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

[Going Rogue]

Which goes back to my original point. This is (theoretically, at least) evidence that Charles Adelson could provide: testimony about that contents of that phone call.

Yes, if Wendi was in on the plot, the chances of them not discussing the plan (even if talking in code) during the 18-minute call are probably zero. Even if she was just simply aware of the plan and didn’t commit any act of furtherance, I still say the chances are zero it wasn’t discussed. If there is any solid proof she was simply aware of the plan and the prosecution does not feel they have enough evidence to prove ‘conspiracy to commit’, as Zedzded keeps saying, they have the groundwork laid out for accessory after the fact. If they go that route they can pile on other charges like perjury and obstruction of justice.

 

[Zedzded]

I have posted all of this before but here I go again.

I think it is highly likely that the plot was discussed during the 18 minute phone conversation between CA and WA on the morning of the murder. I suspect that WA was freaking out because DM wanted to take the boys swimming that afternoon and she was worried that the murder might not have happened by then. I further suspect that CA assured her during that call that all would be taken care of well before then. Note, WA tells what I believe to be a "half-truth" when she testified that she did discuss the swimming issue with CA during that call. I think she omitted the part about why they discussed this.

Without yet having confirmation that the murder occurred, I believe WA continued to obsess over the idea that DM might have the boys with him later that afternoon while hitmen are still stalking him. I believe THAT is why WA made the impulsive and reckless decision to drive by Trescott. I believe she was hoping to get some type of confirmation that DM was dead, and that is exactly what she got on the drive, and that is exactly why (in my opinion) she took off like a bat out of hell without asking any questions.

Or just panicked because she was worried the hit was not going to go ahead like the previous attempt. Perhaps the hit was supposed to happen after DanM dropped the kids off around 8.30-9.00am? WA knew what his movements were, roughly. She probably knew he would drop the kids off at that time then return home, but she did not factor in that he would go to the gym and when he turned left to go the gym instead of right to go home, things went pear shaped.

This also ties in with the TV repair alibi. TV guy is booked in the exact time as the hit, WA is quickly cleared of any involvement. WA is probably frantically waiting for confirmation from CA. She needs to keep TV guy there as the hit has not happened yet. Eventually she phones CA as she is freaking out, he's trying to calm her down, saying the hit is about to happen any minute. By the time she goes past Trescott she is a complete wreck, not knowing what is going on.

I don't think she was that concerned about the boys. I think she was desperate as she know the court hearing was on Monday and she stood to lose a lot, her career as a lawyer for starters, plus a lot of money. Her whole life depended on this hit.

When I say I don't think she was concerned about the kids. I think as a mother she has some level of attachment with her boys, but I'm not going to call it love. They adored their father, as WA has admitted and she has also confirmed he was a great Dad. If she really loved those boys, she would not have killed their Dad, end of. I can't get inside her head, but I would imagine the level of connection and attachment she has for the boys is on a par with having a pet rabbit. It's cute, she gets to play with it, but if it died she would just get a new one.

This murder did not happened because WA wanted to move to Miami, this murder happened because:
1. WA thought she might lose her career as a lawyer and/or lose a significant amount of money
2. As a narcissistic family the Adelson's had a pathological need to win, they could not face losing in court
3. CA wanted to please mommy
4. DA was enraged she would have to have supervised visits with the boys

note - I don't think WA would have been disbarred, but perhaps she was concerned she would have been.

 

[Luna20]

Or just panicked because she was worried the hit was not going to go ahead like the previous attempt. Perhaps the hit was supposed to happen after DanM dropped the kids off around 8.30-9.00am? WA knew what his movements were, roughly. She probably knew he would drop the kids off at that time then return home, but she did not factor in that he would go to the gym and when he turned left to go the gym instead of right to go home, things went pear shaped.

This also ties in with the TV repair alibi. TV guy is booked in the exact time as the hit, WA is quickly cleared of any involvement. WA is probably frantically waiting for confirmation from CA. She needs to keep TV guy there as the hit has not happened yet. Eventually she phones CA as she is freaking out, he's trying to calm her down, saying the hit is about to happen any minute. By the time she goes past Trescott she is a complete wreck, not knowing what is going on.

I don't think she was that concerned about the boys. I think she was desperate as she know the court hearing was on Monday and she stood to lose a lot, her career as a lawyer for starters, plus a lot of money. Her whole life depended on this hit.

When I say I don't think she was concerned about the kids. I think as a mother she has some level of attachment with her boys, but I'm not going to call it love. They adored their father, as WA has admitted and she has also confirmed he was a great Dad. If she really loved those boys, she would not have killed their Dad, end of. I can't get inside her head, but I would imagine the level of connection and attachment she has for the boys is on a par with having a pet rabbit. It's cute, she gets to play with it, but if it died she would just get a new one.

