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

[Knitpicker]

"the false narrative that this was a bitter custody battle."

Oh no it was perfectly amicable!! Lol. This is called "The banana bread defence." DA baked some banana bread for DanM so therefore the divorce was not bitter.

And babysat the kids…

 

[Ferpo]

Why are they taking WA's deposition?

They just want to make sure they know what WA is going to say when the State calls her as a witness. They know already, they just want to hear it for themselves.

 

[Going Rogue]

Why are they taking WA's deposition?

Donna's defense team better be doing all the ‘expected’ things / due diligence in order to provide Donna with a zealous defense. If it can be reasonably proven Donna was not given a zealous defense (no matter how guilty we know she is) it is legitimate grounds for ineffective counsel. I would say not deposing Wendi would be an error and would be part of an ‘ineffective’ counsel claim filed by Donna post conviction. I’m sure Donna’s legal team reviewed Wendi’s police interview and all three trial testimonies. Obviously in the three trials where Wendi was a state’s witness, Donna was not on trial. I’m sure there are ‘questions’ they might have for Wendi that were not covered in the previous trials that ‘might’ benefit Donna’s defense (whatever that might be) and were not addressed in her police interview. Donna’s defense team can’t just ‘go through the motions’ – they need to provide her with a ‘zealous’ defense.

 

[Going Rogue]

One thing that hasn’t made sense to me is that I’m positive I remember Wendi telling Isom that the TV repair man was there two hours ( something like 8 - 10a, then she worked on her paper that she sent to library for help with citations before she left for her errands and lunch).

I can’t imagine how it would take a technician 2 hours to see the TV screen was cracked and advise Wendi it wasn’t worth fixing. Did she not give Isom a correct time span? Did she purposely stall the tech for two hours as a solid alibi? Of course I’m sure the tech’s receipt would indicate a start and stop time so she would have been stupid to lie about him being there two hours if he wasn’t.

This just seems like another slippery detail she has provided. Like saying she had laryngitis and couldn’t talk to Dan about the boys’ school earlier that week, when in actuality she was able to take a long walk with her friend (Jane?) and dump all her woes about Dan.

OMO.

I believe she told Isom the repair guy was ‘scheduled’ to arrive between 8 and 10. She was just giving the window of time (not length of the visit) and then said he came early. I’m not sure how long he was there, but have seen many theories that Wendi was trying to stall him. I think that is one of those details (stalling him) that is overanalyzed.

 

[Knitpicker]

Donna's defense team better be doing all the ‘expected’ things / due diligence in order to provide Donna with a zealous defense. If it can be reasonably proven Donna was not given a zealous defense (no matter how guilty we know she is) it is legitimate grounds for ineffective counsel. I would say not deposing Wendi would be an error and would be part of an ‘ineffective’ counsel claim filed by Donna post conviction. I’m sure Donna’s legal team reviewed Wendi’s police interview and all three trial testimonies. Obviously in the three trials where Wendi was a state’s witness, Donna was not on trial. I’m sure there are ‘questions’ they might have for Wendi that were not covered in the previous trials that ‘might’ benefit Donna’s defense (whatever that might be) and were not addressed in her police interview. Donna’s defense team can’t just ‘go through the motions’ – they need to provide her with a ‘zealous’ defense.

Why do you suppose Rashbaum didn’t take a deposition from Wendi? Charlie seemed surprised at trial and even said “I don’t know if I heard (watched) that” (her Isom interview)

Yet he bought a jury consultant.

 

[Going Rogue]

Why do you suppose Rashbaum didn’t take a deposition from Wendi? Charlie seemed surprised at trial and even said “I don’t know if I heard (watched) that” (her Isom interview)

Yet he bought a jury consultant.

Depending on the defense strategy (meaning the defense they are arguing) deposing certain state witnesses might not be beneficial to the trial strategy or may not be in the best interest of your client’s defense / trial strategy. I can’t think of valid reason (with hindsight info) of why Rashbaun would have / should have deposed Wendi with the ridiculous ‘double extortion’ defense. As an example, if Rashbaum / Charlie’s defense strategy was ‘Wendi did it” and she was framing Charlie and he did not depose Wendi – it would have been a critical misstep not to depose her AND a valid claim of ineffective counsel. It’s dependent on defensive strategy. Re Donna’s team deposing Wendi, its strategy dependent and we don’t know what their trial strategy will be so I can't say definitively whether or not a decision not to depose her 'could' be viewed as ineffective counsel. Regardless, its good they are covering the bases.

 

[IQuestion]

Donna's defense team better be doing all the ‘expected’ things / due diligence in order to provide Donna with a zealous defense. If it can be reasonably proven Donna was not given a zealous defense (no matter how guilty we know she is) it is legitimate grounds for ineffective counsel. I would say not deposing Wendi would be an error and would be part of an ‘ineffective’ counsel claim filed by Donna post conviction. I’m sure Donna’s legal team reviewed Wendi’s police interview and all three trial testimonies. Obviously in the three trials where Wendi was a state’s witness, Donna was not on trial. I’m sure there are ‘questions’ they might have for Wendi that were not covered in the previous trials that ‘might’ benefit Donna’s defense (whatever that might be) and were not addressed in her police interview. Donna’s defense team can’t just ‘go through the motions’ – they need to provide her with a ‘zealous’ defense.

