FL - FSU Law Professor Dan Markel Murdered by Hitmen *4 Guilty* #25

[IQuestion]

I had heard this, but wasn't sure if it was true or speculation..IT'S TRUE!!

"The First District Court of Appeal has rejected Charlie Adelson’s request to allow the judge who presided over his murder trial to consider conflict of interest claims, newly filed court documents say."

The First DCA issued a one paragraph order denying his request on Thursday.

Appeals court denies Charlie Adelson’s request to relinquish jurisdiction​

Adelson is appealing his murder conviction, had pushed for trial court to consider conflict of interest claims​

"Appeals court denies Charlie Adelson’s request to relinquish jurisdiction

 

[Zedzded]

I think CA will be granted a new trial. Which is a good thing. Well for us it is. Not the Adelsons. I believe if he gets a new trial he will co-operate. He had no other choice, he's out of options. Even a vain, arrogant narcissist like CA knows when he's beaten, knows when his number's up. Unless Ufferman missed his ethics class in law school like Rashbaum apparently did, he would be ensuring his clients best interests are his priority. Telling him he has a chance with the double-extortion theory is not in his clients best interest.

CA will almost definitely throw at least one family member under the bus. He will have KM's trial outcome in the forefront of his mind, cognisant of how she blew her one chance at freedom. If he gets his shot he will not blow it.

 

[IQuestion]

I think CA will be granted a new trial. Which is a good thing. Well for us it is. Not the Adelsons. I believe if he gets a new trial he will co-operate. He had no other choice, he's out of options. Even a vain, arrogant narcissist like CA knows when he's beaten, knows when his number's up. Unless Ufferman missed his ethics class in law school like Rashbaum apparently did, he would be ensuring his clients best interests are his priority. Telling him he has a chance with the double-extortion theory is not in his clients best interest.

CA will almost definitely throw at least one family member under the bus. He will have KM's trial outcome in the forefront of his mind, cognisant of how she blew her one chance at freedom. If he gets his shot he will not blow it.

ZZ I enjoy reading your thoughts!! "if he gets his shot" The big unknowns? Will the Dist Atty even consider offering CA a deal this late in the process? I don't think CA has made a lot of alliances or gained any sympathies from anyone (beyond the stale date of his last Ritz canteen order)...least of all his "little sister Wendi. DA's active involvement will be very easy to prove. So, my thought, the only person Charlie could offer up that would pique the state's interest is providing concrete evidence against Wendi.
This is such a tough call. If he turns against Wendi, will his family cut him off financially? Tough call...maybe there won't be any money left anyway? Hmmm cut a deal to spend his sunset years as an obscure foot note in a retirement community? IDK.

 

[Zedzded]

ZZ I enjoy reading your thoughts!! "if he gets his shot" The big unknowns? Will the Dist Atty even consider offering CA a deal this late in the process? I don't think CA has made a lot of alliances or gained any sympathies from anyone (beyond the stale date of his last Ritz canteen order)...least of all his "little sister Wendi. DA's active involvement will be very easy to prove. So, my thought, the only person Charlie could offer up that would pique the state's interest is providing concrete evidence against Wendi.
This is such a tough call. If he turns against Wendi, will his family cut him off financially? Tough call...maybe there won't be any money left anyway? Hmmm cut a deal to spend his sunset years as an obscure foot note in a retirement community? IDK.

Thanks, you too

"Will the Dist Atty even consider offering CA a deal this late in the process?"
Yup. Maybe that ship has sailed. I think the State has a lot more evidence on WA than we are aware of e.g Sara Yousef's email. I think if they do offer him a plea deal it would be on the condition that he be 100% honest. That would mean flipping on WA and HA. Is he really going to have his 83 year old Dad thrown in jail? And flipping on WA alone and risking alienating his family... I just don't know if he would do that. But then I'm not a sociopath... I just don't know why he would push for a new trial, spend a cool $1 million on legal fees only to have the same outcome - LWOP.

 

[Going Rogue]

I think CA will be granted a new trial. Which is a good thing. Well for us it is. Not the Adelsons. I believe if he gets a new trial he will co-operate. He had no other choice, he's out of options. Even a vain, arrogant narcissist like CA knows when he's beaten, knows when his number's up. Unless Ufferman missed his ethics class in law school like Rashbaum apparently did, he would be ensuring his clients best interests are his priority. Telling him he has a chance with the double-extortion theory is not in his clients best interest.

