in a burglary-gone-wrong scenario. Break a window and steal some stuff etc.
This is way out there, but, what if WA still had a garage door remote for the Trescott home. What if the neighbors had not been home or had not witnessed the Prius. If the neighbor had not gone to check on Dan, could Wendy have made her drive by and closed the garage door? Dan wouldn't have been discovered right away, possibly?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
112
Guests online
2,702
Total visitors
2,814

Forum statistics

Threads
632,680
Messages
18,630,378
Members
243,248
Latest member
nonameneeded777
Back
Top