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

[Zedzded]

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.

I would imagine that WA and DA would not have been able to help themselves. So reckless and impulsive. As the plot fell apart the calls would have increased. There would have been a high degree of stress, anxiety and intensity.

 

[Knitpicker]

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.

That was the trip that LR said DM was with the kids in the car so he couldn't do it. Also talk of the guys being in the apartments behind the house and the possible transfer of something small and black. Some say a possible remote control garage door opener being left there for them.
Also that was the time Wendi got very sick to her stomach and some say she wanted JL to pass by the house but that wouldnt have been a route he’d take to get pepto (I don’t think).

 

[Going Rogue]

That was the trip that LR said DM was with the kids in the car so he couldn't do it. Also talk of the guys being in the apartments behind the house and the possible transfer of something small and black. Some say a possible remote control garage door opener being left there for them.
Also that was the time Wendi got very sick to her stomach and some say she wanted JL to pass by the house but that wouldnt have been a route he’d take to get pepto (I don’t think).

The sighting behind the apartments is written in Sigfredo’s arrest affidavit. Its possible it was them, but I know it was brought up on a uTube discussion and Monica Jordan said it was later proven that it was not Sigfredo & Rivera. Not sure how she knew that? Regardless, I have looked at that piece of evidence before and even if it was them, the ‘theory’ of them retrieving something (remote or whatever) is pure conjecture. In the affidavit the witness said one of the guys was carrying a black object in his hand. You definitely heard the remote story – but like many details in this case, theories start to get confused with facts. Same holds true with the pepto ‘theory’. Yes, its a fact Jeff said he ran out to get her pepto because she was sick to her stomach BUT the ‘theory’ that the reason was Wendi was trying to get him to pass by Dan’s house is just a theory.

I have too many details of this case ingrained in my head. I can even tell you where I first heard both of those theories. The remote theory was from our good friend Tim F and not sure if he still believes it? The pepto theory was from one of your x friends (lol) and it was discussed in a uTube video. Hint it was in the video of the interview with the author of audio book you are reading.

 

[apeXperience]

On Charles Adelson’s docket as of 1/24/2025

ORDER GRANTING POST CONVICTION MOTION:

1. ORDER GRANTING IN PART
   The Judge agrees that there were 2 errors in the sentencing sheet calculating the minimum years in prison allowed
   
   
2. AND DENYING IN PART
   The Judge denies the re-sentencing request
   
   
3. DEFENDANTS MOTION TO CORRECT SENTENCING ERROR
   The Judge indicates that the 2 errors in the sentencing sheet have no effect on his sentencing decisions. He did not consider the minimum allowed by the sentencing sheet. The Judge has decided to impose the maximum "30 Years x 2; consecutive".

Conclusion

• The motion for re-sentencing generated many billable hours for the attorneys, for little expectation of success for Charles Adelson
• It appears Charles Adelson is milked for more billable hours by the attorneys, stressing his proceedings endlessly for zero real prospect of positive outcome

 

[apeXperience]

On Donna Adelson’s docket as of 1/27/2025

• DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR IN CAMERA EXAMINATION OF DEFENSE INVESTIGATOR: Granted
• DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR CHANGE OF VENUE: Not have been decided yet
• ORDER DENYING (requests to unseal proceedings): Granted
• INSTRUCTIONS FROM JUDGE SET HEARING:
  
  1. ON WEDNESDAY, JAN. 29, 2025 AT 11:30
  2. FOR 15 MINS
  3. ON MOTION TO PERPETUATE TESTIMONY
  4. THIS WILL BE IN COURTROOM 3B
  5. THE DEFENDANT DOES NOT NEED TO BE TRANSPORTED

Conclusion

• This hearing seems importantly consequential. It has the potential of affecting the tone and the substance of Donna Adelson’s proceedings going forward

 

[Tricia]

Remember these obnoxious type ads that were everywhere on Websleuths? You don't want them to return, right? If you could please subscribe to DNA Solves.com and make a monthly donation. Not only does this keep these awful ads off of Websleuths, but you are helping the families of the missing get the answers they deserve.
Find out how you can become a subscriber to DNA Solves.com by CLICKING HERE.
If you want to make a single donation, go to www.dnasolves.com and pick a case you would like to donate to.
Do not comment on this thread. CLICK HERE to ask questions and to learn more.
Thank you very much.

 

[Zedzded]

I wonder why the first trial wasn

Conclusion

• The motion for re-sentencing generated many billable hours for the attorneys, for little expectation of success for Charles Adelson
• It appears Charles Adelson is milked for more billable hours by the attorneys, stressing his proceedings endlessly for zero real prospect of positive outcome

Years and years they carefully built their fortune and literally spent it all in the last few years on legal fees. I've guesstimated close to $6 million now.

