GUILTY FL - FSU Law Professor Dan Markel Murdered by Hitmen #19

[Sustained]

I didn't know that . ( bolded) And yes it's an interesting point - if the boys do really share a bedroom.

yes, much safer to speak in person than on the phone. Harvey's place isn't going to be bugged and I doubt Wendi's is either ( Currently, not enough PC to get a judge to sign off on that wire)

re your final point, if the two apartments are relatively close to each other, maybe none of them are staying overnight and were just spending the days with each other post arrest? (And IIRC neither of the teenaged boys were mentioned in the original post)

It's a bizarre situation all round. Wendi claiming not to have known about a 9 year old double extortion plot until 4 weeks ago.
Wendi's informal PR representative ( imo) Tova Walsh claiming on this month's 20/20 that Wendi had never suspected her parents of any involvement in DM's murder.
Harvey fleeing with Donna
Wendi now having to CYA over her support of Harvey.

Personally I don't believe a word out of Tova Walsh's mouth

 

[amicuscurie]

Upstate NY? She is from Queens and i think he is from Brooklyn. I haven’t heard anything about upstate.

They are not from upstate. Rob currently lives upstate.

 

[amicuscurie]

That friend was in Boca. There are 2 Gary Cohens in S Fl. One is an older man Harveys age in Boca who offered her a job when she moved back to the family home in Coral Springs. The other is a younger man in Miami. (Thats not the one). She never worked for him.
She lived in the family home that was sold in 8/2015.thats why she was cleaning her bedroom. They didn’t all move to Miami till this home was sold.

I remember hearing or reading somewhere that the law firm she was going to work at if she was allowed relocation was Grossman and Roth. She was going to be doing medical malpractice. I don’t remember where I heard that, and I am not saying it is true, just something I remember hearing, I could be wrong, of course. That firm has offices in both Miami and Boca. Boca is a little closer to Coral Springs. Gary Cohen is a partner there. He is not Harvey’s age.


ETA- the Florida Bar website currently shows three Gary Cohens, one at Grossman Roth and the other two in Miami. There is a Gary CohAn in Boca, but that‘s a different name, with an A..

 

[amicuscurie]

I have watched it too. Wasn't he saying that he thought, as a lawyer, there was insufficient evidence rather and he was basing his legal opinion on that? Vaguely recall him continually referencing ' objective facts'
iirc from that interview, he did most of his research very early on, prior to Magbanua retrial? he mentioned something about adding a few chapters during a publisher delay. Anyway, i have the recollection - maybe mistaken - that he thought there was huge amount of evidence against Donna

Although posters on WS who bought the book have said on WS recently ( during this trial) that it's worth reading. ( I haven't read it )

Maybe he's also on the payroll ? Maybe he's attracted to her !
(Not serious. I'm more interested in actual conspiracies than conspiracy theories. )

The book is good. He gave one interview with AALegal Focus in which, as I recall, he took the position, which he admitted was unpopular, that there simply was not enough evidence to show that Wendi was involved. He is a lawyer, and he says he looked at the evidence he had seen so far. (He said driving by the house by itself, is not evidence of the crimes of murder, conspiracy, or solicitation.). He also said he thought she would not have done that long interview with police if she was involved, and said he thought that Donna’s saying “no, no, no,” on the bump when Charlie asked if it involved Wendi was significant. In my opinion, this one interview may have hurt his book sales unfairly. The book itself is by NO means pro-Wendi.

 

[amicuscurie]

I didn't know that . ( bolded) And yes it's an interesting point - if the boys do really share a bedroom.

yes, much safer to speak in person than on the phone. Harvey's place isn't going to be bugged and I doubt Wendi's is either ( Currently, not enough PC to get a judge to sign off on that wire)

re your final point, if the two apartments are relatively close to each other, maybe none of them are staying overnight and were just spending the days with each other post arrest? (And IIRC neither of the teenaged boys were mentioned in the original post)

It's a bizarre situation all round. Wendi claiming not to have known about a 9 year old double extortion plot until 4 weeks ago.
Wendi's informal PR representative ( imo) Tova Walsh claiming on this month's 20/20 that Wendi had never suspected her parents of any involvement in DM's murder.
Harvey fleeing with Donna
Wendi now having to CYA over her support of Harvey.

