FL - FSU Law Professor Dan Markel Murdered by Hitmen-Donna Adelson Upcoming Trial - *4 Guilty* #26

[IQuestion]

1 hour ago.

DOUBLE SWOON!!!!

 

[IQuestion]

Thank you for the Lawyer You Know and Tim Jansen video. I had to mostly "listen" because of other work. Good grief!.... drop dead gorgeous, articulate, respectful conversation and incredibly smart. If one of my family members was going to trial, I'd sure want one of these gentlemen as their defense attorney.
Sometimes overhearing a few words can make a whole lot of difference. For Example:
"....they offered and we wouldn't take the deal" (8 words) vs. someone hearing, "Even if they offered, we wouldn't take the deal." (9 words) Almost the same sentence structure but not the same meaning and easily misinterpreted? Sometimes a "good source" is only as good as what they think they heard. I don't know where TJ stands on this case, but I think he has heard a lot of courtroom scuttlebutt and doesn't share most of it.

 

[Knitpicker]

Did anyone see on STS today that Stephen Webster said Jackie (Donnas lawyer) faked that she was dying of cancer for years?
She officiated his wedding and became friends with he and his wife. They had a mutual friend struggling with cancer at the time.
He said he has no respect for her. And had to get that off his chest.

 

[Knitpicker]

Thank you for the Lawyer You Know and Tim Jansen video. I had to mostly "listen" because of other work. Good grief!.... drop dead gorgeous, articulate, respectful conversation and incredibly smart. If one of my family members was going to trial, I'd sure want one of these gentlemen as their defense attorney.
Sometimes overhearing a few words can make a whole lot of difference. For Example:
"....they offered and we wouldn't take the deal" (8 words) vs. someone hearing, "Even if they offered, we wouldn't take the deal." (9 words) Almost the same sentence structure but not the same meaning and easily misinterpreted? Sometimes a "good source" is only as good as what they think they heard. I don't know where TJ stands on this case, but I think he has heard a lot of courtroom scuttlebutt and doesn't share most of it.

Do you have a timestamp?

 

[Going Rogue]

Thank you for the Lawyer You Know and Tim Jansen video. I had to mostly "listen" because of other work. Good grief!.... drop dead gorgeous, articulate, respectful conversation and incredibly smart. If one of my family members was going to trial, I'd sure want one of these gentlemen as their defense attorney.
Sometimes overhearing a few words can make a whole lot of difference. For Example:
"....they offered and we wouldn't take the deal" (8 words) vs. someone hearing, "Even if they offered, we wouldn't take the deal." (9 words) Almost the same sentence structure but not the same meaning and easily misinterpreted? Sometimes a "good source" is only as good as what they think they heard. I don't know where TJ stands on this case, but I think he has heard a lot of courtroom scuttlebutt and doesn't share most of it.

Many that follow this case often react to news in a mob-like fashion, without reasoning things out or reading between the lines. The likelihood of Tim fabricating the "plea deal" story (as many allege) is close to zero. He likely heard something from a trusted source, and I’d bet there were plea discussions or something informal was dangled by the prosecution in front of Donna’s team. I’m certain any "deal" was contingent on receiving conclusive evidence that would implicate Wendi. The specifics of the deal are anyone’s guess, but I have a hard time believing it would have been "time served", but it had to be something substantial. Jack Campbell’s denial was specific to the "time served" offer—he didn’t deny that plea discussions never occurred. Another clue that something was discussed is Josh Zelman’s initial response that no "firm" offer was received by his team. As Tim explained in today’s video with TLYK, plea discussions are essentially a feeling-out process, and it’s not as black-and-white as the general public imagines. There’s a lot of gray area, and sometimes the prosecution says things in a strategic / tactical way to a defendant’s legal team as part of an exploratory process.

I’m not sure how I feel about Tim sharing this news on the STS broadcast. It’s fair to criticize his judgment or call the decision to share the news irresponsible, but labeling him a liar and alleging he made it up for clicks is absurd. Further, the rumors or speculation that Tim is working behind the scenes and being paid to serve Wendi and the Adelsons’ interests are utterly ridiculous.

 

[Going Rogue]

Did anyone see on STS today that Stephen Webster said Jackie (Donnas lawyer) faked that she was dying of cancer for years?
She officiated his wedding and became friends with he and his wife. They had a mutual friend struggling with cancer at the time.
He said he has no respect for her. And had to get that off his chest.

