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

[BlueSky12]

KM turning would be real tidy! I agree full immunity is def off the table now. At that time when full immunity was offered they had everything but the enhanced Dolce Vida tape.

I believe it was very recently established by Georgia Cappleman that Katherine Magbanua was never offered full immunity. It was implied, a number of times in the past six years, by her defense, but the prosecution recently clarified that full immunity had never been offered. I can't find the exact source, but it came out just prior to this second trial of Katie, I believe in a pre-trial motion. The best reference I can find is another post:

"GC has clarified immunity was never offered and I believe she filled out what was offered in one of the pre trial conferences with J Wheeler and the usual suspects. in fact Kawass was forbidden to use the word Immunity deal and how KM turned it down in any testimony or argument she made in the present trial as it would be a LIE. Immunity means no prosecution in return for evidence. Never on offer to KM"

 

[clearskies1]

Although sealed, the recordings could be used in the upcoming trial(s) if the foundational elements are there. It sounded like some of the Katie/Kawass calls were deemed privileged. Clearly, the Garcia calls were going to be used only for impeachment if he testified. All the calls would be problematic as being hearsay, of course.

The judge ruled that the Kawass/SG jailhouse calls were protected from disclosure by the work product doctrine.

 

[Blue Shakehead]

The judge ruled that the Kawass/SG jailhouse calls were protected from disclosure by the work product doctrine.

Of course we don't know what is said on these calls except that Judge Wheeler indicated the content would be extremely prejudicial to Magbanua's Defense. The timing of the calls was also a huge point of contention in that Defense had already made their opening statements alleging they would prove beyond any doubt that Charlie and Garcia planned the whole thing behind Katie's back. Now, they were stuck with that opening statement and were not able to call Garcia as a witness, so it hurt the defense tremendously but not as much as if they had called Garcia. So we know the calls were a bombshell against the Defense.

The million dollar question is whether Charlie Adelson's lawyers will be able to successfully rely on Tara Kawass's work doctrine privilege to keep out the same evidence against him. Recorded jail house calls between two co-conspirators, with no expectation of privacy, coming up with which lies to tell the court about what happened? Likely not as damaging to Adelson. In fact, they might even be used by Adelson to show the court how manipulative Katie Magbanua is. Whatever was said, I suspect we will get to hear them at some point.

 

[TTF14]

Bbm <snipped by me>

Kristen Kawass is an appellate and post conviction lawyer whose main focus appears to be post trial litigation and motions.​

Kristen Kawass - Florida Appellate | Law Offices of Kawass

Get to know Kristen Kawass at Law Offices of Kawass Lawyers. Kristin is an experienced appellate attorney who focuses on post-trial litigation. Learn More.

www.kawasslaw.com

That sounds so boring.

 

[BlueSky12]

Of course we don't know what is said on these calls except that Judge Wheeler indicated the content would be extremely prejudicial to Magbanua's Defense. The timing of the calls was also a huge point of contention in that Defense had already made their opening statements alleging they would prove beyond any doubt that Charlie and Garcia planned the whole thing behind Katie's back. Now, they were stuck with that opening statement and were not able to call Garcia as a witness, so it hurt the defense tremendously but not as much as if they had called Garcia. So we know the calls were a bombshell against the Defense.

Very minor point: it also meant that Magbanua and Garcia didn't get to lay eyes on one another. Surely, both of them were looking forward to that.

 

[clearskies1]

Of course we don't know what is said on these calls except that Judge Wheeler indicated the content would be extremely prejudicial to Magbanua's Defense. The timing of the calls was also a huge point of contention in that Defense had already made their opening statements alleging they would prove beyond any doubt that Charlie and Garcia planned the whole thing behind Katie's back. Now, they were stuck with that opening statement and were not able to call Garcia as a witness, so it hurt the defense tremendously but not as much as if they had called Garcia. So we know the calls were a bombshell against the Defense.

The million dollar question is whether Charlie Adelson's lawyers will be able to successfully rely on Tara Kawass's work doctrine privilege to keep out the same evidence against him. Recorded jail house calls between two co-conspirators, with no expectation of privacy, coming up with which lies to tell the court about what happened? Likely not as damaging to Adelson. In fact, they might even be used by Adelson to show the court how manipulative Katie Magbanua is. Whatever was said, I suspect we will get to hear them at some point.

Yes, I'm not an expert on work product protection, but I think it sometimes only applies to the particular litigation at issue. Here that is State v. Magbanua. Have no idea how it would apply in an alleged co-conspirator case (State v. Charles Adelson). Lots of issues, including hearsay.... JMO.

 

[Weki]

It will be hard. And Im not sure I was very persuasive, its just an interesting counterfactual.