Donna and Harvey no longer live close to Wendi, they bought an apartment in 2022 in a different area of the city.

 

[Blue Shakehead]

The book is good. He gave one interview with AALegal Focus in which, as I recall, he took the position, which he admitted was unpopular, that there simply was not enough evidence to show that Wendi was involved. He is a lawyer, and he says he looked at the evidence he had seen so far. (He said driving by the house by itself, is not evidence of the crimes of murder, conspiracy, or solicitation.). He also said he thought she would not have done that long interview with police if she was involved, and said he thought that Donna’s saying “no, no, no,” on the bump when Charlie asked if it involved Wendi was significant. In my opinion, this one interview may have hurt his book sales unfairly. The book itself is by NO means pro-Wendi.

He is not pro-Wendi as a person, but he is emphatic in his belief that she was not involved in the crime. He goes quite a bit further than pontificating on whether her actions rise to the level of beyond reasonable doubt - he doesn’t think she did it. Epstein spends the first ~17 minutes of the interview with AALegal Focus defending this position and then at one point later in the interview says that Wendi will never be charged because she had nothing to do with the crime. He doesn’t even allow for the possibility that the State could have other evidence against her that has not been made pubic yet. He also explains that It’s perfectly reasonable that Wendi probably shared with Donna that Dan would be leaving town the next day because they were so enmeshed - not because she was involved.

Epstein believes that Donna and Charlie did this behind her back. He points to Wendi not doing any of the crazy things Donna suggested in her emails as evidence. “Wendi wouldn’t go along with the bribe, religious conversion or other stuff and none of that is even illegal so she would never go along with the murder!“ umm, Donnas plan of action was after Wendi already lost relocation and 2 weeks before the same judge was going to oversee a trial on their divorce. If Wendi used her children as pawns and did ANY of those transparently evil things to ”win” relocation - something the court already decided on, there was a very good chance she loses everything, including custody.

Im not saying the book has no value. But his unwavering belief in Wendi’s innocence is……extremely odd.

 

[Weki]

He is not pro-Wendi as a person, but he is emphatic in his belief that she was not involved in the crime. He goes quite a bit further than pontificating on whether her actions rise to the level of beyond reasonable doubt - he doesn’t think she did it. Epstein spends the first ~17 minutes of the interview with AALegal Focus defending this position and then at one point later in the interview says that Wendi will never be charged because she had nothing to do with the crime. He doesn’t even allow for the possibility that the State could have other evidence against her that has not been made pubic yet. He also explains that It’s perfectly reasonable that Wendi probably shared with Donna that Dan would be leaving town the next day because they were so enmeshed - not because she was involved.

Epstein believes that Donna and Charlie did this behind her back. He points to Wendi not doing any of the crazy things Donna suggested in her emails as evidence. “Wendi wouldn’t go along with the bribe, religious conversion or other stuff and none of that is even illegal so she would never go along with the murder!“ umm, Donnas plan of action was after Wendi already lost relocation and 2 weeks before the same judge was going to oversee a trial on their divorce. If Wendi used her children as pawns and did ANY of those transparently evil things to ”win” relocation - something the court already decided on, there was a very good chance she loses everything, including custody.

Im not saying the book has no value. But his unwavering belief in Wendi’s innocence is……extremely odd.

I wonder what his explanation would be for the TV repairman. Why she wouldn’t just replace the TV with a broken screen? I know Lacasse describes her as infantile and that her parents micromanaged her life/decisions. So I guess you could make the argument that Donna managed Wendi’s life to such an extent that she maneuvered her into the alibi without Wendi knowing about the murder.

Then I guess he could explain the drive to Trescott as her just taking a familiar route to the liquor store and nothing more. She lies about how close she was to the house because she’s a pathological liar and not because she’s hiding anything. She lied about whether her parents were wealthy. She just lies. It doesn’t mean she’s guilty of conspiring in this murder. Just wondering if that’s what Epstein would say.