Wow, that’s a serious allegation to make about someone – especially someone working in the same town and running in the same circles. How does know that she didn’t have cancer and is now in remission? I didn’t see the episode, so not sure exactly what he said – now I have to check it out.

 

[Zedzded]

I’m not sure how I feel about Tim sharing this news on the STS broadcast. It’s fair to criticize his judgment or call the decision to share the news irresponsible, but labeling him a liar and alleging he made it up for clicks is absurd. Further, the rumors or speculation that Tim is working behind the scenes and being paid to serve Wendi and the Adelsons’ interests are utterly ridiculous.

I don't think he made it up, but I believe he heard nothing more than a Chinese whisper. As a lawyer it would have been drilled in to him from day 1 in Law school to only use authoritative sources i.e credible, trustworthy and verifiable. Even secondary sources from scholarly databases are discouraged.

If he handed in an assignment that was full of information gleaned from tabloid media outlets he would have received a big fat fail. So it's second nature to him (or it should be) to take what he reads, sees or hears with a huge pinch of salt and to do everything he can to verify it.

Mentour lawyer sent a quick 2 minute email to Jack Campbell asking for the rumour to be verified and JC instantly replied. Why did TJ fail to do this? Because he was after clicks. The sad thing is I think he's great, he doesn't need to resort to cheap tricks like this.

Also it's hugely disrespectful to the Markels. Imagine how they must have felt reading that. The woman that killed their son could be walking the streets a free woman. Joel waxes lyrical about his feelings for the Markels and always weaves them into his content, making sure they are not forgotten about, but then allows guests to come on his show and say what they like. He is coming across as quite disingenuous.

I think when it comes to discussing horrific crimes when there are still living victims, content publishers like STS/Joel that suggest they are credible and compassionate, have a duty to at the very least attempt to verify the information they are publishing.

 

[Zedzded]

Wow, that’s a serious allegation to make about someone – especially someone working in the same town and running in the same circles. How does know that she didn’t have cancer and is now in remission? I didn’t see the episode, so not sure exactly what he said – now I have to check it out.

Knitpicker said she claimed "she was dying of cancer." This is the main flaw in a lot of cases where terminal cancer is fabricated *e.g Belle Gibson. She had 3 months to live, dying of terminal cancer, but is still alive and kicking.

There is no reversal of terminal cancer. You are going to die from it, it's not if, but when. Perhaps if Fulford stated she just had cancer, then that's different. No-one would know whether that was true or not unless they were privy to her medical records. The fact that Fulford is running around fresh as a daisy and not 6 feet under suggests she was lying....

Or maybe she did a Belle Gibson and "treated" her terminal cancer using coffee colon cleanses...

 

[Going Rogue]

I don't think he made it up, but I believe he heard nothing more than a Chinese whisper. As a lawyer it would have been drilled in to him from day 1 in Law school to only use authoritative sources i.e credible, trustworthy and verifiable. Even secondary sources from scholarly databases are discouraged.

If he handed in an assignment that was full of information gleaned from tabloid media outlets he would have received a big fat fail. So it's second nature to him (or it should be) to take what he reads, sees or hears with a huge pinch of salt and to do everything he can to verify it.

Mentour lawyer sent a quick 2 minute email to Jack Campbell asking for the rumour to be verified and JC instantly replied. Why did TJ fail to do this? Because he was after clicks. The sad thing is I think he's great, he doesn't need to resort to cheap tricks like this.

Also it's hugely disrespectful to the Markels. Imagine how they must have felt reading that. The woman that killed their son could be walking the streets a free woman. Joel waxes lyrical about his feelings for the Markels and always weaves them into his content, making sure they are not forgotten about, but then allows guests to come on his show and say what they like. He is coming across as quite disingenuous.

I think when it comes to discussing horrific crimes when there are still living victims, content publishers like STS/Joel that suggest they are credible and compassionate, have a duty to at the very least attempt to verify the information they are publishing.