CA will almost definitely throw at least one family member under the bus. He will have KM's trial outcome in the forefront of his mind, cognisant of how she blew her one chance at freedom. If he gets his shot he will not blow it.

Ufferman is an attorney that focuses on state and federal criminal appeals and postconviction motions. His representation of Charlie will end ‘IF’ Charlie wins the appeal. I seriously doubt Ufferman will be giving Charlie any legal guidance on what’s in Charlie’s best interests regarding defense / strategy if the appeal is successful. Personally, I don’t believe the appeal will be successful, but if it is, I don’t see Charlie flipping if he gets a second chance. I think you are putting too much stock in ‘a lot more evidence’ that the state has on Wendi. We know they have more ‘information’ that hasn’t been made public, but it can’t be anything that removes all ‘reasonable doubt’ or gives the prosecution ‘reasonable assurances' that they can meet the burden of proof otherwise they would have already charged Wendi. To be more specific on ‘reasonable assurances', their confidence level needs to be in the high 90 percentile that they can meet the burden of proof – a very high standard. I’m not sure where the belief that the state ‘needs’ Wendi’s testimony to win the case against Donna and the reason she hasn’t been arrested is because they ‘need’ her started, but that doesn’t add up to me. If they do in fact arrest Wendi immediately following Donna’s conviction WITHOUT new evidence that was discovered on or around the time of her arrest, I will be very surprised. Regarding the evidence they already have that has not been made public, I'm sure it's nothing that moves the needle - to believe otherwise is just wishful thinking. If they do have ‘evidence’ that hasn’t been made public that will surely lead to a Wendi conviction and they did in fact deploy the ‘one-at-a-time’ prosecution strategy, it will have been a serious miscarriage of justice.

 

[nhmemorymaker]

Ufferman is an attorney that focuses on state and federal criminal appeals and postconviction motions. His representation of Charlie will end ‘IF’ Charlie wins the appeal. I seriously doubt Ufferman will be giving Charlie any legal guidance on what’s in Charlie’s best interests regarding defense / strategy if the appeal is successful. Personally, I don’t believe the appeal will be successful, but if it is, I don’t see Charlie flipping if he gets a second chance. I think you are putting too much stock in ‘a lot more evidence’ that the state has on Wendi. We know they have more ‘information’ that hasn’t been made public, but it can’t be anything that removes all ‘reasonable doubt’ or gives the prosecution ‘reasonable assurances' that they can meet the burden of proof otherwise they would have already charged Wendi. To be more specific on ‘reasonable assurances', their confidence level needs to be in the high 90 percentile that they can meet the burden of proof – a very high standard. I’m not sure where the belief that the state ‘needs’ Wendi’s testimony to win the case against Donna and the reason she hasn’t been arrested is because they ‘need’ her started, but that doesn’t add up to me. If they do in fact arrest Wendi immediately following Donna’s conviction WITHOUT new evidence that was discovered on or around the time of her arrest, I will be very surprised. Regarding the evidence they already have that has not been made public, I'm sure it's nothing that moves the needle - to believe otherwise is just wishful thinking. If they do have ‘evidence’ that hasn’t been made public that will surely lead to a Wendi conviction and they did in fact deploy the ‘one-at-a-time’ prosecution strategy, it will have been a serious miscarriage of justice.

@Zedzded , thank you for the serious discussion regarding what evidence they do have on Wendi.

And quoting @Going Rogue response: I think you are putting too much stock in ‘a lot more evidence’ that the state has on Wendi. We know they have more ‘information’ that hasn’t been made public, but it can’t be anything that removes all ‘reasonable doubt’ or gives the prosecution ‘reasonable assurances' that they can meet the burden of proof otherwise they would have already charged Wendi.

This issue of "can the PIN WENDI is what we are all hoping to hear about.
We have each followed enough cases here on WS, and know this could go either way.

I do hope you both continue to bring up any facts or leads that give us more........

