FL - FSU Law Professor Dan Markel Murdered by Hitmen-Donna Adelson Upcoming Trial - *5 Guilty* #28

[Best of What's Around]

Well said.

This level of vitriol against Wendi was not present in the 1st or even 2nd trials. During that period, the focus of trial watchers was on Charlie and Donna. The obsession with Wendi started after the proliferation of YouTube grifters. I’m thinking particularly of 2 male YouTubers. I fully believe it is these particular YouTubers’ projection that has infected many in the J4D community. With the way parasocial relationships work, it is no surprise that many people have bought into this narrative unquestioningly.

To be clear, I am not a Wendi fan either. I think she knew and she’s a person of low morals/character.

It’s unfortunate that Georgia can’t even take a breath to enjoy the verdict before everyone is jumping down her throat about a Wendi arrest. By treating Wendi as the ultimate get, Donna’s verdict is diminished. And that’s pretty sad because Donna IS the ultimate get in this murder.

JMO

Did you watch and listen to the trials? Or just the coverage?

Because more and more has come out about Wendi in this trial that was never out in the open before.

There is nothing diminished about wanting justice for Dan by hoping all involved are prosecuted.

I have no problem with your belief that Wendy is innocent of charges related to murder. I have a problem when you insist others must be brainwashed to believe she shows many signs of guilt and evidence to back that up.

Once again may I point out that many actual, practicing attorneys in Tallahassee no less have gone on the record that they think Wendi will be arrested next? This is based upon what has come out in court and what they believe is yet to come. In my experience, well respected practicing attorneys do not easily get snowed by social media. So are they also infected?

Why the vitriol against others with a different view of the evidence to date? There has not even been a jury member who has said they believe Wendi is innocent. They have seen enough to find it likely she is guilty and would want to see more to make a decision beyond a reasonable doubt.

Last, if you think Wendi knew but did not plan the murders - how can you possibly find it an illogical leap that some believe she was more involved than that by quietly passing on knowledge and setting up her ex to muddy the waters?
If she only knew and did not thing active in furtherance, that does not absolve her from charges if she knew and remained silent, has tailored testimony to cover up. It would not absolve her from losing her license to practice law in disgrace as a member of the bar. I have never said which charges Wendi should face exactly. But if you believe she knew then her obvious lies afterward to help her family at a minimum opens her up to major jail time. And a practicing attorney should know better than to lie to the court - making her crimes that much more heinous as she cannot claim ignorance nor confusion of the law.

 

[BUF]

So we were traveling to Tallahassee today. We were between Ocala and Tallahassee and on the other side coming from Tallahassee there was an inmate transport with sirened LE in front and back of it. I jokingly said to Mr BUF “maybe that was Donna”. It was about 2:00.

 

[Zedzded]

Yes, I also give credit to many of the YouTube content creator’s for ‘amping up’ the crowd and for creating the illusion that case against Wendi is so strong. I am still open to the possibility of Wendi being fully shielded and never being directly brought into the loop. I do agree there is plenty of reason to believe that at a minimum she had ‘knowledge’ – I’m just not sure if she was told directly OR figured it out.

She was more or less shielded from the planning, In part her own volition to protect herself, in part due to her families pathological need to infantilize her. I don't think anyone that knows the case has ever really suggested she was deeply involved in the planning. If that were the case she would have been arrested long ago.

So it is a difficult task proving she conspired with the others. However it is not a difficult task proving she knew about the murder. That's a very easy sell to the jury and opens up other doors for prosecution. She's going to prison for a very long time, it's just on what charge and what sentence that we don't know.

 

[Going Rogue]

With all due respect, to say you are simply presenting an alternative point of view while not advocating directly contradicts your contention that anyone who argues in favor of Wendy’s guilt is allowing her poor character to cloud their judgment.

May I be arrogant for a moment myself? Just in the last paragraph alone you appear to not be in command of the facts. We know exactly the context as Wendi stated during her interview (which was not an interrogation) that she thought she might be suspect during the car ride. When asked to explain that in court, she lies and states she was told her ex was shot by the detective in the car ride. It is clear from her performance during the interview that she was unaware there was a shooting until she listened to her voicemail.