The only defense I could imagine is the one I mentioned, where Charlie's defense theory is that Magbanua/Garcia/Rivera killed Markel as part of some scheme to extort the Adelsons. That theory falls apart on logical (and evidence) grounds rather quickly....but its still not quite as ridiculous as Katie's defense theory in this last trial where Charlie and Garcia hatched the plan behind Katie's back.

Katie has been allowed to represent herself as a sympathetic character to this point whereas she will be the villain in the Charlie Adelson defense. And there's quite a bit to chew on there. For instance, I don't think anyone - neither the prosecution, nor the defense, or even any of us spectators who aren't burdened by admissibility rules - can logically explain how this murder plot was hatched and the reason we can't is because of how deceptive and manipulative Magbanua actually is.

Charlie and Katie start dating at the end of 2013. Charlie and the rest of the Adelsons needs someone to kill Dan Markel. Katie knows some people might be able to pull it off. Katie agrees to help stick-handle the operation and manage the interactions with the killers. Dan Markel is killed and everyone gets paid and then spends money on *advertiser censored* and toys. Charlie and Katie stop seeing each other around Jan/Feb of 2015. Garcia and Katie get back together in May 2015.

But what does Charlie know about Garcia, and what does Garcia know about Charlie? Who did Garcia think he was killing Dan Markel on behalf of? In early July 2014, Garcia tries to run Adelson and Magbanua off the road the day they were trying to go jetskiing. He then calls Harvey Adelson and leaves a nasty voicemail. This is in between the first trip he took to Tallahassee to kill Dan Markel and the second trip to Tallahassee later in July when he actually kills Dan Markel.

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.

Yeah she’s the mastermind like Rivera said. There is no way she told Garcia the murder was for Charlie. She told him Wendi - so she could get her kids back. He surely had no idea Wendi was related to Charlie. She told part of the truth, which is the best lie. No way is Garcia doing a favor for Charlie. Directly or otherwise. IMO. That is the most ludicrous theory by this defense. I can’t believe they got so lucky the first go ‘round only to come back with such an asinine theory years later.

 

[clearskies1]

Yeah she’s the mastermind like Rivera said. There is no way she told Garcia the murder was for Charlie. She told him Wendi - so she could get her kids back. He surely had no idea Wendi was related to Charlie. She told part of the truth, which is the best lie. No way is Garcia doing a favor for Charlie. Directly or otherwise. IMO. That is the most ludicrous theory by this defense. I can’t believe they got so lucky the first go ‘round only to come back with such an asinine theory years later.

This time the Dolce tape sank them, plus Yindra's testimony about the jealous mistaken call to HA, and JR's testimony re the $. Not sure of any viable defense with that evidence. JMO.

 

[clearskies1]

Yeah she’s the mastermind like Rivera said. There is no way she told Garcia the murder was for Charlie. She told him Wendi - so she could get her kids back. He surely had no idea Wendi was related to Charlie. She told part of the truth, which is the best lie. No way is Garcia doing a favor for Charlie. Directly or otherwise. IMO. That is the most ludicrous theory by this defense. I can’t believe they got so lucky the first go ‘round only to come back with such an asinine theory years later.

I forget the State's theory on this point -- is the State saying that CA did not know the identity of the person (SG) who was hired to do the hit? JMO.

 

[Weki]

I forget the State's theory on this point -- is the State saying that CA did not know the identity of the person (SG) who was hired to do the hit? JMO.

No. They’re saying SG didn’t know the murder was for CA. I think CA knew SG was involved cause he brings him up in Dolce Vida or on the phone asking if SG is mad at him etc.

 

[vislaw]

Yes, I'm not an expert on work product protection, but I think it sometimes only applies to the particular litigation at issue. Here that is State v. Magbanua. Have no idea how it would apply in an alleged co-conspirator case (State v. Charles Adelson). Lots of issues, including hearsay.... JMO.

The work product privilege applies generally to all cases and is intended to protect an attorney's ability to provide effective assistance of counsel. For anyone interested, here's a very good explanation from the Florida Bar Journal. The privilege certainly can be waived by the client OR when the evidence in question was knowingly disclosed to others outside the scope of the representation of the client. Moreover, the privilege must be raised by the attorney or client and cannot be invoked by a third party outside that relationship.

 

[clearskies1]

No. They’re saying SG didn’t know the murder was for CA. I think CA knew SG was involved cause he brings him up in Dolce Vida or on the phone asking if SG is mad at him etc.

Yes, sorry my post wasn't clear. I understand about the State claiming that SG did not know it was for CA. Was wondering about the other way -- is the State claiming that CA did not know about SG's involvement. I guess they claim he did know. Hard to keep it straight... JMO.