Zealous and EXPENSIVE?

 

[Knitpicker]

Depending on the defense strategy (meaning the defense they are arguing) deposing certain state witnesses might not be beneficial to the trial strategy or may not be in the best interest of your client’s defense / trial strategy. I can’t think of valid reason (with hindsight info) of why Rashbaun would have / should have deposed Wendi with the ridiculous ‘double extortion’ defense. As an example, if Rashbaum / Charlie’s defense strategy was ‘Wendi did it” and she was framing Charlie and he did not depose Wendi – it would have been a critical misstep not to depose her AND a valid claim of ineffective counsel. It’s dependent on defensive strategy. Re Donna’s team deposing Wendi, its strategy dependent and we don’t know what their trial strategy will be so I can't say definitively whether or not a decision not to depose her 'could' be viewed as ineffective counsel. Regardless, its good they are covering the bases.

Yes you are right. I thought about that after I sent..Donna And Wendi’s correspondence during the divorce —-charlie wasn’t a part of all that. We have also never seen any of Wendi’s emails back to Donna. Wendi I know said she didn’t reply to them (or at least one that was pointed out at trial).
This case and legal strategies…really complex.
It also seemed at trial Charlie was trying to make us believe he was so far removed that he never even saw Wendi’s Isom interview?
But yeah Its good Donna isn’t with Rashbaum. (Well good for her lol)…you always give a well thought out response. Thanks!

 

[Knitpicker]

Depending on the defense strategy (meaning the defense they are arguing) deposing certain state witnesses might not be beneficial to the trial strategy or may not be in the best interest of your client’s defense / trial strategy. I can’t think of valid reason (with hindsight info) of why Rashbaun would have / should have deposed Wendi with the ridiculous ‘double extortion’ defense. As an example, if Rashbaum / Charlie’s defense strategy was ‘Wendi did it” and she was framing Charlie and he did not depose Wendi – it would have been a critical misstep not to depose her AND a valid claim of ineffective counsel. It’s dependent on defensive strategy. Re Donna’s team deposing Wendi, its strategy dependent and we don’t know what their trial strategy will be so I can't say definitively whether or not a decision not to depose her 'could' be viewed as ineffective counsel. Regardless, it’s good they are covering the bases.

Did you see TCM’s interview of Shoddricks friends baby momma? In it Isom and Sanford ask about June 24th. So now we know that was the date of the second attempt. I dont think we have that info before, right? Not that it makes a difference…I can’t remember in the timeline where WA was that week. Do you?
Wasn’t it the last week of June that Jeffrey and Wendi had that falling out/ fight? (Maybe that was the last week in May-can’t remember)Was that before she spent the 2 weeks in Miami before the murder week? I can’t believe I am forgetting things I had clearly in my mind…

 

[amicuscurie]

Did you see TCM’s interview of Shoddricks friends baby momma? In it Isom and Sanford ask about June 24th. So now we know that was the date of the second attempt. I dont think we have that info before, right? Not that it makes a difference…but in my covid brain I can’t remember in the timeline where WA was that week. Do you?
Wasn’t it the last week of June that Jeffrey and Wendi had that falling out/ fight? Was that before she spent the 2 weeks in Miami before the murder week? I can’t believe I am forgetting things I had clearly in my mind…

I had thought the first attempt was in early June and the second was when the murder actually happened. I am not aware of any other attempt.

 

[newbysleuther]

They just want to make sure they know what WA is going to say when the State calls her as a witness. They know already, they just want to hear it for themselves.

What's interesting is Katie's lawyers tried deposing her and she tried to block it, then was forced to but ended up pleading the fifth to most of the questions. That is the entire basis of Katherine Magbanua's appeal (I'll post it here if you're interested).

 

[Going Rogue]

Did you see TCM’s interview of Shoddricks friends baby momma? In it Isom and Sanford ask about June 24th. So now we know that was the date of the second attempt. I dont think we have that info before, right? Not that it makes a difference…I can’t remember in the timeline where WA was that week. Do you?
Wasn’t it the last week of June that Jeffrey and Wendi had that falling out/ fight? (Maybe that was the last week in May-can’t remember)Was that before she spent the 2 weeks in Miami before the murder week? I can’t believe I am forgetting things I had clearly in my mind…

I did see the interview you referenced but it was a long time ago – ML posted that a long time ago but I don’t remember any particular details that seemed relevant to the case. The first attempt was during the first week of June. I’m not sure what the date of June 24th was in reference to, but I am certain the first attempt (with Rivera) was the first week of June. I say first w/ ‘Rivera’ because there is also speculation Sigfredo went on another separate trip with King Anthony prior to his two trips with Rivera

 

[Knitpicker]

I did see the interview you referenced but it was a long time ago – ML posted that a long time ago but I don’t remember any particular details that seemed relevant to the case. The first attempt was during the first week of June. I’m not sure what the date of June 24th was in reference to, but I am certain the first attempt (with Rivera) was the first week of June. I say first w/ ‘Rivera’ because there is also speculation Sigfredo went on another separate trip with King Anthony prior to his two trips with Rivera

Yes so it’s June 24 with King Anthony. The relevance is what was going on with Wendi at the time. Freaking out? Sick? Etc.
I never saw it before.