Lies can show consciousness of guilt as well as cover up. They are circumstantial evidence.

It was Wendy and not anyone else (other than her attorney) who was facing a very serious filing headed her way coincidentally on the day of or after the shooting. She was being accused of committing a fraud upon the court and that could have repercussions for her license in the eyes of some FL attorneys. Amazing that it needed to be done by this date and this was the date quoted to her attorney that the filing would mean the point of no return for this accusation to be on the books.

If every liar, selfish person were a murderer we would never be able to hold them all! I put more confidence in the mindset of both fellow Websleuths as well as many actual practicing attorneys who have commented on this trial. Attorneys currently practicing in Tallahassee even - their reputations are not worth click bait.

Speaking of not seeing straight, some evidence that many weigh against Wendi have less worth to me - for example, both the license plate number and travel schedule. These two points of knowledge I find to be not persuasive of Wendi’s guilt without more evidence since I also know that Donna had spent a great deal of time in town to help with the boys - giving her many opportunities to ascertain Dan’s license plate number surreptitiously as well as his travel schedule since it has been established that she was always advised of this so she could plan for when Wendi might need help. I could be wrong and there could be better evidence to back these points up, but from what little I know, I do not find them persuasive.

So is my judgment clouded or not that I see other evidence as persuasive? While someone’s likability should not be a factor in evaluating evidence, someone’s lies, behavior, how they conduct themselves on the stand, how they conduct themselves in interviews taped…these all go to circumstantial evidence that may be drawn by jurors as to someone’s guilt or innocence. I have not found that Wendy lies because she is a terrible person - I have found her lies to be with great purpose. You don’t need to lie about your actions the day of the shooting if you have nothing to hide. The truth tends to be more easily remembered as well. The truth doesn’t change to fit later evidence.

I am happy to be a participant in a devil’s advocate argument, but I have been simply debating why I do believe there will be enough evidence to proceed to trial of Wendy in some capacity related to the murder.

I gave your post a once over, and will have to reread tomorrow as I’m a bit tired at the moment and I appreciate the detail and it deserves more attention than I can give it at the moment. My initial response is that if Wendi was not in on the plot, and there can be varying degrees from having simple knowledge to being completely clueless, the error she made was standing behind her family. Once she made the conscious decisions to stand by her family, she was knee deep in it and there was no turning back AFTER she testified and claimed she had no idea who was behind the murder etc.. I am FULLY convinced she knew who did it by the time she first testified, I’m just not FULLY convinced she was a part of the plans. If she wasn’t involved, the spiral of lies got the best of her and she will likely never recover from that.

 

[Zedzded]

Important to note that in Donna’s planner, directly above Dan’s car info (08 Accord) was Wendi’s car info (07 Odyssey). IMO, this points more to the entry being part of Donna’s meddling in the divorce assets / settlement type research. That said, the info may have come from Wendi, but not in support of the murder plans.

Yeah saw that, bit disappointing as it dilutes the strength of that as evidence. That said it does also imply it came from WA. How would DA know the actual year of the cars. For example a 2007 and 2008 Accord are exactly the same. She would have to have access to the cars log books or be told that information.

 

[Best of What's Around]

The evidence for one is the evidence for all. Because any evidence that implicates one implicates all since this is a conspiracy case. At this point, there’s no reason for the state to withhold more evidence against Wendi. Besides they have to turn over everything they have to the defense. It would be a Brady violation if they had evidence of Wendi’s culpability at Donna’s trial and didn’t turn that over to her defense. Especially when Donna’s defense was her kids did this without her knowledge.

JMO

Did you watch/listen to the trials? Some evidence is presented at each of them, some comes in because it is tailored for that defendant. Some evidence is glossed over in one trial but becomes vitally important to put under a microscope and flesh out in another. None of the trials were the same. Nobody said anything about what was or wasn’t turned over to the defense. Some evidence neither party brought up because they both had their reasons for their own cases.