I’m of the opinion that Wendi knew but wasn’t actively conspiring. I don’t think she’ll ever be charged. Too much reasonable doubt. JMO

 

[jbc]

I wonder what his explanation would be for the TV repairman. Why she wouldn’t just replace the TV with a broken screen? I know Lacasse describes her as infantile and that her parents micromanaged her life/decisions. So I guess you could make the argument that Donna managed Wendi’s life to such an extent that she maneuvered her into the alibi without Wendi knowing about the murder.

Why not replace the TV is, of course, the issue everyone has raised. It's not like Wendi's access to cash was affected by her separation from Dan. I was surprised that when Wendi took half of their savings, she took $350,000. This means $700k in their shared savings account. My question is where did all of that cash come from? As Dan was perhaps Associate Professor, and Wendi a lower-level practice faculty - both at FSU which is not a very high paying public university - and they were only in their 30's (I think I have that correct), they didn't have time to amass such a nest egg (separate from their state-funded 401k, if I understand correctly). Where did all of that savings come from?

 

[clearskies1]

Whether Wendi is charged or not, IMO she's morally guilty and her life seems like a living he**. I believe Lacasse when he says that Wendi told him a few weeks before the murder that CA looked into hiring a hit man. Did she tell CA "absolutely not, do not do that"? Somehow, I doubt it -- and Wendi apparently did not tell Jeff that she said that. Anyway, IMO she was in on it without being explicitly told what was happening. Charlie was dumb and took incredible risks -- but IMO they wanted the Wendi part of the picture to be fuzzy because she is the obvious suspect. All my opinion.

 

[Blue Shakehead]

Whether Wendi is charged or not, IMO she's morally guilty and her life seems like a living he**. I believe Lacasse when he says that Wendi told him a few weeks before the murder that CA looked into hiring a hit man. Did she tell CA "absolutely not, do not do that"? Somehow, I doubt it -- and Wendi apparently did not tell Jeff that she said that. Anyway, IMO she was in on it without being explicitly told what was happening. Charlie was dumb and took incredible risks -- but IMO they wanted the Wendi part of the picture to be fuzzy because she is the obvious suspect. All my opinion.

Interestingly, there was an inmate who came forward in December 2016 who said that Sigfredo got drunk on "toilet wine" and told him that the Adelsons hired someone in the summer of 2013 and paid them $50,000 to kill "the dude" but those people just ran off with the money "without doing the lick". So his "baby-mama" took the job and made sure that would not happen and that the job would get done.

This inmate said all this before Lacasse ever testified. Which completely corroborates Lacasse's testimony. Lacasse also told at least one or two of his friends about this conversation with Wendi soon after it happened. So there is absolutely zero reason to believe Jeff Lacasse is lying.

 

[Odeto BJ]

Then I guess he could explain the drive to Trescott as her just taking a familiar route to the liquor store and nothing more. She lies about how close she was to the house because she’s a pathological liar and not because she’s hiding anything. She lied about whether her parents were wealthy. She just lies. It doesn’t mean she’s guilty of conspiring in this murder. Just wondering if that’s what Epstein would say.

I’m of the opinion that Wendi knew but wasn’t actively conspiring. I don’t think she’ll ever be charged. Too much reasonable doubt. JMO

WA has done plenty that would lead to charges (similar to) perjury and interfering with an investigation.

And then there's the key activity: the approach to the Markel house and her premise for simply turning around to follow an alternate route. Surely if DM indicated he was taking the sons out of school to go swimming she would want to know how a barrier on Trescott near the house effected those plans or her schedule for the rest of the day and may have represented a threat to the boys' welfare collectively. In spite of that, she makes no effort at immediate contact with DM. Her adjustments to testimony over the course of multiple trials indicate she perceives this as a liability because if it was simply consequence of her own lack of perception or insensitivity, why not deliver a singular version and anticipate, and prepare for, the fallout? Why change it? Go ahead and lie; but stick with the same lie over time.

I can create a scenario where DA would nag WA about the specific timing of WA taking charge of the boys on 7/18 and the need for WA to confirm DM's specific travel schedule, and thus induce the phone call to DM to clarify his plans; which results in the deadline for the event. We do not know all of the conversation between the Adelsons that occurred that morning but it seems the trip to Trescott was product of her own need for confirmation, rather than a result of any exchange with CA or DA.
Its my belief that she knew what was going to happen and more or less, when; and while she probably did not have any contact with the killers or KM in that regard, she is part of the conspiracy by virtue of that knowledge alone.
IANAL; JMO; FWIW and the rest of the alphabet soup.