I fully agree with your comments and thoughts on Joel’s obligation and duty to take reasonable measures to make sure his show and his guests report accurate information – although that’s not so easy to control in his format. Personally, I think accuracy is not on the top of his list, he’d rather have the headline if it gets exposure and views and will gladly walk it back later if it turns out to be false. He immediately made it clear it was ‘Tim’s source’ and said (paraphrasing) - “you heard it here first… well take full credit if is true but its all on Tim if its false”. He said it jokingly, but not far from the truth.

As far as Tm verifying the information he received from his source with Jack first. I know I already mentioned this elsewhere. Jack would not have been able to confirm the truth of the matter with Tim had Tim asked. Plea discussions are confidential, Jack would told him to go fly a kite if he asked to confirm the ‘leak’ or ‘rumor’. Jack replied to Mentour Lawyer's email and gave the press conference because it became a news story after Tim decided to broadcast the ‘news’ on STS. He was forced to do damage control - and I'm sure he wasn't happy. I don’t agree with Tim’s decision to report this news on STS, but verifying the ‘rumor’ with Jack wasn’t his mistake, his mistake was broadcasting the story on STS.

 

[Knitpicker]

Many that follow this case often react to news in a mob-like fashion, without reasoning things out or reading between the lines. The likelihood of Tim fabricating the "plea deal" story (as many allege) is close to zero. He likely heard something from a trusted source, and I’d bet there were plea discussions or something informal was dangled by the prosecution in front of Donna’s team. I’m certain any "deal" was contingent on receiving conclusive evidence that would implicate Wendi. The specifics of the deal are anyone’s guess, but I have a hard time believing it would have been "time served", but it had to be something substantial. Jack Campbell’s denial was specific to the "time served" offer—he didn’t deny that plea discussions never occurred. Another clue that something was discussed is Josh Zelman’s initial response that no "firm" offer was received by his team. As Tim explained in today’s video with TLYK, plea discussions are essentially a feeling-out process, and it’s not as black-and-white as the general public imagines. There’s a lot of gray area, and sometimes the prosecution says things in a strategic / tactical way to a defendant’s legal team as part of an exploratory process.

I’m not sure how I feel about Tim sharing this news on the STS broadcast. It’s fair to criticize his judgment or call the decision to share the news irresponsible, but labeling him a liar and alleging he made it up for clicks is absurd. Further, the rumors or speculation that Tim is working behind the scenes and being paid to serve Wendi and the Adelsons’ interests are utterly ridiculous.

“I’m not sure how I feel about Tim sharing this news”…so you think it happened then? As he said it? Because it’s only news if it’s true right?
I just think now right before the trial theres a mad rush to get out as much content as possible so that when the trial starts-yours will be the channel everyone views the trial from. Theres a lot of competition, and there will be a lot of views. CC’s are depending on it to keep them afloat.

 

[Wishbone]

Thank you for the Lawyer You Know and Tim Jansen video. I had to mostly "listen" because of other work. Good grief!.... drop dead gorgeous, articulate, respectful conversation and incredibly smart. If one of my family members was going to trial, I'd sure want one of these gentlemen as their defense attorney.
Sometimes overhearing a few words can make a whole lot of difference. For Example:
"....they offered and we wouldn't take the deal" (8 words) vs. someone hearing, "Even if they offered, we wouldn't take the deal." (9 words) Almost the same sentence structure but not the same meaning and easily misinterpreted? Sometimes a "good source" is only as good as what they think they heard. I don't know where TJ stands on this case, but I think he has heard a lot of courtroom scuttlebutt and doesn't share most of it.

Last I heard TJ didn't think WA could be convicted. Not enough evidence according to him. I don't much care for him. JMOO

 

[Knitpicker]

Last I heard TJ didn't think WA could be convicted. Not enough evidence according to him. I don't much care for him. JMOO

Even TLYK thinks that.

 

[Knitpicker]

Wow, that’s a serious allegation to make about someone – especially someone working in the same town and running in the same circles. How does know that she didn’t have cancer and is now in remission? I didn’t see the episode, so not sure exactly what he said – now I have to check it out.

I think Webster is genuine. I don’t think he would say that if it weren’t true. He said the irony is that they shared a friend who was dying of cancer at time and who was in treatment,He seemed really angry about it.
It’s the first 5 minutes of the podcast.

Edit_ I wanted to make it clear that he said dying of cancer and that she was lying to him.
So the question is did she have cancer at all or was she just lying (for years) that she was terminal?