 

[TTF14]

I think CA will be granted a new trial. Which is a good thing. Well for us it is. Not the Adelsons. I believe if he gets a new trial he will co-operate. He had no other choice, he's out of options. Even a vain, arrogant narcissist like CA knows when he's beaten, knows when his number's up. Unless Ufferman missed his ethics class in law school like Rashbaum apparently did, he would be ensuring his clients best interests are his priority. Telling him he has a chance with the double-extortion theory is not in his clients best interest.

CA will almost definitely throw at least one family member under the bus. He will have KM's trial outcome in the forefront of his mind, cognisant of how she blew her one chance at freedom. If he gets his shot he will not blow it.

I like your way of thinking.

If CA does get a new trial, can what he said in his first trial be used to impeach him?

 

[Zedzded]

I don’t see Charlie flipping if he gets a second chance.

There is a degree of loyalty in the family, if CA does flip, it would be very reluctantly and I doubt he'd do anything that would ensure his parents ended up in prison. However if he gets a second trial, what is his strategy going to be? There is no plausible defence. The double extortion theory is gonski, as is his credibility. So any other potential defence would fail because he is a proven liar and I think he knows this. Perhaps cooperating is just not on his radar and he's accepted spending the rest of his life in prison, a new trial is just a roll of the dice and hope for the best? But he's a strategist who looks for solutions hence the moniker, "The Maestro!" Which makes me think he would be trying to formulate some kind of plan.

He can flip on WA and potentially not draw the ire of his family. He's had time to think and reflect on the crime he and his family committed. He is utterly repentant and full of remorse, disgusted at all their actions. Co-operating is CA simply doing the right thing, not some kind of self-serving act to reduce his sentence.

He can convince himself of the above, making it easier to reconcile himself with him ratting out his sister.

I think you are putting too much stock in ‘a lot more evidence’ that the state has on Wendi. We know they have more ‘information’ that hasn’t been made public, but it can’t be anything that removes all ‘reasonable doubt’ or gives the prosecution ‘reasonable assurances' that they can meet the burden of proof otherwise they would have already charged Wendi.

Contradicting myself here, but yeah I think they have more evidence, but not a lot more.

I’m not sure where the belief that the state ‘needs’ Wendi’s testimony to win the case against Donna and the reason she hasn’t been arrested is because they ‘need’ her started, but that doesn’t add up to me.

I agree. I think if the case against her was strong, she would have been arrested irrespective of whether she was needed for DA's trial. And whilst she may be of use in her Mum's trial, the verdict will not be influenced by her testimony.

I do think WA will be arrested. Perhaps that's just because I'm thinking with my heart not my head. I can't fathom how someone so obviously complicit with so much incriminating circumstantial evidence against them can walk free. But ultimately any competent lawyer could dismiss a lot of the evidence that implicates WA.

The cases against CA and DA are strong because of smoking guns such as the Bump phone calls, various text messages and recorded conversations between the co-conspirators. The case against WA lacks those smoking guns. She drove past the crime scene, so what, it's a shortcut. She lied about it, so what, she was scared, nervous, panicked...

Once DA is convicted, the case against WA will naturally be stronger. i.e how can she not know DanM was going to be killed now that her brother and mother have been convicted? I think there will be evidence that shows she had knowledge - was an accessory, but not necessarily enough to prove she was a conspirator. I think that's the content of her email to Sara Yousef, admitting she knew her family was involved and had planned to kill DanM. If that's true, proving the offence of accessory is easier.

So i think the State will get WA on accessory before/after the fact and will probably offer her a plea deal. That way she gets to avoid an expensive, ugly and public trial and also gets to still keep her hands clean. She can maintain to her sons and supporters that her evil family plotted to kill DanM, she was totally against it, but didn't stop it as she was naive and did not think they were serious or was scared of her family or something else. She does 5 years, despite doing nothing wrong and remains a hero in her kids eyes.

This is where things could get interesting and it's a timing thing. If the State can offer WA accessory before/after and 5 years she would literally bite their hand off rather than go to trial. But if DA and/or CA are aware that she is going to cooperate before their trial, appeals, 2nd trial etc then they might flip on her. WA will not hesitate to throw DA and CA under the bus for a lighter sentence. Not for a second. They are pretty much done anyway, her cooperation simply seals their fate.

If the State plan on arresting WA for accessory, it makes much more sense that they wait till after DA's trial. There will be more evidence that is produced in DA's trial that demonstrates accessory in comparison to conspiracy.