 

[Knitpicker]

I had thought the first attempt was in early June and the second was when the murder actually happened. I am not aware of any other attempt.

Yes we always knew there was another attempt. Just didn’t know the time. That ends my theory that it was the 1st week of July.

 

[Going Rogue]

Yes so it’s June 24 with King Anthony. The relevance is what was going on with Wendi at the time. Freaking out? Sick? Etc.
I never saw it before.

I’m not saying June 24th was the trip with King Anthony – just that there was a potential third trip Sigfredo was on without Rivera. That trip is just speculation in the ‘community’ and there isn’t any evidence (that is public) even supporting that trip. As far as Wendi whereabouts in late June, I’m fairly certain she was in Miami at that time – it was just before Harvey’s 70th B-Day bash. On the 24th she was probably icing the slap marks on her a$$ and helping Charlie call in the paella order while cleaning out her childhood bedroom

 

[Knitpicker]

I’m not saying June 24th was the trip with King Anthony – just that there was a potential third trip Sigfredo was on without Rivera. That trip is just speculation in the ‘community’ and there isn’t any evidence (that is public) even supporting that trip. As far as Wendi whereabouts in late June, I’m fairly certain she was in Miami at that time – it was just before Harvey’s 70th B-Day bash. On the 24th she was probably icing the slap marks on her a$$ and helping Charlie call in the paella order while cleaning out her childhood bedroom

Isom and Sanford specifically asked the red topped lady about the 24th so I’d say that is the time. I replayed it 3 times to make sure I got it right. It was never brought up in court prob bc it didn't involve the 2, but I’d think it’s still important. When I have more time I’ll quote what they asked her about it. I did think it had to be in between the June 4/5 and actually day it happened.

It seems since WA had the kids the 2 weeks in Miami the weeks before, then the 24th would have been a Wendi week. Just out of curiosity would be interesting if DM was in town.

Lol about the other stuff. I’ll refrain from commenting further

 

[IQuestion]

Am I the only one who sees the craziness of DA on the stand? First,
she doesn't call the police when she thinks she is being blackmailed for $5,000 by a large man (a half a block from) near her grandons' school. But, can hardly wait to get into court and tell the world she just got extorted for packages of Ramen noodles??? Mixed up priorities for sure.
After watching her on the witness stand, I think her best approach is to say nothing and let her attorneys do their job.
IMO

 

[Knitpicker]

CORRECTION!!! They guys said early June and when SHE said June 2014,(it sounded like June 24th… last night way past my bedtime I replayed it twice and it’s the way she said it….I wanted to make that correction. Darn..

So my theory may still be right. Lol.
Timestamp @45:58

 

[Going Rogue]

Isom and Sanford specifically asked the red topped lady about the 24th so I’d say that is the time. I replayed it 3 times to make sure I got it right. It was never brought up in court prob bc it didn't involve the 2, but I’d think it’s still important. When I have more time I’ll quote what they asked her about it. I did think it had to be in between the June 4/5 and actually day it happened.

It seems since WA had the kids the 2 weeks in Miami the weeks before, then the 24th would have been a Wendi week. Just out of curiosity would be interesting if DM was in town.

Lol about the other stuff. I’ll refrain from commenting further

I’m not sure it really matters. Here’s why - we know for a fact that Rivera and Sigfredo carried out the hit and that Charlie, Donna, & Katie were directly involved AND possibly Wendi & Harvey had some level of involvement. If there was another failed trip on June 24th (or any date) – it doesn’t change anything. King Anthony died in a motorcycle accident so if he was involved in that other trip, he can’t be questioned but even if he was still alive, what information could he have possibly have that would be helpful? I am 100% convinced there was no direct communication about ANY details of the hit / plan with any Adelson EXCEPT Charlie with any of the ‘hired’ hit team AND I believe Charlie ONLY communicated with Katie. Everyone else was walled off.

 

[Knitpicker]

I’m not sure it really matters. Here’s why - we know for a fact that Rivera and Sigfredo carried out the hit and that Charlie, Donna, & Katie were directly involved AND possibly Wendi & Harvey had some level of involvement. If there was another failed trip on June 24th (or any date) – it doesn’t change anything. King Anthony died in a motorcycle accident so if he was involved in that other trip, he can’t be questioned but even if he was still alive, what information could he have possibly have that would be helpful? I am 100% convinced there was no direct communication about ANY details of the hit / plan with any Adelson EXCEPT Charlie with any of the ‘hired’ hit team AND I believe Charlie ONLY communicated with Katie. Everyone else was walled off.

I already corrected my comments. Really sorry about that..Remember the July Jetski “event”. I don’t want to go back over a year ago bc we discussed it. And I know it made a couple of you guys upset. For me, it now opens it up to the possibility of the July 1st… Sorry but I really thought the young lady said the 24th. It was a little low and my ipad sound was low so I misheard.