I found it interesting that it was mentioned that DA will have friends in attendance for the trial.What was discussed and ruled on in this morning’s hearing….
UPDATE: Donna Adelson's trial officially set for August 19th, hundreds of jurors to be summoned for selection
The final pre-trial motion hearing has begun for accused murderer Donna Adelson. Adelson is accused of having her former son-in-law shot and killed in 2014.www.wtxl.com
FL - FSU Law Professor Dan Markel Murdered by Hitmen-Donna Adelson Upcoming Trial - *4 Guilty* #26
- Thread starter 0101ABA
- Start date
- Status
Yes, it seems we'll get testimony by DA as well as Charlie (defense said state will call CA). Going to be a lot going down in a couple short weeks.
Friends, plural? I'll believe that when I see it.
As to her testifying, that seems to be her only hope. I look forward to hearing about the triple extortion or other cockamamie tale.
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2025
- Messages
- 15
- Reaction score
- 140
I'm just picturing Georgia Cappelman sharpening her claws in advance of this and I can't help but laugh. DA testifying is going to be even more satisfying to watch than watching Georgia getting under Charlie's skin over and over again was.
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2023
- Messages
- 177
- Reaction score
- 1,481
The United States are in a complex federation, in which successful criminal plea deal depends on (1) customary communication, (2) jurisdiction, and (3) types of plea bargain. This one time, reviewing the rights and legal standing of the victim’s party regarding plea deal might help move from {unflattering but polite characterization of} question to worthy and elevated conversation.
Customarily, it is the duty of the victim’s party to diligently communicate with the prosecutors, and provide timely objection to any undesirable plea bargain.
Complaining to the effect of “we received information about a plea deal via email only 48 hours before sentencing” is not sensible if no attempt were made for due diligence with the prosecutors. This is one of many reasons for victim’s party to lawyering.
The mean for formally disagreeing with the prosecution about plea deal despite prior due diligent communication is the impact statement, which is read in open court at sentencing. The victim’s party could state to the effect of “We were not informed of a plea bargain. We object to the plea deal.” Depending on the argument presented at that time, the Judge may or may not reject the plea deal.
Customary communication goes both ways. It is the duty of the defendants’ attorneys to diligently communicate with the Judge, and initiate timely probe as to the sentencing range the Judge thinks adequate. There are cases where the Judge rejects a plea deal dimmed too lenient albeit prosecutor and defendant reached a prior agreement.
Albeit the Sixth Amendment applies to all jurisdictions of the 50 United States and their dependencies, the legal authority granted to the varied courts (read Judges) to enact justice is not uniform.
In the United States, jurisdiction concept depends on multiple levels of local, state, and federal governments. That is to say even the federal government courts have differing levels of jurisdiction and behavior. That is why completing a JD education is not enough without passing the adequate Board examinations to become a lawyer in a specific US jurisdiction. There are nuances about the rights and legal standing of the victim’s party regarding plea deal depending on these jurisdictions.
Before a trial date or a plea date of a criminal case is set in the jurisdiction of the State of Florida (and other jurisdictions), the Judge asks during a preliminary hearing if any plea bargain is on going or a plea deal is reached. In the public domain, there is a video of Judge Everett asking this question in a preliminary hearing before Charles Adelson’s trial.
Before today’s preliminary hearing, both the State Attorney and one of Donna Adelson’s lawyers denied publicly that a plea deal exists. Given the circumstance, that public denial rather than a denial in open court was unusual from the State Attorney, albeit necessary.
The three major types of plea bargain are charge bargaining, sentencing bargaining, and fact bargaining.
The victim’s lawyers do not have to be passive observers, depending of the type of bargaining. To be brief, let us exemplify that opportunity for objection during fact bargaining is not only desirable for the lawyers of the victim’s party but also appreciated by the investigators working under the prosecution.
In the jurisdiction of the State of Louisiana, fact bargaining is illegal! Rising a reasonable suspicion of fact bargaining with the Judge could be enough for the victim’s party to stop the bargaining process. Thereafter, careless defendant lawyers in Louisiana might have higher hurdle to initiate any other type of plea bargaining.
Customarily, it is the duty of the victim’s party to diligently communicate with the prosecutors, and provide timely objection to any undesirable plea bargain.