 

[Going Rogue]

There is a degree of loyalty in the family, if CA does flip, it would be very reluctantly and I doubt he'd do anything that would ensure his parents ended up in prison. However if he gets a second trial, what is his strategy going to be? There is no plausible defence. The double extortion theory is gonski, as is his credibility. So any other potential defence would fail because he is a proven liar and I think he knows this. Perhaps cooperating is just not on his radar and he's accepted spending the rest of his life in prison, a new trial is just a roll of the dice and hope for the best? But he's a strategist who looks for solutions hence the moniker, "The Maestro!" Which makes me think he would be trying to formulate some kind of plan.

He can flip on WA and potentially not draw the ire of his family. He's had time to think and reflect on the crime he and his family committed. He is utterly repentant and full of remorse, disgusted at all their actions. Co-operating is CA simply doing the right thing, not some kind of self-serving act to reduce his sentence.

He can convince himself of the above, making it easier to reconcile himself with him ratting out his sister.

Contradicting myself here, but yeah I think they have more evidence, but not a lot more.

I agree. I think if the case against her was strong, she would have been arrested irrespective of whether she was needed for DA's trial. And whilst she may be of use in her Mum's trial, the verdict will not be influenced by her testimony.

I do think WA will be arrested. Perhaps that's just because I'm thinking with my heart not my head. I can't fathom how someone so obviously complicit with so much incriminating circumstantial evidence against them can walk free. But ultimately any competent lawyer could dismiss a lot of the evidence that implicates WA.

The cases against CA and DA are strong because of smoking guns such as the Bump phone calls, various text messages and recorded conversations between the co-conspirators. The case against WA lacks those smoking guns. She drove past the crime scene, so what, it's a shortcut. She lied about it, so what, she was scared, nervous, panicked...

Once DA is convicted, the case against WA will naturally be stronger. i.e how can she not know DanM was going to be killed now that her brother and mother have been convicted? I think there will be evidence that shows she had knowledge - was an accessory, but not necessarily enough to prove she was a conspirator. I think that's the content of her email to Sara Yousef, admitting she knew her family was involved and had planned to kill DanM. If that's true, proving the offence of accessory is easier.

So i think the State will get WA on accessory before/after the fact and will probably offer her a plea deal. That way she gets to avoid an expensive, ugly and public trial and also gets to still keep her hands clean. She can maintain to her sons and supporters that her evil family plotted to kill DanM, she was totally against it, but didn't stop it as she was naive and did not think they were serious or was scared of her family or something else. She does 5 years, despite doing nothing wrong and remains a hero in her kids eyes.

This is where things could get interesting and it's a timing thing. If the State can offer WA accessory before/after and 5 years she would literally bite their hand off rather than go to trial. But if DA and/or CA are aware that she is going to cooperate before their trial, appeals, 2nd trial etc then they might flip on her. WA will not hesitate to throw DA and CA under the bus for a lighter sentence. Not for a second. They are pretty much done anyway, her cooperation simply seals their fate.

If the State plan on arresting WA for accessory, it makes much more sense that they wait till after DA's trial. There will be more evidence that is produced in DA's trial that demonstrates accessory in comparison to conspiracy.

You are correct, based on the evidence, there is no defense Charlie can or could have used that anyone with half a brain would buy. The case against him is just too strong. That fact that you, I and the rest of the folks that follow this case understand this and realize flipping would be benefit him in some way, it doesn’t increase the likelihood of Charlie flipping. For Charlie to flip, not only would he need to turn on his family, he would have to admit guilt. Also, I’m a very rare outlier as it relates to certain theories of this case and I believe it is possible that Charlie & Donna ‘may’ have plotted this behind Wendi’s back. There are many details of this case that would suggest that Wendi was not in on the plot and I think the chances of Charlie flipping is zero if Charlie & Donna did this behind her back. If Wendi was active in the planning and an equal participant, I could see Charlie potentially flipping. If they plotted this behind her back, there are still multiple ways she could have had knowledge is was happening - they were very sloppy and she is of more than average intelligence. There are many reasons most reject the theory of Charlie & Donna plotting behind Wendi’s back – there are a lot of complexities to case and add on top of that the clear dysfunctional way that Charlie & Donna think, lived their lives, and tried to control others. We have a large enough sample size of data between recorded phone calls and emails to come to the conclusion that Charlie & Donna have serious mental issues and I would not put it past them to have acted without Wendi’s knowledge and for multiple reasons.

