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

[Going Rogue]

The journalist that took that photo had not crossed police tape otherwise they would have been arrested. So what they saw is what WA saw. i.e no tree.

The ‘crime scene’ was Dan’s property and was taped off. I can’t say for sure that the photo wasn’t taken from just outside the north roadblock – its possible, but I don’t buy your argument…..a journalist could have gotten past (walked) the roadblocks – I agree they would not have been permitted on the property…. but it was a good thought – maybe things are different in Australia

 

[Knitpicker]

The ‘crime scene’ was Dan’s property and was taped off. I can’t say for sure that the photo wasn’t taken from just outside the north roadblock – its possible, but I don’t buy your argument…..a journalist could have gotten past (walked) the roadblocks – I agree they would not have been permitted on the property…. but it was a good thought – maybe things are different in Australia

ZOOM LENS

 

[Zedzded]

By statements of at least three law enforcement officers / detectives (Isom, Brennan and I forgot the female officer’s name) that all testified that the north roadblock was set up 2 to 5 houses north of Dan’s home.

which is it 2 or 5?

Note 5 houses down still gives WA line of sight.

 

[Going Rogue]

which is it 2 or 5?

Note 5 houses down still gives WA line of sight.

Three witness for the state gave varying distances from 2 to 5 houses away and therein lies the problem. Which is exactly why I’ve been saying in a Wendi trial (if there is one) this will be an issue for the prosecution. As I said several times if it was 5 houses away, you can’t see Dan’s house from that location - double check your claim using Google earth street view. Do we trust Office Brennon after he was asked “could you see Dan’s house from where you set up the roadblock” Remember his responses? He said ~ “Seems likely”. Same guy that changed his testimony about the occupant of the vehicle – Decoste called him out. Sorry, but if we are going to analyze this case objectively, we can’t ignore or hide from bad facts.

 

[Zedzded]

Three witness for the state gave varying distances from 2 to 5 houses away and therein lies the problem. Which is exactly why I’ve been saying in a Wendi trial (if there is one) this will be an issue for the prosecution. As I said several times if it was 5 houses away, you can’t see Dan’s house from that location - double check your claim using Google earth street view. Do we trust Office Brennon after he was asked “could you see Dan’s house from where you set up the roadblock” Remember his responses? He said ~ “Seems likely”. Same guy that changed his testimony about the occupant of the vehicle – Decoste called him out. Sorry, but if we are going to analyze this case objectively, we can’t ignore or hide from bad facts.

But then if there was tape 5 houses down, are you suggesting multiple news reporters broke the law and climbed over the tape to get video and photos?

 

[Tortoise]

Was the 'stock the bar' party a suitable party for young children?

 

[Knitpicker]

Three witness for the state gave varying distances from 2 to 5 houses away and therein lies the problem. Which is exactly why I’ve been saying in a Wendi trial (if there is one) this will be an issue for the prosecution. As I said several times if it was 5 houses away, you can’t see Dan’s house from that location - double check your claim using Google earth street view. Do we trust Office Brennon after he was asked “could you see Dan’s house from where you set up the roadblock” Remember his responses? He said ~ “Seems likely”. Same guy that changed his testimony about the occupant of the vehicle – Decoste called him out. Sorry, but if we are going to analyze this case objectively, we can’t ignore or hide from bad facts.

The question is not whether she saw the house the question is whether she saw 15 cars, on the street , and on the driveway. We know the house is not visible from the street.

And yes, why did they (Isom and Brannon) not know how many houses down the tape was, when it looks like there was tape on the utility pole RIGHT at Dans house!. Court Tv reported that Brannon said 2-6 houses (a big difference) away and clearly we don’t see that. No one frustrated me more than Brannon. He was standing there. He should have known. I give Isom a pass bc he was at the house.

 

[Going Rogue]

But then if there was tape 5 houses down, are you suggesting multiple news reporters broke the law and climbed over the tape to get video and photos?

No, I’m not suggesting that. What I’m saying is there are no pictures, at least that I’ve seen, that show where the north roadblock was set up. All we have to go on is what was given in previous testimony - which was that it was set up anywhere from 2 to 5 (maybe 6?) houses away. You showed a picture taken from north of Dan’s home and all I’m saying is we don’t know where that was taken from. It may have been taken from outside the north perimeter or possibly from inside the perimeter.

 

[Going Rogue]

The question is not whether she saw the house the question is whether she saw 15 cars, on the street , and on the driveway. We know the house is not visible from the street.

And yes, why did they (Isom and Brannon) not know how many houses down the tape was, when it looks like there was tape on the utility pole RIGHT at Dans house!. Court Tv reported that Brannon said 2-6 houses (a big difference) away and clearly we don’t see that. No one frustrated me more than Brannon. He was standing there. He should have known. I give Isom a pass bc he was at the house.

Take a close look at the picture posted last night. Do you see anything close to15 vehicles? I’m sure most have a mental image of multiple vehicles, flashing lights and a chaotic scene - in that pic we don’t see that. We don’t even know exactly where the roadblock was set up and we don’t know what kind of view Wendi may have had from outside the police roadblock north of Dan’s home or how many vehicles were there when she arrived at roadblock. From 4 to 5 houses away, you likely can’t even see vehicles if there were any in the driveway.