 

[Knitpicker]

The sighting behind the apartments is written in Sigfredo’s arrest affidavit. Its possible it was them, but I know it was brought up on a uTube discussion and Monica Jordan said it was later proven that it was not Sigfredo & Rivera. Not sure how she knew that? Regardless, I have looked at that piece of evidence before and even if it was them, the ‘theory’ of them retrieving something (remote or whatever) is pure conjecture. In the affidavit the witness said one of the guys was carrying a black object in his hand. You definitely heard the remote story – but like many details in this case, theories start to get confused with facts. Same holds true with the pepto ‘theory’. Yes, its a fact Jeff said he ran out to get her pepto because she was sick to her stomach BUT the ‘theory’ that the reason was Wendi was trying to get him to pass by Dan’s house is just a theory.

I have too many details of this case ingrained in my head. I can even tell you where I first heard both of those theories. The remote theory was from our good friend Tim F and not sure if he still believes it? The pepto theory was from one of your x friends (lol) and it was discussed in a uTube video. Hint it was in the video of the interview with the author of audio book you are reading.

Lol. “X” friend..Hmmm. Yeah Tim F hasn’t been around much. He would not let me spell out the word “remote control” bc he was paranoid about it.
Well WA would have been sick due to the impending murder not to just get Jeff to drive by. I always thought maybe she was on the phone when he left.Like she had to get him out to make a call and she just happened to have her stomach in knots. But not sure we ever got a lot of her calls that night, did we? I hope I don’t get full blown dementia by the time this case is over!
Btw in the audio book on the Mike Williams case, I found out Judge Hankinson used to coach or watch Jack Campbell play ball in HS I think which is how they know eachother.
What did you think of Hankinson for KM’s trial? (To change the subject a bit).

 

[Going Rogue]

Lol. “X” friend..Hmmm. Yeah Tim F hasn’t been around much. He would not let me spell out the word “remote control” bc he was paranoid about it.
Well WA would have been sick due to the impending murder not to just get Jeff to drive by. I always thought maybe she was on the phone when he left.Like she had to get him out to make a call and she just happened to have her stomach in knots. But not sure we ever got a lot of her calls that night, did we? I hope I don’t get full blown dementia by the time this case is over!
Btw in the audio book on the Mike Williams case, I found out Judge Hankinson used to coach or watch Jack Campbell play ball in HS I think which is how they know eachother.
What did you think of Hankinson for KM’s trial? (To change the subject a bit).

I thought he was a good judge and I heard nothing but good things about him. Both Tim J and ML spoke very highly of him and they both tried cases in his court. I recall Tim J saying he was very fair but also very tough. His nickname was ‘Hang’em Hankinson’ according to Tim.

 

[Niner]

Wednesday, January 29th:
*Motions Hearing (@ 11:30am ET) - FL - Daniel Eric Markel (41) (shot to death July 18, 2014, Tallahassee) - *Donna Sue Adelson (64 @ time of crime/73/now 75) arrested by FBI @ Miami Intl. Airport (11/13/23) on out-of-County warrant from Leon County arrest Warrant [#FW231o2353] & indicted (11/15/23), charged (11/21/23) & arraigned (12/11/23) with 1st degree murder, conspiracy to commit 1st degree murder & solicitation to commit 1st degree murder. No bond. Held at Miami-Dade County Jail (Turner Guilford Knight Correctional Center. Leon County has 15 days to extradite from Miami-Dade County). Transferred from Miami-Dade to Leon County on 11/20/23. Held without bond (murder), $25K (conspiracy) & $25K (solicitation) on 11/21/23. Plead not guilty. Leon County
Jury selection was set to begin on 9/17/24 has been vacated & continued on 6/3/25.
Trial was set to begin on 9/23/24 has been cancelled & will begin on 6/9/25.
Leon County Circuit Judge Stephen S. Everett presiding. Prosecutor Georgia Cappelman & Assistant State attorney Sarah Dugan. Defense attorney Adam J. Komisar.
Case & Court info from 11/13/23 thru 9/17/24 reference post #269 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...murdered-by-hitmen-4-guilty-25.724818/page-14
10/7/24 Docket update: Order disqualifying defense counsel [Robert A. Morris & Adam Komisar] by Judge Stephen S. Everett on his own motion. See post #84, page 5, thread #25. The Judge canceled the Case management of 10/15/24. Instead, next case management is for 12/10/24.
12/10/24 Update: Mentioned during today's case management hearing, trial may occur mid-June through early July, Adelson's new attorneys say that time frame fits with their schedules as well as their witnesses. Judge says it may work for him also but he needs to check his personal calendar. Next case management hearing is 2/11/25 @ 2:30pm/ Defense will probably need to get new investigators as the ones used by the former attorneys may be considered fruit from the forbidden tree; discovery should be turned over by the next hearing date & a trial date will be set then.
12/23/24 Updates: Discovery, depositions, expert lists, witnesses & materials due by Wednesday 4/30/25. Motion in Limine at the latest due 5/2025. Filing of all pretrial motions on or before Wednesday, 4/30/25. Witness lists & exhibits exchanged on or before Wednesday, 4/30/25. Pretrial hearing on Friday, 5/16/25 @ 9am, jury selection begins on 6/3/25 @ 8am & trial will begin on or before 6/9/25.
1/2/25 Docket update: Released Sealed In Camera-Motion Hearing from 9/6/24. For more info reference post #278, page 14, thread #25.
1/27/25 Docket update: Defendant's Motion for In Camera examination of defense investigator-Granted. Defendant's Motion for Change of Venue-Not have been decided yet. Order Denying (requests to unseal proceedings)-Granted. Instructions from Judge. Set motions hearing on 1/29/25 @ 11:30am on motion to perpetuate testimony. Defendant does not need to be transported. Conclusion: This hearing seems importantly consequential. It has the potential of affecting the tone & the substance of Adelson’s proceedings going forward.