 

[IQuestion]

You are correct, based on the evidence, there is no defense Charlie can or could have used that anyone with half a brain would buy. The case against him is just too strong. That fact that you, I and the rest of the folks that follow this case understand this and realize flipping would be benefit him in some way, it doesn’t increase the likelihood of Charlie flipping. For Charlie to flip, not only would he need to turn on his family, he would have to admit guilt. Also, I’m a very rare outlier as it relates to certain theories of this case and I believe it is possible that Charlie & Donna ‘may’ have plotted this behind Wendi’s back. There are many details of this case that would suggest that Wendi was not in on the plot and I think the chances of Charlie flipping is zero if Charlie & Donna did this behind her back. If Wendi was active in the planning and an equal participant, I could see Charlie potentially flipping. If they plotted this behind her back, there are still multiple ways she could have had knowledge is was happening - they were very sloppy and she is of more than average intelligence. There are many reasons most reject the theory of Charlie & Donna plotting behind Wendi’s back – there are a lot of complexities to case and add on top of that the clear dysfunctional way that Charlie & Donna think, lived their lives, and tried to control others. We have a large enough sample size of data between recorded phone calls and emails to come to the conclusion that Charlie & Donna have serious mental issues and I would not put it past them to have acted without Wendi’s knowledge and for multiple reasons.

Although most of tbe "groundwork" was done in Miami: CA hooking up with KM. Hiring hitman, funding and pay off. CA, DA & HA having legitimate business dealings because of the dental practice (which can easily explain constant phone contact). WA was a part of the discussion to "offer DanM money to take the children to South Florida." She even said , in court, she was aware of those financial discussions (one million dollars)....but that the offer was never made to DanM. I think WA was "stoking the fires of hate & loathing" with her claims of "emotional abuse." His growing desire for observance of his faith, morphing into being labeled a zealot and making DanM seem petty in wanting the return of his property. (What Does "Stoking the Flames" Mean? At its core, the idiom "stoking the flames" connotes encouraging or intensifying an already existing issue or emotion, thereby amplifying it.) To me, there is a big difference between a tennis racket and a family heirloom!
There has been some interesting "innuendos/suggestions" that have raised more than a few eyebrows, but I guess she is pretty smart at "skirting the edge of being complicit to a crime."
WA repeating to 3 times on the same day, "Charlie said buying me a TV was cheaper than a hitman." True.. maybe he also said, "Hiring a hitman is cheaper than coming up with a million dollars, too."
WA has been named as an unindicted co-conspirator....and already offered "limited immunity." Who provided the killers with all the details of Dan's Tallahassee schedule??

 

[Zedzded]

There are many details of this case that would suggest that Wendi was not in on the plot.

Whilst there may not be enough evidence to indict WA, I firmly believe she was aware and involved in the plot to kill DanM. Aside from all the circumstantial evidence such as the Trescott drive by, lying about it etc there's the email to Sara Yousef. DanM had been dead for 3 years when this email was sent by WA, to Sara. WA had already been publicly listed by the State as an unindicted co-conspirator yet Sara stuck by her friend. And Sara is a lawyer who would be cognisant of how one becomes listed as a unindicted co-conspirator. Yet she maintained their friendship.

However something was said by WA in that email that was serious enough for SY to sever the friendship permanently and contact the authorities, eventually giving a deposition largely based on that email. I believe WA stated in that email that she knew her family was involved in the murder of DanM.