 

[Blue Shakehead]

Why not replace the TV is, of course, the issue everyone has raised. It's not like Wendi's access to cash was affected by her separation from Dan. I was surprised that when Wendi took half of their savings, she took $350,000. This means $700k in their shared savings account. My question is where did all of that cash come from? As Dan was perhaps Associate Professor, and Wendi a lower-level practice faculty - both at FSU which is not a very high paying public university - and they were only in their 30's (I think I have that correct), they didn't have time to amass such a nest egg (separate from their state-funded 401k, if I understand correctly). Where did all of that savings come from?

Hard to know where Wendi and Dan managed to save up $700k except that, after taxes and even allowing for the most frugal cost of living spending, there's no way they earned enough net income to save that kind of money. So inheritances, gifts would likely account for some of it.

Whats more telling for me, is that Wendi testified that she never bought a house in Tallahassee because she couldn't afford it because Dan never paid her the $120k in equity from their house on Trescott. So she rented from August 2012 through to July 2014. Records show that she had $532,614.52 in her savings accounts in June of 2014. She could have bought a house in Tallahassee at any time in cash and still had about $200k leftover. But she never did. Wonder why.

 

[Weki]

Hard to know where Wendi and Dan managed to save up $700k except that, after taxes and even allowing for the most frugal cost of living spending, there's no way they earned enough net income to save that kind of money. So inheritances, gifts would likely account for some of it.

Whats more telling for me, is that Wendi testified that she never bought a house in Tallahassee because she couldn't afford it because Dan never paid her the $120k in equity from their house on Trescott. So she rented from August 2012 through to July 2014. Records show that she had $532,614.52 in her savings accounts in June of 2014. She could have bought a house in Tallahassee at any time in cash and still had about $200k leftover. But she never did. Wonder why.

Charlie and Donna conspired to talk her out of buying a house in Tally, according to the texts that came out at Charlie’s trial. She was probably renting awaiting the relocation issue but I’m not sure. But yeah I totally agree that money must be inheritance/gift not earned income. JMO

Edited to add: Here’s part of the exchange:

 

[Blue Shakehead]

Charlie and Donna conspired to talk her out of buying a house in Tally, according to the texts that came out at Charlie’s trial. She was probably renting awaiting the relocation issue but I’m not sure. But yeah I totally agree that money must be inheritance/gift not earned income. JMO

Edited to add: Here’s part of the exchange:

View attachment 463459

Yes they did. And what is happening at this time:

1. Relocation has been denied with prejudice. Permanently. She is not going to be able to move for 16 years when her youngest turns 18, unless something happens to Dan or he agrees to move to Miami.
2. The hitmen the Adelsons hired in the summer of 2013 ran off with the money and there is no active plot to kill him.
3. Wendi pulls out of buying a house after talking with Charlie. It has nothing to do with finances (i.e., $530k in her savings accounts), and it has no logical rationale because Wendi is going to be in Tally for 16 years, so it makes zero sense to rent. The divorce is settled and the relocation is done, so there is no legal rationale. So what is the rationale? This is the same day Charlie approaches Magbanua to have him killed. Is it possible that Charlie said "don't buy a house, let me get someone else to kill this a-hole and we will do it right this time?"

 

[Sustained]

Then I guess he could explain the drive to Trescott as her just taking a familiar route to the liquor store and nothing more. She lies about how close she was to the house because she’s a pathological liar and not because she’s hiding anything. She lied about whether her parents were wealthy. She just lies. It doesn’t mean she’s guilty of conspiring in this murder. Just wondering if that’s what Epstein would say.

I’m of the opinion that Wendi knew but wasn’t actively conspiring. I don’t think she’ll ever be charged. Too much reasonable doubt. JMO

BBM -

Epstein can explain the route any way he wants but I'm not buying that BS as Wendi had lived in Tally for a number of years and knew her way around.

I'm of the opinion that LE has more on Wendi than we know and she will be charged eventually. Perhaps Charlie's tune will change in a FL max and he'll deliver the coup de grâce to Wendi's chances at staying a free person. If Charlie is a vindictive narcissist, he may turn on her at some point.