 

[Going Rogue]

Sorry if this is redundant, and it may seem like I’m beating a dead horse asking this question, but I’m struggling to understand why there are still so many people continuing to believe Wendi will be arrested soon and that the case against her is so strong. There are a couple of recent posts on another platform asking the simple question – “what evidence is out there that would be a sure conviction for Wendi on conspiracy charges”? Most responses are just restating all the usual talking points that make a case that many of Wendi’s actions seem to show she likely had knowledge of the crime. Also, many cite Wendi had to give the hitmen Dan’s schedule but there is no proof of that - just conjecture. If there was proof of that, she would have already been charged. Another leading response is "didn’t you see Carl Steinbecks’s video, he explains it all”. Yes, I’ve seen it, but his video does not provide the answer I’m looking for. If you disagree, I’d respectfully ask that you provide a specific points in Carl’s video or other points in general that help me get over my mental hurdle. I don’t know what others see that I’m missing? If the case against Wendi is so strong as purported by many in social media for years, why can’t anyone outline how it’s so strong and the key to a conviction?

 

[Niner]

So - no new news on the last motions hearing on Wed?

 

[SamiSleuth]

So - no new news on the last motions hearing on Wed?

Link to short summary article in the Tallahassee Democrat:

Donna Adelson gives surprise testimony about jailhouse talk and family 'blackmail'​

Looks to me like: the defense team wanted judge to force 2 inmates to appear for depositions. DA testified regarding information received from these two inmates re: K. Magbaunua talking about a plot to blackmail Charlie. Defense was concerned these 2 inmates would soon be released, might go back to using drugs, and thus might be unavailable as a witness for the trial.
Judge denied the motion and suggested the defense just subpoena the witness(es) for trial. He did say he'd reconsider if the situation progressed to something more than a supposition.

 

[opt]

So the defense is changing from double extortion to blackmail? Will it still start with murder on spec?

These stories have the believability of a late season episode of Lost.

 

[Zedzded]

Sorry if this is redundant, and it may seem like I’m beating a dead horse asking this question, but I’m struggling to understand why there are still so many people continuing to believe Wendi will be arrested soon and that the case against her is so strong. There are a couple of recent posts on another platform asking the simple question – “what evidence is out there that would be a sure conviction for Wendi on conspiracy charges”? Most responses are just restating all the usual talking points that make a case that many of Wendi’s actions seem to show she likely had knowledge of the crime. Also, many cite Wendi had to give the hitmen Dan’s schedule but there is no proof of that - just conjecture. If there was proof of that, she would have already been charged. Another leading response is "didn’t you see Carl Steinbecks’s video, he explains it all”. Yes, I’ve seen it, but his video does not provide the answer I’m looking for. If you disagree, I’d respectfully ask that you provide a specific points in Carl’s video or other points in general that help me get over my mental hurdle. I don’t know what others see that I’m missing? If the case against Wendi is so strong as purported by many in social media for years, why can’t anyone outline how it’s so strong and the key to a conviction?