 

[Going Rogue]

Although most of tbe "groundwork" was done in Miami: CA hooking up with KM. Hiring hitman, funding and pay off. CA, DA & HA having legitimate business dealings because of the dental practice (which can easily explain constant phone contact). WA was a part of the discussion to "offer DanM money to take the children to South Florida." She even said , in court, she was aware of those financial discussions (one million dollars)....but that the offer was never made to DanM. I think WA was "stoking the fires of hate & loathing" with her claims of "emotional abuse." His growing desire for observance of his faith, morphing into being labeled a zealot and making DanM seem petty in wanting the return of his property. (What Does "Stoking the Flames" Mean? At its core, the idiom "stoking the flames" connotes encouraging or intensifying an already existing issue or emotion, thereby amplifying it.) To me, there is a big difference between a tennis racket and a family heirloom!
There has been some interesting "innuendos/suggestions" that have raised more than a few eyebrows, but I guess she is pretty smart at "skirting the edge of being complicit to a crime."
WA repeating to 3 times on the same day, "Charlie said buying me a TV was cheaper than a hitman." True.. maybe he also said, "Hiring a hitman is cheaper than coming up with a million dollars, too."
WA has been named as an unindicted co-conspirator....and already offered "limited immunity." Who provided the killers with all the details of Dan's Tallahassee schedule??

Based on Donna’s email to Wendi, the 1-million dollar offer was pitched to Wendi. To say she was ‘part of the discussion’ is accurate, but it wasn’t her idea. In fact, I can easily make the argument that the ‘offer’ email is evidence of how dysfunctional and controlling Donna was by inserting herself into Wendi’s personal affairs. Additionally, since Wendi refused to make the offer, and refused other ridiculous suggestions Donna made to Wendi (there were several) that were clear attempts to make Dan’s life miserable and ‘take control’, I can see Donna & Charlie deciding to take more drastic measures without looping in Wendi. Yes, I believe Donna is that disturbed that she would spearhead a plan like Dan’s murder directly with Charlie without Wendi’s involvement and can see Charlie going along with her.

Although, I’m sure Wendi complained to anyone that listened about Dan or whatever other ‘problem’ she was facing in her personal life, Donna was close enough to Wendi and the grandchildren to know and see first-hand all the ‘issues’ the couple faced pre and post divorce. Donna didn’t need Wendi to ‘stoke the flames’ – she despised Dan with a passion and you are assuming Donna’s complete disdain for Dan was Wendi doing. Dan filed a motion against Donna asking the court to mandate supervised visits with his boys – Dan and Donna didn’t need Wendi to stoke any flames..... they had a mutual dislike for one another.

Do you know why Wendi was named an ‘unindicted co-conspirator’ according to Georgia Cappleman? According to Georgia in an article from David Lat who interviewed her after Wendi was named, it was done for technical reasons after she was named as a witness for the defense on the eve of Katie’s second trial and it did not necessarily mean they intended on charging Wendi.

Here is an excerpt of that article and a direct quote from Georgia:

"The characterization of Wendi as a co-conspirator was specifically for the purpose of acknowledging that she has enough exposure to give rise to Fifth Amendment protections. This issue was previously addressed in regard to Wendi Adelson when the defense attempted to depose her and the Court found that she legally invoked her Fifth Amendment privilege when she refused to answer their questions."

Re your last statement re Dan’s schedule – it’s well documented in Rivera’s proffer and testimony that all they had was Dan’s name, address, and information he was leaving town on Friday night so it had to be done before he left. Per Rivera, they followed him for days to learn his routes and patterns. There is no evidence Wendi passed any information to the hit team on Dan’s schedule – just speculation. That’s the main issue with the case against Wendi it is very assumption based. Dan traveled often and most weeks – you don’t think Donna knew that? Maybe she found out he was leaving town through causal conversation with Wendi? Maybe she or Charlie just told the hitman he was leaving town because they knew there was a 50 / 50 chance he was travelling that weekend as it is well documented he traveled often.

 

[Going Rogue]

Whilst there may not be enough evidence to indict WA, I firmly believe she was aware and involved in the plot to kill DanM. Aside from all the circumstantial evidence such as the Trescott drive by, lying about it etc there's the email to Sara Yousef. DanM had been dead for 3 years when this email was sent by WA, to Sara. WA had already been publicly listed by the State as an unindicted co-conspirator yet Sara stuck by her friend. And Sara is a lawyer who would be cognisant of how one becomes listed as a unindicted co-conspirator. Yet she maintained their friendship.

However something was said by WA in that email that was serious enough for SY to sever the friendship permanently and contact the authorities, eventually giving a deposition largely based on that email. I believe WA stated in that email that she knew her family was involved in the murder of DanM.

