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

[Going Rogue]

And as I mentioned previously the divorce had been finalised a year before which included the financial settlement. And as I also mentioned there is no need in the valuation of one's assets to put specific information such as year of the car and especially the license plate.

If there was some specific motion or process that was ongoing relating to the financial settlement that involved the cars that will be easy for WA's previous lawyer to produce that documentation. Without any relevant documentation, the idea that it was divorce related will be usurped by the likelihood that it was related to the murder.

Every piece of circumstantial evidence that the prosecution produces will need a credible and plausible explanation. Without that the jury will most likely accept the prosecution's interpretation of the evidence.

WA's attorney will smile and laugh and look all cute as he wax's lyrical about WA's poor sense of direction, driving past all those liquor stores and that's fine. He can do story time till the cows come home. The jury simply will not accept silly and implausible explanations.

Thus no financial documentation vis a vis licence plate information, it defaults to it was relating to the murder.

In the post-divorce filings, Dan filed a motion claiming Wendi failed to properly disclose the value of certain assets. I recall one motion specifically mentioning the minivan, where Dan alleged she did not list the vehicle’s value, among other things. There was a video on AALegal’s channel where this motion was read, but I’m not about to spend time digging it up – I promise you its there, I specifically remember that detail. I disagree the marital asset / financial disclosures were resolved in 2013 – at least Dan was still filing motions fighting for $ based on what he believed to be erroneous financial disclosers by Wendi. I bet it wasn't 'resolved' in Donna's mind.

 

[Going Rogue]

But why did she pick two very specific dates. June 4th (hit attempt) and April 21st. Presumably there were plenty of times WA was drunk/high.erratic. Why April 21st? Plausible remember!

Obviously there is significance to the June 4th date. As far as the April 21th date, maybe you are looking too deeply into it – my guess is dates make the story more believable or the help establish a timeline but I don’t believe there is any significance to that date that is tied to the murder or planning.

 

[Zedzded]

In the post-divorce filings, Dan filed a motion claiming Wendi failed to properly disclose the value of certain assets. I recall one motion specifically mentioning the minivan, where Dan alleged she did not list the vehicle’s value, among other things. There was a video on AALegal’s channel where this motion was read, but I’m not about to spend time digging it up – I promise you its there, I specifically remember that detail. I disagree the material asset / financial disclosures were resolved in 2013 – at least Dan was still filing motions fighting for $ based on what he believed to be erroneous financial disclosers by Wendi. I bet it wasn't 'resolved' in Donna's mind.

Yes I know about the motion re hidden assets. I would assume they would deal with that separately without having to redo the financial settlement all over again, a separate issue. There was a financial settlement that was dealt with re houses, money etc. Hence the reason Dan stayed in the marital home. That said if there was a possibility that the car info related to the financial settlement it would be up to the defence to produce the relevant documentation to refute the prosecutions claim the car info was related to the murder.

Fulford never mentioned anything about it. It was brought up in the trial wasn't it?

 

[Zedzded]

Obviously there is significance to the June 4th date. As far as the April 21th date, maybe you are looking too deeply into it – my guess is dates make the story more believable or the help establish a timeline but I don’t believe there is any significance to that date that is tied to the murder or planning.

There was a 3rd attempt (supposedly) where the hitmen ran off with the money. This involved SG and some other guy.

GC is an astute prosecutor with limited time on her hands. Mentioning random times when WA was drunk to try and discredit her when she's not even on trial seems a tad ridiculous.

Note if she wanted to truly discredit her she has JL's multiple statements about her cheating on him, sleeping with another man 45mins before him, cheating on him at a conference and getting "spanked", OK Cupid activity, boyfriend down in Miami etc

 

[Going Rogue]

Yes I know about the motion re hidden assets. I would assume they would deal with that separately without having to redo the financial settlement all over again, a separate issue. There was a financial settlement that was dealt with re houses, money etc. Hence the reason Dan stayed in the marital home. That said if there was a possibility that the car info related to the financial settlement it would be up to the defence to produce the relevant documentation to refute the prosecutions claim the car info was related to the murder.

Fulford never mentioned anything about it. It was brought up in the trial wasn't it?

Not sure what the legal procedure would be to handle those motions on erroneous financial disclosures – but I don think that's relevant to the argument of why the car info (BOTH Vehicles) were
in Donna’s planner. According to the prosecution, Donna was intimately involved in EVERY aspect of the divorce filings and motions. She VERY likely knew Dan was raising that specific concern of the minivan and with that said its not so hard to understand why BOTH vehicles are listed in her planner – Occam’s razor. Again, if it were just Dan’s vehicle, its a much stronger argument.

As far as your expectation that Donna’s attorneys would have caught that detail and make a counterargument or the point I’m making – many things like that are missed in trials. This a complex case with a lot of detail and many moving parts.