Someone did make a good point re conspiracy. I think it can be demonstrated that WA had knowledge the crime was going to be committed and if the jury accepts that, all that needs to happen is for the State to prove beyond a reasonable doubt she agreed with the co-conspirators that DanM should be killed, which would be conspiracy. "Agreed" is a bit vague and ambiguous I suppose. Can someone agree without saying they agree i.e is not disagreeing agreeing?? Well you never said no!

 

[Going Rogue]

Someone did make a good point re conspiracy. I think it can be demonstrated that WA had knowledge the crime was going to be committed and if the jury accepts that, all that needs to happen is for the State to prove beyond a reasonable doubt she agreed with the co-conspirators that DanM should be killed, which would be conspiracy. "Agreed" is a bit vague and ambiguous I suppose. Can someone agree without saying they agree i.e is not disagreeing agreeing?? Well you never said no!

Thanks for the response. You had me go back to the referenced thread and I see the comment you are referring posted by the law student. He / she is referencing the FL statute on 777.04 “Attempts, solicitation, and conspiracy”. My understanding is the language in this statute is for crimes that were planned but failed to materialize. Subsection 3 which the law student referenced, does speak to a person that ‘agrees’, but my understanding is that in the context of that specific statute its referring to someone that agreed to a conspiracy that was thwarted. The assumption or implication is they ‘agreed’ to commit the offence – it’s not the same as having ‘knowledge’ a crime was happening.

 

[Zedzded]

Thanks for the response. You had me go back to the referenced thread and I see the comment you are referring posted by the law student. He / she is referencing the FL statute on 777.04 “Attempts, solicitation, and conspiracy”. My understanding is the language in this statute is for crimes that were planned but failed to materialize. Subsection 3 which the law student referenced, does speak to a person that ‘agrees’, but my understanding is that in the context of that specific statute its referring to someone that agreed to a conspiracy that was thwarted. The assumption or implication is they ‘agreed’ to commit the offence – it’s not the same as having ‘knowledge’ a crime was happening.

Yeah it's a bit confusing. I don't think WA agreed anyway. It was (IMO) a case of CA saying he had a solution, don't ask any questions, wink, wink, nudge, nudge..

 

[Going Rogue]

Yeah it's a bit confusing. I don't think WA agreed anyway. It was (IMO) a case of CA saying he had a solution, don't ask any questions, wink, wink, nudge, nudge..

I believe even if Wendi was told it was happening, and essentially ‘agreed’ as long as she didn’t do anything that contributed to the crime in ANY manner (part of the planing, giving information or any aid whatsoever to assist with the crime), that statute still wouldn’t apply. If she contributed in ANY way, she is 100% guilty of conspiracy. IMO, the law student is misinterpreting the word ‘agree’ in the context used in the statute referenced. I interpret it as “agreeing to conspire” the way it's written in the statute.

Maybe one of our resident law scholars can chime in re my interpretation of 777.04. Perhaps I’m wrong.

 

[Zedzded]

I believe even if Wendi was told it was happening, and essentially ‘agreed’ as long as she didn’t do anything that contributed to the crime in ANY manner (part of the planing, giving information or any aid whatsoever to assist with the crime), that statute still wouldn’t apply. If she contributed in ANY way, she is 100% guilty of conspiracy. IMO, the law student is misinterpreting the word ‘agree’ in the context used in the statute referenced. I interpret it as “agreeing to conspire” the way it's written in the statute.

Maybe one of our resident law scholars can chime in re my interpretation of 777.04. Perhaps I’m wrong.

100% agree and that's how it's read in Australian law. The agreeance is one party agreeing with another to commit a crime. A asks B if he wants to rob a bank, B agrees that he wants to rob a bank with A. Or B says I know when the bank vault is open or you can hide the money at my house.

I think the student is interpreting it as B simply saying robbing a bank is a good idea. If CA tells WA he is hiring hitmen to kill DanM and she says it's a great idea and he should go and do it, there is no crime. It only becomes a crime if she contributes in some way (conspiracy) or after the murder does or says something that allows the co-conspirators to evade justice (Accessory after the fact).

 

[Niner]

Link to short summary article in the Tallahassee Democrat:

Donna Adelson gives surprise testimony about jailhouse talk and family 'blackmail'​

Looks to me like: the defense team wanted judge to force 2 inmates to appear for depositions. DA testified regarding information received from these two inmates re: K. Magbaunua talking about a plot to blackmail Charlie. Defense was concerned these 2 inmates would soon be released, might go back to using drugs, and thus might be unavailable as a witness for the trial.
Judge denied the motion and suggested the defense just subpoena the witness(es) for trial. He did say he'd reconsider if the situation progressed to something more than a supposition.

Thanks!
Going to "assume" next is case management hearing on 2/11/25.