 

[Jerri_Blank]

It was clever of the hitmen to rent a Prius and I was wondering what informed that choice. Like, say, do we know what kind of car Jeffrey Lacasse drove back then?

 

[Blue Shakehead]

Very minor point: it also meant that Magbanua and Garcia didn't get to lay eyes on one another. Surely, both of them were looking forward to that.

Yes. Another interesting little fact: when Sigfredo got transferred to Leon County for Katie's trial, he would have been in the same facility as Charlie Adelson. Wonder if they crossed paths out on the yard? Lol.

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.

 

[Ferpo]

It was clever of the hitmen to rent a Prius and I was wondering what informed that choice. Like, say, do we know what kind of car Jeffrey Lacasse drove back then?

2004 four-door metallic sedan, similar to a Prius, according to Florida Politics reporting.

 

[Gypsy Road]

Yes. Another interesting little fact: when Sigfredo got transferred to Leon County for Katie's trial, he would have been in the same facility as Charlie Adelson. Wonder if they crossed paths out on the yard? Lol.

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

Yes. Another interesting little fact: when Sigfredo got transferred to Leon County for Katie's trial, he would have been in the same facility as Charlie Adelson. Wonder if they crossed paths out on the yard? Lol.

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.

I did read on Charlie’s docket that he is to have NO contact at all with the other indicted co-conspirators so I am hoping the jail kept them apart.

I also saw on KM’s docket that there were a lot of motions filed by the defense regarding Wendi’s testimony. Seems they didn’t want her testifying about certain things?

 

[GordonX]

I did read on Charlie’s docket that he is to have NO contact at all with the other indicted co-conspirators so I am hoping the jail kept them apart.

I also saw on KM’s docket that there were a lot of motions filed by the defense to regarding Wendi’s testimony. Seems they didn’t want her testifying about certain things?

IMO - this is a farce! all of the alleged conspirators can and have easily communicate with each other in secret via their "friendly" attorneys under the guise of attorney client privilege! they are all in cahoots and all on the same team!

 

[Gypsy Road]

IMO - this is a farce! all of the alleged conspirators can and have easily communicate with each other in secret via their "friendly" attorneys under the guise of attorney client privilege! they are all in cahoots and all on the same team!

Exactly! There’s ways to get around it and you know they are doing it.

 

[BlueSky12]

Yes. Another interesting little fact: when Sigfredo got transferred to Leon County for Katie's trial, he would have been in the same facility as Charlie Adelson. Wonder if they crossed paths out on the yard? Lol.

That's a great little nugget (even if the State is keeping them separated).

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.

I watched a lengthy but very informative video on YouTube posted by Mentour Lawyer, dissecting Wendi's testimony. He thinks that the Defense questioning, responses and theatrics were all planned, and that even though DeCoste appeared to go after Wendi, it was all prepared beforehand and benefited the Adelsons. (I don't know if it did or didn't; I'm learning a lot here.)

Dissecting the Testimony of Wendi Adelson - FL vs. Magbanua (Murder of Prof. Dan Markel)

 

[Blue Shakehead]

I also saw on KM’s docket that there were a lot of motions filed by the defense regarding Wendi’s testimony. Seems they didn’t want her testifying about certain things

So Wendi was subpoenaed by both the State and the Defense so both parties wanted her to testify. Since the State can compel her testimony and offer immunity from prosecution regarding the statements she makes during her testimony, she was required to testify as a State's witness and answer any of the prosecution's questions. The cross examination was limited to the issues raised in direct examination. So a limited scope, in theory.

She refused to testify under the Defense's subpoena because immunity was not attached. The motions filed by Magbanua's defense were in relation to their belief that she should be able to testify as both a State and Defense witness and that her immunity should apply to both subpoenas. Those motions were denied.

However....this was all a moot point because one of the most underrated and hilarious aspects of the trial was that the State allowed Decoste to run hog wild on Wendi Adelson and never raised a single objection to any line of questioning. Thats why Wendi was looking at the Judge to object about the speculation and relevance to some of the questions but those objections have to come from Cappleman who was just as entertained as everyone else. So she got absolutely destroyed on the stand and even if she never faces criminal prosecution - her ridiculous testimony will be a matter of public record and on YouTube forever. Oh and furthermore, her laughable testimony can and will be used against her in any wrongful death civil case as an added bonus.

I agree with Mentour lawyer's analysis in that the Adelson's first priority was to get Magbanua off and that Decoste going after Wendi is not at all evidence that they weren't funding the Defense. But as for the cross itself, I do believe it was genuinely surprising to Wendi, as she got the kids gloves treatment by Kawass and Garcia's lawyer in the last trial.