 

[Best of What's Around]

I gave your post a once over, and will have to reread tomorrow as I’m a bit tired at the moment and I appreciate the detail and it deserves more attention than I can give it at the moment. My initial response is that if Wendi was not in on the plot, and there can be varying degrees from having simple knowledge to being completely clueless, the error she made was standing behind her family. Once she made the conscious decisions to stand by her family, she was knee deep in it and there was no turning back AFTER she testified and claimed she had no idea who was behind the murder etc.. I am FULLY convinced she knew who did it by the time she first testified, I’m just not FULLY convinced she was a part of the plans. If she wasn’t involved, the spiral of lies got the best of her and she will likely never recover from that.

Thank you, appreciated.

Imagine though the incredible irony to be someone who is caught up in it all and is only trying to help her family when the same person benefited in numerous ways from the murder that did not benefit anyone else. I would be ashamed and embarrassed to have benefited as much as I had if I were not in on it. Amazing how she doesn’t appear to have that struggle? In fact, as we know from her writings, she believes the murder hurt her and she is pissed she can’t complain about it without looking bad to society. She completely ignores the millions to her benefit in dollars, the dropping of a serious fraud allegation in court, the never having to deal again with that STD of an ex husband, the getting to live anywhere and everywhere no longer tied to a city she despised. So she got a cure for her AIDS but now has to suffer because she loves her family so much. Oh, the irony!

Please note she doesn’t love them enough to speak a word to them after their arrest. And there is only one reason for that. What is there to hide if she is not culpable? Doesn’t your love of family win out over a fear of prosecution if you have nothing to hide?

I would argue her family loved her more than she loves them. Every step of the way. Assuming anyone there is capable of love.

 

[Zedzded]

Did you watch/listen to the trials? Some evidence is presented at each of them, some comes in because it is tailored for that defendant. Some evidence is glossed over in one trial but becomes vitally important to put under a microscope and flesh out in another. None of the trials were the same. Nobody said anything about what was or wasn’t turned over to the defense. Some evidence neither party brought up because they both had their reasons for their own cases.

I think one thing we can take away from DA's trial is that a jury of our peers will accept circumstantial evidence.

For example we can go round and round in circles debating Dans licence plate information written in DA's planner. People might suggest that its possible DA obtained that information and therefore it can be dismissed as evidence that incriminates WA. i.e if there is doubt then that piece of evidence is null and void.

I disagree though. It's what the jury will likely conclude happened. Is it more likely that DA drove up to Tallahassee, drove over to Dans house, broke into the car to get the VIn and therefore the year of the car or....

WA texted her the car details. Note people might want to suggest DA obtained the car details through an official auto portal that states car specifics such as year of the car, we have this in Australia. One issue with this, she has the car year written incorrectly! Human error. So whoever gave this information made a mistake.

 

[Best of What's Around]

I think one thing we can take away from DA's trial is that a jury of our peers will accept circumstantial evidence.

For example we can go round and round in circles debating Dans licence plate information written in DA's planner. People might suggest that its possible DA obtained that information and therefore it can be dismissed as evidence that incriminates WA. i.e if there is doubt then that piece of evidence is null and void.

I disagree though. It's what the jury will likely conclude happened. Is it more likely that DA drove up to Tallahassee, drove over to Dans house, broke into the car to get the VIn and therefore the year of the car or....

WA texted her the car details. Note people might want to suggest DA obtained the car details through an official auto portal that states car specifics such as year of the car, we have this in Australia. One issue with this, she has the car year written incorrectly! Human error. So whoever gave this information made a mistake.

Exactly…and I expect this will be fleshed out in a future trial of Wendi. Was it important to detail and dissect for Donna’s trial? No. What was important is that she recorded it in the year he was murdered by hit men who followed his car. How she got it will be one focus of a trial for Wendi no doubt.

 

[Zedzded]

I would argue her family loved her more than she loves them. Every step of the way. Assuming anyone there is capable of love.

i think they had this weird pathological need to protect her. Not just against "bad stuff" but protect her by doing everything for her, treating her like she was 5 years old.

 

[Zedzded]

Exactly…and I expect this will be fleshed out in a future trial of Wendi. Was it important to detail and dissect for Donna’s trial? No. What was important is that she recorded it in the year he was murdered by hit men who followed his car. How she got it will be one focus of a trial for Wendi no doubt.