 

[Wishbone]

Even TLYK thinks that.

They are entitled to their opinions.......Many other youtube attys have an opposite opinion.

 

[Wishbone]

I think Webster is genuine. I don’t think he would say that if it weren’t true. He said the irony is that they shared a friend who actually DID have cancer at time and who was in treatment,He seemed really angry about it.
It’s the first 5 minutes of the podcast.

State Attorney Jack Campbell and Adelson's defense attorney are firmly denying rumors that the State has offered Donna Adelson a plea deal.

State Attorney Jack Campbell firmly denies rumors of plea deals for Donna Adelson

State Attorney Jack Campbell denies rumors that the State offered Donna Adelson a plea deal. Campbell confirms the trial is set to go ahead August 19.

www.wtxl.com

 

[Knitpicker]

I don't think he made it up, but I believe he heard nothing more than a Chinese whisper. As a lawyer it would have been drilled in to him from day 1 in Law school to only use authoritative sources i.e credible, trustworthy and verifiable. Even secondary sources from scholarly databases are discouraged.

If he handed in an assignment that was full of information gleaned from tabloid media outlets he would have received a big fat fail. So it's second nature to him (or it should be) to take what he reads, sees or hears with a huge pinch of salt and to do everything he can to verify it.

Mentour lawyer sent a quick 2 minute email to Jack Campbell asking for the rumour to be verified and JC instantly replied. Why did TJ fail to do this? Because he was after clicks. The sad thing is I think he's great, he doesn't need to resort to cheap tricks like this.

Also it's hugely disrespectful to the Markels. Imagine how they must have felt reading that. The woman that killed their son could be walking the streets a free woman. Joel waxes lyrical about his feelings for the Markels and always weaves them into his content, making sure they are not forgotten about, but then allows guests to come on his show and say what they like. He is coming across as quite disingenuous.

I think when it comes to discussing horrific crimes when there are still living victims, content publishers like STS/Joel that suggest they are credible and compassionate, have a duty to at the very least attempt to verify the information they are publishing.

He said today (and I can’t quote it) that he hasnt spoken to Phil in awhile so its strange that Phil went on Carls channel to say he thought Wendi was now in Denver, but he was not 100% sure.
I don’t see him on Joel.
Also today Joel did say he has been hearing Wendi is indeed in Denver,. (Once again I can’t quote exactly but that’s the gist)

 

[Knitpicker]

Knitpicker said she claimed "she was dying of cancer." This is the main flaw in a lot of cases where terminal cancer is fabricated *e.g Belle Gibson. She had 3 months to live, dying of terminal cancer, but is still alive and kicking.

There is no reversal of terminal cancer. You are going to die from it, it's not if, but when. Perhaps if Fulford stated she just had cancer, then that's different. No-one would know whether that was true or not unless they were privy to her medical records. The fact that Fulford is running around fresh as a daisy and not 6 feet under suggests she was lying....

Or maybe she did a Belle Gibson and "treated" her terminal cancer using coffee colon cleanses...

It’s interesting that Webster decided to reveal this today. Could it be he found out recently he was lied to? He’s been on before since Jackie has been DA’s attorney. Why now?

 

[Knitpicker]

State Attorney Jack Campbell and Adelson's defense attorney are firmly denying rumors that the State has offered Donna Adelson a plea deal.

State Attorney Jack Campbell firmly denies rumors of plea deals for Donna Adelson

State Attorney Jack Campbell denies rumors that the State offered Donna Adelson a plea deal. Campbell confirms the trial is set to go ahead August 19.

www.wtxl.com

My comment was about Webster mention of Jackie Fulford lying about having terminal cancer.
It wasn’t about the plea deal issue

 

[Knitpicker]

They are entitled to their opinions.......Many other youtube attys have an opposite opinion.

I was responding to someone saying Tim J didn't think they had enough evidence. Watching the video I noticed TLYK agrees. Of course everyone is entitled to their opinion.
I have only watched TLYK once before, So I had no idea of his position on Wendi’s guilt/innocense,

 

[Zedzded]

It’s interesting that Webster decided to reveal this today. Could it be he found out recently he was lied to? He’s been on before since Jackie has been DA’s attorney. Why now?

Yeah it's a big call, publicly shaming someone for lying about their cancer, especially if they actually had it.