This murder did not happened because WA wanted to move to Miami, this murder happened because:
1. WA thought she might lose her career as a lawyer and/or lose a significant amount of money
2. As a narcissistic family the Adelson's had a pathological need to win, they could not face losing in court
3. CA wanted to please mommy
4. DA was enraged she would have to have supervised visits with the boys

note - I don't think WA would have been disbarred, but perhaps she was concerned she would have been.

Number 1)
Why would she lose her career?

 

[Zedzded]

Number 1)
Why would she lose her career?

Could she have faced criminal charges? I can't remember what she did, hid money and then lied in court about it? Not enough to get disbarred I guess, but she might have mistakenly believed she would. She is a lawyer and should know, but as she has demonstrated repeatedly, she's not the brightest light in the harbour.

 

[Zedzded]

No, it would not be inadmissable hearsay. It would be a defendant's own statement/admission, which is admissible. Whether CA's testimony is credible is for the jury to decide (much like KM's testimony). It is still evidence.

Ah OK

 

[Luna20]

Could she have faced criminal charges? I can't remember what she did, hid money and then lied in court about it? Not enough to get disbarred I guess, but she might have mistakenly believed she would. She is a lawyer and should know, but as she has demonstrated repeatedly, she's not the brightest light in the harbour.

Thanks. I’m referring to the comment about the reason for the murder. Because she didn’t want to lose her career?

Why would she lose her career before the murder took place?

“This murder did not happened because WA wanted to move to Miami, this murder happened because:
1. WA thought she might lose her career as a lawyer and/or lose a significant amount of money”

 

[Luna20]

Duplicate

 

[Knitpicker]

Which goes back to my original point. This is (theoretically, at least) evidence that Charles Adelson could provide: testimony about that contents of that phone call.

He claimed at his trial a yet 3rd account of that call. He said he spoke to Wendi about issues going on with his relationship with KM. Yet according to WA it was to discuss her upset with DM wanting to take the boys swimming and whether she should fix an unfixable TV or buy a new one.

 

[Knitpicker]

Thanks. I’m referring to the comment about the reason for the murder. Because she didn’t want to lose her career?

Why would she lose her career before the murder took place?

“This murder did not happened because WA wanted to move to Miami, this murder happened because:
1. WA thought she might lose her career as a lawyer and/or lose a significant amount of money”

Because coming up was a trial according to DM’s lawyer. And she stood to lose her license due to the witholding of info regarding her assets during their divorce. So the hit HAD to happen before that. I think the hearing was to be the following week.

 

[Luna20]

Because coming up was a trial according to DM’s lawyer. And she stood to lose her license due to the witholding of info regarding her assets during their divorce. So the hit HAD to happen before that. I think the hearing was to be the following week.

Thanks! That explains everything. She couldn’t afford to lose anything.

 

[Zedzded]

The hearing was on the Monday I believe with the murder happening 3 days earlier on the Friday which could explain WA’s desperation.

 

[Going Rogue]

The hearing was on the Monday I believe with the murder happening 3 days earlier on the Friday which could explain WA’s desperation.

With all the information and details we have on Wendi and Dan’s failing marriage and acrimonious divorce, had Dan been murdered on any date either before or after she filed for divorce you can make a case that she was desperate because of ‘x’ event. In fact, she stood a lot more to gain had it been done while they were still married. Point being, you can take any isolated event with hindsight knowledge and say she was desperate because of x event. Pick any date after they first started marriage counseling and I’ll give you a reason she was desperate to murder Dan. Hindsight knowledge can be a misleading thing when presented in certain ways.

 

[Knitpicker]

Thanks! That explains everything. She couldn’t afford to lose anything.

Right. Its worth watching if you haven’t seen his lawyer on the witness stand.

 

[Knitpicker]

With all the information and details we have on Wendi and Dan’s failing marriage and acrimonious divorce, had Dan been murdered on any date either before or after she filed for divorce you can make a case that she was desperate because of ‘x’ event. In fact, she stood a lot more to gain had it been done while they were still married. Point being, you can take any isolated event with hindsight knowledge and say she was desperate because of x event. Pick any date after they first started marriage counseling and I’ll give you a reason she was desperate to murder Dan. Hindsight knowledge can be a misleading thing when presented in certain ways.

Why would it have been done while they were still married?
All the issues began once they were separated beginning of course after she served him papers (what a horrible thing to do while he was away teaching),took half of everything, moved out without saying where she was, and then what was to follow with the custody issues.
I have to say that I did have more sympathy for her reading Epsteins book and all the things going on from his “sabbatical” from FSU, his venture into imposed dietary restrictions, etc..in 2011 and all leading up to the seperation, but in NO MEANS did he deserve to die over it.

 

[Going Rogue]

Why would it have been done while they were still married?
All the issues began once they were separated beginning of course after she served him papers (what a horrible thing to do while he was away teaching),took half of everything, moved out without saying where she was, and then what was to follow with the custody issues.
I have to say that I did have more sympathy for her reading Epsteins book and all the things going on from his “sabbatical” from FSU, his venture into imposed dietary restrictions, etc..in 2011 and all leading up to the seperation, but in NO MEANS did he deserve to die over it.