Complaining to the effect of “we received information about a plea deal via email only 48 hours before sentencing” is not sensible if no attempt were made for due diligence with the prosecutors. This is one of many reasons for victim’s party to lawyering.
The mean for formally disagreeing with the prosecution about plea deal despite prior due diligent communication is the impact statement, which is read in open court at sentencing. The victim’s party could state to the effect of “We were not informed of a plea bargain. We object to the plea deal.” Depending on the argument presented at that time, the Judge may or may not reject the plea deal.
Customary communication goes both ways. It is the duty of the defendants’ attorneys to diligently communicate with the Judge, and initiate timely probe as to the sentencing range the Judge thinks adequate. There are cases where the Judge rejects a plea deal dimmed too lenient albeit prosecutor and defendant reached a prior agreement.
Albeit the Sixth Amendment applies to all jurisdictions of the 50 United States and their dependencies, the legal authority granted to the varied courts (read Judges) to enact justice is not uniform.
In the United States, jurisdiction concept depends on multiple levels of local, state, and federal governments. That is to say even the federal government courts have differing levels of jurisdiction and behavior. That is why completing a JD education is not enough without passing the adequate Board examinations to become a lawyer in a specific US jurisdiction. There are nuances about the rights and legal standing of the victim’s party regarding plea deal depending on these jurisdictions.
Before a trial date or a plea date of a criminal case is set in the jurisdiction of the State of Florida (and other jurisdictions), the Judge asks during a preliminary hearing if any plea bargain is on going or a plea deal is reached. In the public domain, there is a video of Judge Everett asking this question in a preliminary hearing before Charles Adelson’s trial.
Before today’s preliminary hearing, both the State Attorney and one of Donna Adelson’s lawyers denied publicly that a plea deal exists. Given the circumstance, that public denial rather than a denial in open court was unusual from the State Attorney, albeit necessary.
The three major types of plea bargain are charge bargaining, sentencing bargaining, and fact bargaining.
The victim’s lawyers do not have to be passive observers, depending of the type of bargaining. To be brief, let us exemplify that opportunity for objection during fact bargaining is not only desirable for the lawyers of the victim’s party but also appreciated by the investigators working under the prosecution.
In the jurisdiction of the State of Louisiana, fact bargaining is illegal! Rising a reasonable suspicion of fact bargaining with the Judge could be enough for the victim’s party to stop the bargaining process. Thereafter, careless defendant lawyers in Louisiana might have higher hurdle to initiate any other type of plea bargaining.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2004
- Messages
- 28,755
- Reaction score
- 44,548
Prosecutors do usually confer with a victim's family when offering a plea deal, but ultimately it's up to the prosecutor. At least one of the victims families of Bryan Kohlberger wasn't happy when he was offered a deal.
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2012
- Messages
- 2,856
- Reaction score
- 14,474
Welcome and Hello TomatoTraveler!! (I always wonder the origins "how's & why's" of each contributor's moniker. Maybe we should start a short thread for that topic one day?) Since this case has been inundated with duosyllabic nick names & code words Tuto's, Tato's and TV's etc, I will be sure not to shorten yours to "Toto." But I digress.
What do you think is the defense's greatest weakness?
What do you think is the defense's greatest strength?
There are a lot pieces of circumstantial evidence that DA needs to provide credible explanations for. e.g "this TV us 5", her cell phone showed she was at CA's house, she texted him "outside your house" etc etc providing bannal, laughable excuses is not going to cut the mustard. "Oh outside your house actually means I'm driving 2 miles away." "I wanted to go to a non-extradition country as it would be easier to return to the USA."
Most of the evidence is circumstantial and could be, arguably, defended. That said it is simply too voluminous to be dismissed in its entirety.
It's odd listening to some of the perpetrators on the stand giving their testimony. It's almost like they are giving without any legal advice, without counsel. I do know that DA's legal team, for example, is up against it with such a strong case against their client and they're all out of options, but it's still bemusing hearing DA state things like "I wanted to go to a non-extradition country as it would be easier to return to the USA."
Obviously this statement was given the 'All clear' by her lawyer who should have known it will be quickly dismissed. Perhaps it would have been better for DA to simply say that although innocent, she fled as she feared arrest due to potential injustice? Sometimes innocent people are jailed and sometimes innocent people flee.