 

[Knitpicker]

Take a close look at the picture posted last night. Do you see anything close to15 vehicles? I’m sure most have a mental image of multiple vehicles, flashing lights and a chaotic scene - in that pic we don’t see that. We don’t even know exactly where the roadblock was set up and we don’t know what kind of view Wendi may have had from outside the police roadblock north of Dan’s home or how many vehicles were there when she arrived at roadblock. From 4 to 5 houses away, you likely can’t even see vehicles if there were any in the driveway.

There were cars there for awhile. Some came, some left and there were some on that long driveway which is also not visible from the road. I do realize I said that she should have seen 15 cars. Even if she saw the ones visible fromt he street there were at least 5 we can see. And it was right in front of her house.
Since she drove down that road all the time as a shortcut, she would know which house it was when she drove up to it.
A

 

[Zedzded]

The topic of Wendi’s ‘inconsistent’ testimony about the intended trip down Trescott is so misunderstood from a legal standpoint – I’ll even call out the ‘Great” Carl Steinbeck on this who has fed the narrative to the ‘community’ it’s perjury – laughable. There is no doubt her statements are inconsistent. I’ve said this many times, in EVERY single trial Wendi’s testimony is VERY clear that Trescott was her intended route and in EVERY single trial she said she saw the ‘police tape’ – EVERY ONE. Yes, there is some variation and inconsistency regarding the ‘turn’ on Trescott. It can’t be proven that she purposely lied – maybe she did, maybe it was memory issue?

Memory issue? She drove down Trescott for 5 mins. In her police interview only hours after her Trescott trip, she said she didn't turn on Trescott, there was tape (there wasn't) so she carried on straight down Centreville.

Irrespectively, as i keep saying, it's what the jury will believe. A defence attorney will be laughed out of court if they try and suggest WA had memory loss. Even in DA's trial she was still lying.

A jury of our peers will determine she is lying. Otherwise any person on the stand could simply excuse their lies as memory loss. Credibility is extremely important in a trial. WA's credibility will be very easily exposed by GC. She has just told too many lies and has too much to cover up.

 

[Knitpicker]

Memory issue? She drove down Trescott for 5 mins. In her police interview only hours after her Trescott trip, she said she didn't turn on Trescott, there was tape (there wasn't) so she carried on straight down Centreville.

Irrespectively, as i keep saying, it's what the jury will believe. A defence attorney will be laughed out of court if they try and suggest WA had memory loss. Even in DA's trial she was still lying.

A jury of our peers will determine she is lying. Otherwise any person on the stand could simply excuse their lies as memory loss. Credibility is extremely important in a trial. WA's credibility will be very easily exposed by GC. She has just told too many lies and has too much to cover up.

The last jury didn’t believe Wendi as did the others.

 

[Zedzded]

The last jury didn’t believe Wendi as did the others.

Yeah it's something certain people are struggling to grasp. An excuse for actions/behaviours/words needs to be plausible. WA saying she's bad with directions is not plausible.

 

[Zedzded]

This is why DA did not take the stand. Every difficult question GC asked would be met with bizarre, ludicrous responses. "I wanted to go to a non extradition country because it would be easier to return!"

Uh huh....

WA"s situation is much more problematic. Whilst one could argue there is more evidence incriminating DA, WA has more lies that need to be explained and more difficult questions to answer. She will get on the stand and just say "she can't remember" or "that witness is lying."

As soon as the jury discovers one lie, she's screwed. Her testimony is worthless and anything she says will be worthless. She probably won't take the stand.

 

[Knitpicker]

Yeah it's something certain people are struggling to grasp. An excuse for actions/behaviours/words needs to be plausible. WA saying she's bad with directions is not plausible.

Right because it’s a small town with only one major shopping center in her area (where she gets her food in Publix) that she frequents that has its own liquor store near it. And at the time one upscale lunch and dinner place to frequent with her friends….”but sure”.

 

[PayrollNerd]

@Niner

I’ll be on my laptop tonight after my dentist appt to help update the case, unless another member can get online to assist prior to that. Sorry for the delay!

 

[BUF]

On Thursday, State Attorney Jack Campbell told WTXL ABC 27 that convicted murderer Donna Adelson will be sentenced on Monday, October 13th, at 3:00 p.m.

BREAKING: Donna Adelson to be sentenced Monday, per State Attorney Jack Campbell

Adelson faces a life sentence after being found guilty of first-degree murder, solicitation, and conspiracy to commit first-degree murder.

www.wtxl.com

 

[arielilane]

Dan Markel would have been 53 years of age today.

 

[Ferpo]

On Thursday, State Attorney Jack Campbell told WTXL ABC 27 that convicted murderer Donna Adelson will be sentenced on Monday, October 13th, at 3:00 p.m.

BREAKING: Donna Adelson to be sentenced Monday, per State Attorney Jack Campbell

Adelson faces a life sentence after being found guilty of first-degree murder, solicitation, and conspiracy to commit first-degree murder.

www.wtxl.com

This is strange, I cannot figure out why the sentencing is being fast-tracked.

 

[Knitpicker]

On Thursday, State Attorney Jack Campbell told WTXL ABC 27 that convicted murderer Donna Adelson will be sentenced on Monday, October 13th, at 3:00 p.m.

BREAKING: Donna Adelson to be sentenced Monday, per State Attorney Jack Campbell

Adelson faces a life sentence after being found guilty of first-degree murder, solicitation, and conspiracy to commit first-degree murder.

www.wtxl.com

Joel said it and Jansen said it wasn’t official. (Last night). Glad it is.