 

[Weki]

The prosecution used Jeff in all four trials to portray Wendi in a negative light, so the April 21st ‘new’ story, is par for the course. I wonder what new stories we’ll hear in a Wendi trial? The reality is that Jeff felt "wronged" by Wendi—his own words from his testimony. He knew she cheated on him but stayed with her. Even days after Dan’s murder, he wanted her back—again, his words. Wendi ended the relationship abruptly, and in my opinion, Jeff’s resentment toward her grew and intensified in the months following Dan’s murder. His three police interviews seem to support this theory. In the third interview, eight months after the murder, Jeff was convinced Wendi was involved and appeared determined to implicate her. I strongly believe Jeff is a good person trying to do the right thing. However, in his effort to be helpful, he may have recalled events inaccurately or subconsciously exaggerated certain details. I have previously pointed out specific examples of that in the past which can reasonably be proven and they have gone unchecked in social media. Jeff is likely the primary reason 99% of those following this case believe Wendi was directly involved. His testimony will be critical in a potential Wendi trial, and I believe it will face significant scrutiny in cross-examination.

Remember at Donna’s trial, Jeff started to testify about how Wendi asked him about memory in small children. He started to answer and the defense objected saying they never got discovery on this testimony. Georgia said they did. Court took a break. After the break, Georgia admitted that she thought it was turned over but it wasn’t. And she dropped the subject. Defense agreed it was inadvertent.

Jeff also testified to new details he never shared before at Charlie’s trial. I noticed how much padding was in his testimony at Charlie’s trial compared to before. It was curious to me. I’m not saying he’s lying. I think he’s credible but as you said he was ruminating over and over about this whole thing and I wonder if his mind is embellishing in an attempt to make sense of the whole relationship?

Jeff will be grilled under cross examination at a potential Wendi trial. At this point I can’t say how he would weather that.

JMO

 

[Zedzded]

She VERY likely knew Dan was raising that specific concern of the minivan and with that said its not so hard to understand why BOTH vehicles are listed in her planner – Occam’s razor. Again, if it were just Dan’s vehicle, its a much stronger argument.

It's a spanner in the works that's for sure. i genuinely believe that DA had WA's down to give to the hitmen (via CA) to somehow protect her. But that's a hard sell to the jury. Could be it cancels out Dan's license plate and is irrelevant.

 

[Zedzded]

to make sense of the whole relationship?

I don't even know why he was with her. The relationship sounded disastrous.

 

[Going Rogue]

There was a 3rd attempt (supposedly) where the hitmen ran off with the money. This involved SG and some other guy.

GC is an astute prosecutor with limited time on her hands. Mentioning random times when WA was drunk to try and discredit her when she's not even on trial seems a tad ridiculous.

Note if she wanted to truly discredit her she has JL's multiple statements about her cheating on him, sleeping with another man 45mins before him, cheating on him at a conference and getting "spanked", OK Cupid activity, boyfriend down in Miami etc

Yes, like I said the prosecution was using Jeff’s firsthand knowledge of Wendi to paint her in a negative light. I don think they have any credible info on the 3rd attempt.

 

[Going Rogue]

Remember at Donna’s trial, Jeff started to testify about how Wendi asked him about memory in small children. He started to answer and the defense objected saying they never got discovery on this testimony. Georgia said they did. Court took a break. After the break, Georgia admitted that she thought it was turned over but it wasn’t. And she dropped the subject. Defense agreed it was inadvertent.

Jeff also testified to new details he never shared before at Charlie’s trial. I noticed how much padding was in his testimony at Charlie’s trial compared to before. It was curious to me. I’m not saying he’s lying. I think he’s credible but as you said he was ruminating over and over about this whole thing and I wonder if his mind is embellishing in an attempt to make sense of the whole relationship?

Jeff will be grilled under cross examination at a potential Wendi trial. At this point I can’t say how he would weather that.

JMO

Yes, I feel terrible for Jeff, and I often hold back some of my criticisms of him because I genuinely feel bad for him. I’ve said this before, I believe he has good intentions, but some of his testimony has evolved over time. I still give him credit and think he was overall helpful to the prosecution and key in securing all previous convictions. However, I believe some of his testimony was embellished or exaggerated to fit certain narratives. That’s an honest take, and most people will absolutely refuse to acknowledge it or consider the possibility. I’ve brought up some of these points in more detail in the past, and they weren’t well received. I found it very interesting that the “new” kids’ art story is surfacing more than 11 years later .

 

[Zedzded]

I found it very interesting that the “new” kids’ art story is surfacing more than 11 years later .

That surprised me too.

It will be hard for WA to take the stand though and refute everything. Even if JL made it up, he's the credible one, she isn't. It kind of gives him Carte Blanche to say what he wants. WA denies it as does her lawyer, but who does the jury believe? That's why I said DA really needed to align herself with the truth as much as possible. We knew if she tried to align with CA's extortion theory she was toast... her credibility was gone.