Obviously this statement was given the 'All clear' by her lawyer who should have known it will be quickly dismissed. Perhaps it would have been better for DA to simply say that although innocent, she fled as she feared arrest due to potential injustice? Sometimes innocent people are jailed and sometimes innocent people flee.
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2012
- Messages
- 2,856
- Reaction score
- 14,474
bbmABOVE ZZ, DA was in quite a dither after the dropped call, so many decisions to make, huh? Option #1 Taking pills, "We could do it together. Go to sleep and never waking up." or Option #2 "Rushing off to a foreign country with no extradition."
Both Options make them look suspect, IMO. The "pill pact" for two innocent people? Really?
A refresher on what she said in court:
“I wasn’t afraid of being arrested,” she told the court, according to CourtTV. “My husband and I – literally shocked and traumatized at what had happened to Charlie – and he said ‘we need to just get some peace, we need to catch our breath, we’re gonna go away somewhere.”
DA on the stand.... The Martyr of South Beach.... oh the pain.
5Donna Adelson appears in court during her murder trial in Leon County on Feb. 26, 2025.CourtTV
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2025
- Messages
- 15
- Reaction score
- 140
Ha! (It's truly nothing exciting. I am an avid tomato gardener, and an avid traveler. Not at all creative, heh.)
Their greatest strength, if any, would just be that she didn't literally murder someone with her own hands, and that she's old and sometimes jurors feel sympathy to the elderly (not saying this jury will, and I am positive DA will come across just as deeply unlikable as she always does, but it's still something.)
Their greatest weakness is, uh, pretty much everything else, not least of all the fact that DA IS so viscerally unlikable.
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2012
- Messages
- 2,856
- Reaction score
- 14,474
Tomatotraveler...(I love it..travel and gardening!)
You bring up a very interesting aspect of the "A" defense ......distancing themselves from the gun and bullets that destroyed their son-in-law. Ergo, "We haven't done anything. It was them!! " (Ya' know, manipulative poor folk who don't live in gated communities with guard houses & gate codes or glass paneled high rises constructed of steel girder beams with panoramic ocean views) I think CA convinced his parents they were so far removed physically, socially and geographically from the trigger of the gun that it would be impossible for LE to ever tie them to the crime.
Now that DA is "officially?" going to testify during her trial...I think her story will change from "looking for a peaceful place after the shock and trauma of CA's conviction" to "We were terrified and running away from them, aka LK's."
Donna Adelson to testify in her murder trial later this month, defense attorneys say
Donna Adelson’s court appearance Friday comes less than two weeks before her murder trial is expected to begin on August 19
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2017
- Messages
- 48
- Reaction score
- 385
It was very telling that CA had literally no one in the courtroom supporting him. Not a friend, a baby mama, and most importantly not his parents. If a family member of mine was being wrongly accused you couldn’t keep me away from sitting there in solidarity.
I have no doubt that HA will be there supporting DA and I do believe she will have some friends there.
But the absences of RA and WA will be felt.
I know juries shouldn’t take this into account, but it’s human nature to take notice and have some thought on this.
I have no doubt that HA will be there supporting DA and I do believe she will have some friends there.
But the absences of RA and WA will be felt.
I know juries shouldn’t take this into account, but it’s human nature to take notice and have some thought on this.
Yup. Where are all those "friends" he had when he was free and was splashing his cash around....
I don't think DA will have anyone other than HA.
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2005
- Messages
- 1,426
- Reaction score
- 1,948
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2023
- Messages
- 1,550
- Reaction score
- 6,161
Right she just wants to limit the amount of content creators in the room imo. And discourage people from thinking they can get a seat in the courtroom.
It was interesting that they don’t want the public to have the same view as we had for Charlie’s trial (Moving furntiure), looking at Charlies face ,and the entertainment of Rashbaum with his beard/fingers
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2004
- Messages
- 28,755
- Reaction score
- 44,548
Having grey hair doesn't stop a murderer. In fact, Dorothea Puente was actually elderly when she went on her killing spree of killing her boarders.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
Online statistics
- Members online
- 60
- Guests online
- 3,060
- Total visitors
- 3,120