The email to Sara doesn’t mean much until we see the content – all we know is an email exists and Sara thinks it means something. Based on the way the prosecution has used ‘information’ in the past, I wouldn’t get my hopes up. Great example is allowing Jeff to testify about the ‘thought’ he was being ‘set up’ as the fall guy down to the level / detail of similar cars. The state knows there was no elaborate plan to set up Lacasse yet they allowed that picture to be painted and it is believed by many.

 

[Zedzded]

There is no evidence Wendi passed any information to the hit team on Dan’s schedule – just speculation. That’s the main issue with the case against Wendi it is very assumption based. Dan traveled often and most weeks – you don’t think Donna knew that? Maybe she found out he was leaving town through causal conversation with Wendi?

Totally agree. Dan's movements were probably conveyed to CA/Km the hitmen by WA. But there is no proof of that. It seems logical so people almost take it as fact.

I think the State can build a case against WA as accessory before/after the fact and that's part of the reason she has not been arrested yet.

 

[Zedzded]

The email to Sara doesn’t mean much until we see the content – all we know is an email exists and Sara thinks it means something. Based on the way the prosecution has used ‘information’ in the past, I wouldn’t get my hopes up. Great example is allowing Jeff to testify about the ‘thought’ he was being ‘set up’ as the fall guy down to the level / detail of similar cars. The state knows there was no elaborate plan to set up Lacasse yet they allowed that picture to be painted and it is believed by many.

Obviously speculative on my part, but Sara is an experienced lawyer and whatever was in the email she deemed it pertinent and relevant to the case. And whatever WA wrote, it's content was enough to prompt Sara to end the relationship there and then. So I don't think I'm jumping to some wild crazy conclusion that WA wrote something damning and potentially incriminating. I don't think she told Sara she helped plan to kill Dan, but it is not something inconsequential. And whilst the State has been guilty in this case of producing evidence that is meaningless or of little value, this isn't just the State that has attached importance to this email. Sara Yousef also recognised the value in the email. What else do you think could be in the email?

 

[Going Rogue]

Obviously speculative on my part, but Sara is an experienced lawyer and whatever was in the email she deemed it pertinent and relevant to the case. And whatever WA wrote, it's content was enough to prompt Sara to end the relationship there and then. So I don't think I'm jumping to some wild crazy conclusion that WA wrote something damning and potentially incriminating. I don't think she told Sara she helped plan to kill Dan, but it is not something inconsequential. And whilst the State has been guilty in this case of producing evidence that is meaningless or of little value, this isn't just the State that has attached importance to this email. Sara Yousef also recognised the value in the email. What else do you think could be in the email?

I have no idea what’s in the email, but I think Wendi, if involved, was way too careful to say anything in email that could come back to bite her. I’d be surprised if it its anything with teeth. Sara was moved after hearing Phil Markel’s victim impact statement, and that is what prompted her to reach out to the DA’s office with ‘information’ she thought they should know. My guess is its something along the lines of more information that proves Wendi and her family totally despised Dan to support the motive. I don’t think is anything that’s going to move the needle.

 

[Zedzded]

I have no idea what’s in the email, but I think Wendi, if involved, was way too careful to say anything in email that could come back to bite her.

WA is intelligent and has shown herself to be quite caution and shrewd when it comes to distancing herself from the crime. However, she is a bit of a paradox because she has also done and said things that show her to be very impulsive, irrational and reckless, showing little regard for protecting herself. There are many examples of this, no 1 being her drive down Trescott. As CA said "she just couldn't help herself...."

So it depends which WA was writing the email, cautious diligent WA or crazy mal-adjusted WA... I think she desperately needed Sara's friendship. I think she knew Sara was beginning to doubt her when it came to her maintaining she had no involvement in the crime, so thought if she told Sara she knew her family was involved, but she had nothing to do with it that would be enough to ensure Sara continued supporting her and even sympathising with her.

"My guess is its something along the lines of more information that proves Wendi and her family totally despised Dan to support the motive. I don’t think is anything that’s going to move the needle"

She knew WA very well and they were very close. She knew how acrimonious the divorce was and understood WA and her family's animosity towards DanM. This was public knowledge. WA had pretty much stated this in her initial police interview. The State were already aware of this, there was no need for Sara's deposition. And why would Sara sever the friendship over that? Her friend hated her abusive (in WA's words) ex. That status quo had existed for years prior to the email being sent. This was not news to Sara and again she's a lawyer, she understands the importance of evidence and/or incriminating evidence. WA saying her family hated DanM was not news. The police already had the motive, they needed hard evidence.