 

[opt]

Epstein believes that Donna and Charlie did this behind her back.

I have to admit: Murder as a surprise gift is slightly more believable than Murder on spec.

 

[LinasK]

We are talking about people that are beyond stupid. Worse than stupid. You get stupid people that know they're stupid, but these people are stupid and think they're smart! e.g talking about your secretive plans to leave the country and escape authorities. They don't think, if I do this or say this will i get caught? They think no-one will ever catch them. Plus she's 73 and her tech-saviness may be questionable. Has she been diligent about only using Whatsapp for example. I think there will be communication between her and HA that will drop HA right in the sh!!t.

It's not just stupidity, it's arrogance in thinking that you won't get caught/arrested, that you are above the law because you have money.

 

[LinasK]

There is an interesting transition in Jeff Lacasse's thinking towards Dan Markel. In his first two interviews within a week or two of the murder, he clearly describes Markel as the worlds biggest *advertiser censored* who was emotionally abusing Wendi. He was surprised at all the eulogies at DM's funeral because he was under the impression that nobody liked him.

In his March 2015 interview, when he's come out of Wendi's spell and there's like a kindred spirit thing going on. Band of Brothers. He now understands DM (and particularly his characterization of Wendi) in a way that very few people do. He understands that DM was well loved and a loving father and the stuff he was saying about Wendi being a sociopath, pathological liar and mentally unstable were all true.

As for Dan's career prospects, ironically - my information is coming from Epstein (who is a dunce on his conclusion on WA's guilt, but imagine his biography on DM is accurate given that he spoke to many of his friends.) Epstein said DM had offers from universities in St. Louis, Houston and Washington and also great prospects at Berkley - these offers were well after he was already entrenched in Tallahassee. DM and WA considered them but by then Wendi was pregnant and DM had put roots down in Tallahassee. Apparently, at his first job fair, DM struck out and got zero offers and he really had to do some soul searching and figure out why he wasn't getting scooped up. It was after that, he got his bearings and started getting offers.

I have no reason to doubt that DM could come off as abrasive, rude, elitist or arrogant. I think a lot of people have described him that way. But he also cast a massive social net and connected with a huge number of people - with very intense, lasting and loyal friendships.

Since it's coming from Wendi, I don't believe that Dan was abrasive, rude,arrogant or elitist at all.

 

[jbc]

Hard to know where Wendi and Dan managed to save up $700k except that, after taxes and even allowing for the most frugal cost of living spending, there's no way they earned enough net income to save that kind of money. So inheritances, gifts would likely account for some of it.

Whats more telling for me, is that Wendi testified that she never bought a house in Tallahassee because she couldn't afford it because Dan never paid her the $120k in equity from their house on Trescott. So she rented from August 2012 through to July 2014. Records show that she had $532,614.52 in her savings accounts in June of 2014. She could have bought a house in Tallahassee at any time in cash and still had about $200k leftover. But she never did. Wonder why.

OK, thanks. Following up further, if she takes $350k from the shared account in what, 2013, and that's her savings, where does the next ~$180k come from to bring her to $532k in 2014? Man, she's rolling in the dough. Is this all from her family? She certainly doesn't need to rely on Dan for income once separated, legally or permanently.

 

[LinasK]

Yes they did. And what is happening at this time:

1. Relocation has been denied with prejudice. Permanently. She is not going to be able to move for 16 years when her youngest turns 18, unless something happens to Dan or he agrees to move to Miami.
2. The hitmen the Adelsons hired in the summer of 2013 ran off with the money and there is no active plot to kill him.
3. Wendi pulls out of buying a house after talking with Charlie. It has nothing to do with finances (i.e., $530k in her savings accounts), and it has no logical rationale because Wendi is going to be in Tally for 16 years, so it makes zero sense to rent. The divorce is settled and the relocation is done, so there is no legal rationale. So what is the rationale? This is the same day Charlie approaches Magbanua to have him killed. Is it possible that Charlie said "don't buy a house, let me get someone else to kill this a-hole and we will do it right this time?"

Oooh, ooh, I vote for Door #3!