 

[Tortoise]

She did not have the VIN. She had:
make
model
license plate
and year car was made (to help identify it). A 2015 Honda Odyssey looks very different to a 2005 one.

Yes, just attaching a screenshot. Note Wendi's car did not have the license plate written down.


ASA Georgia Cappleman displays Donna Adelson’s planner from 2014 and points out that Adelson made a note of Dan Markel’s vehicle and the tag number during testimony Friday, Aug. 29, 2025. Show less
Alicia Devine/Tallahassee Democrat
Donna Adelson trial: Three key moments for jurors that led to guilty verdict

 

[Zedzded]

Yes, just attaching a screenshot. Note Wendi's car did not have the license plate written down.

View attachment 614288
ASA Georgia Cappleman displays Donna Adelson’s planner from 2014 and points out that Adelson made a note of Dan Markel’s vehicle and the tag number during testimony Friday, Aug. 29, 2025. Show less
Alicia Devine/Tallahassee Democrat
Donna Adelson trial: Three key moments for jurors that led to guilty verdict

Ooh that's interesting. Thanks for that. Also it looks like her blue pen died and she finished using black. "Dr Lia" written below is also in black so could give a hint as to when the car info was added.

Also the year of the Accord is wrong. It's an 07 not an 08. So it's unlikely she got that information from a formal document. Someone gave her the wrong information.

 

[Knitpicker]

Ooh that's interesting. Thanks for that. Also it looks like her blue pen died and she finished using black. "Dr Lia" written below is also in black so could give a hint as to when the car info was added.

Also the year of the Accord is wrong. It's an 07 not an 08. So it's unlikely she got that information from a formal document. Someone gave her the wrong information.

Dr Lic=Drivers License
I think if I’m not mistaken-on the page to the right was Charlies car/vin.
Too busy this weekend to look for it but I will when I have time.

 

[Zedzded]

I think if I’m not mistaken-on the page to the right was Charlies car/vin.

Oh thats not good. Blows my theory out the water!

 

[Weki]

Ruth Markel in her post-verdict interview with Joel says Donna is the implementer, the architect, and the coordinator of this murder. And that this murder would not have happened without her.

I’m more than satisfied that justice has been FULLY served for her son, Danny Markel. I think it’s really sad that this momentous conviction of Donna is being diminished by the fake narrative about this murder. The tremendous effort and hard work by law enforcement is also being diminished because of this fake narrative. One by friggin’ one they all fell. Life in prison + 30 + 30 for all!!! Incredible!

JMO

 

[SubtlePseudonym]

Yes, it's reasonable to believe that Wendi either knew in advance and potentially contributed in some manner in an act in furtherance of the crime. I haven't seen anyone post anything here ever claiming she was unequivocally not involved or not aware. The core argument, however, is whether Wendi's direct involvement can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. In my humble opinion, the Tallahassee DA's office does not believe they can reasonably meet that burden—or, stated differently, they realize there's a very high risk in taking her to trial with the information they currently have. With the risk of coming across as arrogant (for the second time this week), if anyone believes the DA's office is confident they can meet the burden of proof, you're not looking at this realistically—or perhaps you've bought into the hype of the "125 indicators of guilt".

I now understand the point, for M1. Still can’t see a path for her not to be charged with anything at all ever, with evidence already shown in the trials.

 

[Knitpicker]

Oh thats not good. Blows my theory out the water!

So not sure if you got that the prior one from me -is not “Dr Lia” but Dr. Lic=Drivers license.(For Wendi) At least that is what I got out of it.

For the Charlie’s car reference:
Go to “law and Crime Trials” on YT, titled “Donna Adelson wrote down Dan Markels License plate in Planner before Murder” and at the 8:03 mark, to the right of DM’s plate number is a vertical double line, and then see part of “Charl…and then vin#”.
I remember noticing that at the trial. So at the trial they did not show that whole page but we can conclude that the “Charl then vin#” must be one of Charlies cars.

Not sure why they wouldn't have shown that whole page. They could have redacted the number like they did elsewhere.
I guess it wasn’t important.

 

[jumpinjack]

Ruth Markel in her post-verdict interview with Joel says Donna is the implementer, the architect, and the coordinator of this murder. And that this murder would not have happened without her.

I’m more than satisfied that justice has been FULLY served for her son, Danny Markel. I think it’s really sad that this momentous conviction of Donna is being diminished by the fake narrative about this murder. The tremendous effort and hard work by law enforcement is also being diminished because of this fake narrative. One by friggin’ one they all fell. Life in prison + 30 + 30 for all!!! Incredible!

JMO

Garcia got life plus 30, he was found NG on solicitation but point taken.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

The foeeperson talked with STS. It's a good, worthwhile interview.