 

[Tortoise]

Whilst there may not be enough evidence to indict WA, I firmly believe she was aware and involved in the plot to kill DanM. Aside from all the circumstantial evidence such as the Trescott drive by, lying about it etc there's the email to Sara Yousef. DanM had been dead for 3 years when this email was sent by WA, to Sara. WA had already been publicly listed by the State as an unindicted co-conspirator yet Sara stuck by her friend. And Sara is a lawyer who would be cognisant of how one becomes listed as a unindicted co-conspirator. Yet she maintained their friendship.

However something was said by WA in that email that was serious enough for SY to sever the friendship permanently and contact the authorities, eventually giving a deposition largely based on that email. I believe WA stated in that email that she knew her family was involved in the murder of DanM.

The drive-by is enough for me, with her obvious attempts to distance herself from going there. And now she's locked in to her reason for it, so it's too late to come up with a more plausible explanation. Plus, she didn't drive-by the gym, so she knew precisely where it was going down, IMO.

Her police interview was also a case of poor acting and deception. IMO

 

[Going Rogue]

WA is intelligent and has shown herself to be quite caution and shrewd when it comes to distancing herself from the crime. However, she is a bit of a paradox because she has also done and said things that show her to be very impulsive, irrational and reckless, showing little regard for protecting herself. There are many examples of this, no 1 being her drive down Trescott. As CA said "she just couldn't help herself...."

So it depends which WA was writing the email, cautious diligent WA or crazy mal-adjusted WA... I think she desperately needed Sara's friendship. I think she knew Sara was beginning to doubt her when it came to her maintaining she had no involvement in the crime, so thought if she told Sara she knew her family was involved, but she had nothing to do with it that would be enough to ensure Sara continued supporting her and even sympathising with her.

"My guess is its something along the lines of more information that proves Wendi and her family totally despised Dan to support the motive. I don’t think is anything that’s going to move the needle"

She knew WA very well and they were very close. She knew how acrimonious the divorce was and understood WA and her family's animosity towards DanM. This was public knowledge. WA had pretty much stated this in her initial police interview. The State were already aware of this, there was no need for Sara's deposition. And why would Sara sever the friendship over that? Her friend hated her abusive (in WA's words) ex. That status quo had existed for years prior to the email being sent. This was not news to Sara and again she's a lawyer, she understands the importance of evidence and/or incriminating evidence. WA saying her family hated DanM was not news. The police already had the motive, they needed hard evidence.

Re the email Wendi sent Sara Yousef’s, I believe it was an email Wendi sent to several people that were ‘friends’ or acquaintances of Wendi – titled “My side of the story”. The purpose of the email was to do damage control because Wendi was aware the 20/20 episode was about to drop (In-laws & Outlaws) and she 100% knew (at that time) her family was involved. In a separate email, Sara was even solicited by Wendi (under the request of her counsel) to issue a public statement about Wendi's character (Sara declined). I am sure the email (my side of the story) didn’t say anything close to implicating her family, but I’m sure once that email is released to public record, it will be analyzed and interpreted six ways to Sunday. I’m sure the e-mail was carefully crafted and probably under the advisement / approval of her counsel and I don’t think it will be anything of consequence or something that strengthens the case against Wendi. I do believe it will be something that will not be positive for Wendi’s image, but nothing that progresses the case against Wendi. As I said, probably something that adds more color to what we already know like the hatred he family had towards Dan. Just my prediction, my hopes aren't high that the email will be anything of great substance or something we don't already know.

 

[Zedzded]

Re the email Wendi sent Sara Yousef’s, I believe it was an email Wendi sent to several people that were ‘friends’ or acquaintances of Wendi – titled “My side of the story”

There was an email from WA to Sara entitled "presenting my side of the story." But the email I'm referring to was entitled "self-care" and it's this email that was the catalyst for Sara severing the friendship. That was sent in 2017. But I've just read she did not contact the authorities about it till years later, perhaps as late as 2023. So perhaps it isn't as significant as I thought.