Yup and once GC has laid out the complete narrative of the murder, starting with the acrimonious divorce, the jury will most likely conclude that (beyond a reasonable doubt) it was WA that gace DA the license plate.

 

[Luna20]

The thing I am struck by is, there seems to be a sincere affection between HA and DA — the warm smiles exchanged during the trial and a supportive presence from HA. If he really loves her in a way those adoring smiles indicate, and had anything to do with the murder, how can he be going on with his life la-tee-da and letting his wife and son take the fall. OMHO.

We’re all dumping on Wendi as the self-centered princess, what is HA?

Agree. It genuinely looked like he was there to support her. On most days he sat there alone and he never missed a day. From outward appearances they appeared to live by ‘for better or worse to death do us part’.

They were affectionate at the airport. He embraced her with a kiss. He tried to put distance between her and the police. He knew that she wanted him to take her earrings off and he did it assuredly. She was concerned about him getting back home.

There is a point during the verdict that she says something endearing about Harvey to the paralegal. I can’t understand what she said exactly but the words that I did recognize were ‘my husband’.

It’s sad to get to the elderly season of life where you thought that you would enjoy it side by side for it then to all go in a horrible direction.

 

[LinasK]

The evidence for one is the evidence for all. Because any evidence that implicates one implicates all since this is a conspiracy case. At this point, there’s no reason for the state to withhold more evidence against Wendi. Besides they have to turn over everything they have to the defense. It would be a Brady violation if they had evidence of Wendi’s culpability at Donna’s trial and didn’t turn that over to her defense. Especially when Donna’s defense was her kids did this without her knowledge.

JMO

How? And maybe they don't have that evidence yet... but are close.

 

[Wishbone]

Ruth has said they are excelling academically and doing well.

Yeah, well WA and CA both did well academically also and look at them now.

 

[IQuestion]

"Sprinkler Man" aka Mitchell speaks on STS was also a juror. Honorable veteran (Marine Corp URAH! URAH! SEMPER FI!) Love me a Marine man!!

 

[Born2BWild]

I totally disagree with you about Georgia — I think she and her team were brilliant. OMO.

I second your opinion. I find it odd that after Georgia led the P to a guilty verdict on all three counts, that anyone on this particular site, would choose “this” to rant about. It seems to me that is “off topic”. I was so put off by the pettiness of it all, I had to take a few days off.

 

[DustysMom]

I also was of the mind that there might not be enough evidence to indict WA. But then I watched Jeff LaCasse's unredacted interview with the police. https://youtu.be/WVpGpA-Qbno?si=tULJ9ZxSUxzEesZW When I saw that it was about 2.5 hours long, I thought there was no way I was going to spend that much time watching it. But I did because it was fascinating. The whole episode about the TV was especially enlightening. She invited him to watch her damaged TV, when they had rarely watched TV before. Who wants to watch a TV with a damaged screen? Wendy, apparently, probably because she needed JL to be fully aware that the TV was actually damaged and repair folks would have to come. (If they make the movie or TV series about this, this would be the part that offers some comic relief.) And then the weird stuff about her inviting him to yoga but hardly talking to him, and it seems she is breaking up with him. Then, as he walks away to his car, she wants to know exactly what time he is leaving on Friday, and I think she also asks about the route he will take? (As an aside to all this, I did question why did JL stay with this selfish, cheating, unhinged woman as long as he did, but I guess the "benefits" were good.)

Ok - I’m watching this right now!

 

[opt]

I disagree though. It's what the jury will likely conclude happened. Is it more likely that DA drove up to Tallahassee, drove over to Dans house, broke into the car to get the VIn and therefore the year of the car or....

The VIN does reveal the year make and model. The VIN is clearly visible through the front of the windshield, at the bottom on the drivers side. No need to break in.

Much easier is to copy it from the registration renewal paper if you have that. Wendi or Donna might have that if the car was owned before the divorce. I can easily imagine Donna paying bills for a married Wendi, including car registration.

 

[Zedzded]

I can easily imagine Donna paying bills for a married Wendi, including car registration.