If all the issues happened after they were separated, then why did they get separated in the first place? I can give you tons of reasons it would have been more beneficial for Wendi if Dan had been murdered prior to the divorce starting with not paying for the high-priced divorce attorney she hired and other spousal benefits. She wouldn’t have had to deal with the issue of not having control of the life insurance policy AND it would have gone to her directly. As you know his policy was changed to his boys being the beneficiaries and the funds are controlled by Dan’s sister.

I do recall Epstein being careful when speaking about Dan during Judy’s interview and it seemed clear to me that Epstein had information on Dan that wasn’t very flattering. Most are not willing to point out his flaws and Epstein walked that fine line.

 

[Knitpicker]

If all the issues happened after they were separated, then why did they get separated in the first place? I can give you tons of reasons it would have been more beneficial for Wendi if Dan had been murdered prior to the divorce starting with not paying for the high-priced divorce attorney she hired and other spousal benefits. She wouldn’t have had to deal with the issue of not having control of the life insurance policy AND it would have gone to her directly. As you know his policy was changed to his boys being the beneficiaries and the funds are controlled by Dan’s sister.

I do recall Epstein being careful when speaking about Dan during Judy’s interview and it seemed clear to me that Epstein had information on Dan that wasn’t very flattering. Most are not willing to point out his flaws and Epstein walked that fine line.

The life insurance policy was only purchased while they were in counseling which was a few months before the “Pearl Harbor” day. Yeah she wasn’t expecting the change. She should have known. Still it would have always been the boys.I am sure the life insurance policy was her idea. I know he already had some with his job. It wasn’t only the money. She didn’t want him around. Not in her kids lives or deal with joint custody. Look how fast she changed the names
I think Epstein did a great job. I am now listening to the Michael Williams book he wrote. I am sorry he got such a bad rap, and I don’t know why. Could it be his book would be in competition with another?

Mike Williams mother encouraged Epstein to write the book about her own sons murder.
I agree with you that no one wants to see anything wrong with DM.
I think a big problem was his not going to DA’s mothers funeral claiming that a “Cohen” could not be in a cemetery bc they would be defiled.
Well, Ruth is a Cohen-her father…and she wrote a book called “The Unveiling” which is when family and friends go to the cemetery to unveil the tombstone.
Why would RM write a book with that name if she or her son would be defiled in a cemetery?
So I think that was a really wrong decision of DM. A Cohen also could not own land (they took care of the temple) so people had to take care of them.
So DM did own a house…and land….so you have to be careful not to be hypocritical and legalistic.

PS He mentioned Judy at the end of his book. Maybe she helped with the epilogue. She was new on the scene when his book came out so she couldnt have helped him with that. Only his recent update to it.

 

[SubtlePseudonym]

Thinking… DNA evidence is statistical based (odds are). Is it possible to run the odds (I am serious) that the conspirators phone call between themselves, night before and day of are not related to the same subject matter. How would this formula be constructed? And then the odds of the same pattern in June? And then the combined odds of it not being about what we now know was at least one reason for some of the calls…murder. If a formula could be constructed, would it approach DNA odds?

 

[Knitpicker]

Thinking… DNA evidence is statistical based (odds are). Is it possible to run the odds (I am serious) that the conspirators phone call between themselves, night before and day of are not related to the same subject matter. How would this formula be constructed? And then the odds of the same pattern in June? And then the combined odds of it not being about what we now know was at least one reason for some of the calls…murder. If a formula could be constructed, would it approach DNA odds?

Yes many have mentioned a pattern. I think the focus has been on the actual hit in July, so there hasn’t been as much focus on June. At least in court.

 

[Zedzded]

The supposed first hit barely gets a mention. You'd think it would be a treasure trove of circumstantial evidence. Dozens of phone calls and text messages on the day of the murder between the hitmen - KM - CA - DA - WA..

 

[Going Rogue]

The supposed first hit barely gets a mention. You'd think it would be a treasure trove of circumstantial evidence. Dozens of phone calls and text messages on the day of the murder between the hitmen - KM - CA - DA - WA..

Agreed, I don’t recall any evidence in any of the trials re the communication trail during the June trip. Two thoughts come to kind:

1) Maybe there was nothing out of the ordinary on the trip in June and the reason for the ‘high’ call volume on the July trip was because the first trip failed and Donna wanting to be more ‘hands-on’ OR simply just more eager to get ‘real-time’ information. Thus the 'flurry' of calls on the July trip.

2) Maybe there was a decent amount of calls between Charlie, Katie & Sigfredo on the June trip BUT Donna & Wendi were not part of the communication trail. In that case the prosecution would not want to highlight the call / communication details from the June trip because it would be beneficial to Donna & Wendi’s cases.