Like I said it's possible DA got that information. But the greater possibility is that WA gave it to her. Presented with those two options and all the rest of the incriminating evidence the jury would most likely choose the latter - Occam's razor.

 

[apeXperience]

Did you watch and listen to the trials? Or just the coverage? [...]

I have no problem with your belief that Wendy is innocent of charges related to murder. I have a problem when you insist others must be brainwashed to believe she shows many signs of guilt and evidence to back that up.

Best Of What's Around, I agree with you 100%.

Is Wendi off the hook after Donna’s conviction?

Some internet wanna be investigators, prosecutors, or lawyers wonder Wendi and Donna Adelson were both labeled by the State as un-indicted co-conspirators in the PCA of Charles Adelson dated April 2022. Donna is tried and convicted in September 2025. Wendi is still free.

That is an indicator that a grand jury did not have enough evidence to indict Wendi yet. There is no statute of limitation for first degree murder. That is NOT an indicator of Wendi being off the hook!

Firstly, notice that Donna was arrested under a special circumstance. Phone records indicated that she discussed about fleeing to a foreign country. Then, she was apparently fleeing. Hence, she was already arrested before her PCA went to a Grand Jury. And her indictment came after her arrest.

By analogy, Luis Rivera already in Federal custody on RICO charge turned “direct evidence” and pointed finger at Sigfredo Garcia as the trigger man and at Katherine Magbanua as the principal who hired them both. In June 2016, Sigfredo Garcia was indicted on first-degree murder of Dan Markel. It was only 4 month later in October 2016 when Katherine Magbanua was taken into custody.

In between those 4 months, there was no doubt a Grand Jury would indict Magbanua but it took them time or more evidence despite the Luis Rivera “direct evidence”.

There will be times in between Donna's conviction and Wendi's indictment. But Wendi will be arrested at last, IMHO!

How much is the billable hours of white collar criminal defenders such as John Lauro or criminal defense lawyers such as Matthew Luka?

The answer is about $2,000 per hour.

Do not ask “Do you have a link that shows that major lawyers milk their clients at this rate?” Do not compare with the $500 per hour rate of lawyers defending domestic violence cases from slum neighborhood. If you are a sleuth, find out independently how much would someone such as Trump pay some lawyers such as John Lauro to defend him about real estate accounting issues.

Some super lawyers working on criminal defense tend to be payed flat fees. About how much would such a fee be?

Dan Rashbaum is experienced with white collar crime and government investigations but he was mistakenly hired (IMHO) by Charles Adelson as a criminal defense lawyer. His purported flat fees were discussed by other lawyers such as clickbait YT lawyers, and IMHO it was exaggerated.

To have some realistic idea of criminal defense lawyers’ flat fees, notice that one of Donna Adelson’s lawyers is used to drive a 2010 Asian sedan. After starting to work on Donna Adelson’s case, that lawyer switched to a 2025 HUMMER EV 3X, which retails north of $100K. IYKYK, so make your own inference.

Why would John Lauro and Matthew Luka with combined billable hours of about $4,000 team up to defend Wendi Adelson?

Firstly, notice that Wendi Adelson being herself a member of the Florida bar is a major factor in the situation against her as labeled co-conspirator of murder. Second, she has shown that she is not a shiftless bum relying only on support of others. Wendi is somewhat arrogant, I take it. But given that she has escaped indictment these many years despite being labeled co-consipirator of a murder by the prosecutors, she must be a smart cookie.

When John Lauro has hired criminal defense lawyer Matthew Luka in 2023, just at about the time the other State labeled co-consipirator Donna Adelson is indicted, there must be a good reason!

When John Lauro stays in Tallahassee few days studying the court dynamics of Dan Markel's murder case instead of watching the proceeding via videos from the comfort of his office, there must be a good reason!

And the only sensible such good reason is that Wendi Adelson, John Lauro, and Matthew Luka (three members of the Florida bar) are worried that it is about time that a secret Grand Jury would have enough evidence to indict Wendi!

Yes, the conviction of Harvey Adelson’s “domestic coordinator” Donna highlighted his increasing exposure but that will not distract the State Attorneys from Wendi. Why would not they bag them both at once if a secret Grand Jury is willing to indict them together?