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

[opt]

It was strange how Dave A. tried to call Tamara out on her comment that she purchased a gun the next day after she saw Harvey and Donnas at Wendi’s, saying it takes time to get a gun unless you get it illegally. He must have some beef with her to do that. It was uncalled for IMO. Basically calling her a liar. Showed his true colors imo.

She said that she bought a gun the next day. Meaning paid for it. Not that she took delivery immediately. A lawyer should know how to parse English sentences literally and avoid extrapolation.

 

[Kakidoll]

It was strange how Dave A. tried to call Tamara out on her comment that she purchased a gun the next day after she saw Harvey and Donnas at Wendi’s, saying it takes time to get a gun unless you get it illegally. He must have some beef with her to do that. It was uncalled for IMO. Basically calling her a liar. Showed his true colors imo.

You can go and buy a gun, and take it with you. I've bought in under an hour. All they do is run a background check. Legit stores.

 

[Weki]

It was strange how Dave A. tried to call Tamara out on her comment that she purchased a gun the next day after she saw Harvey and Donnas at Wendi’s, saying it takes time to get a gun unless you get it illegally. He must have some beef with her to do that. It was uncalled for IMO. Basically calling her a liar. Showed his true colors imo.

Yeah what was THAT about?? Dave The Prosecutor came out. I don’t think he was saying she had to have bought it illegally but he was definitely being skeptical of her story.

Don’t forget he started out by saying “didn’t you convert to Judaism? But I guess when you need to speak to a priest you need a priest.”

Haha!

I don’t know much about her. It seemed she was pretty close not to just Dan but the Adelsons as well. She spent a lot of time with them. I’m guessing they saw her interview with Isom and that’s where “Enemy No.1” comment came from.

Talked to a priest, bought a gun, and moved has a pretty cinematic beat to it! Or a country song. I don’t know what to make of it. Adults with 2 small children can’t just uproot their lives willy nilly.

JMO

 

[rescuemom]

Yep. The Adelsons probably thought Tally was a hillbilly backwater filled with poorly educated hicks. Maybe they thought the trial would be like in the movie "My Cousin Vinny." (That's actually one of my faves.) Boy, were they ever wrong. Although it took a while, TPD and the prosecution dotted all their i's and crossed all their t's.

I've said this before. Tallahassee and surrounding area in the Big Bend of Florida has generational wealth, huge farm operations on hundreds of acres of land plus the academia. It is a capital city. Some of these backwater boys have more money than the slimy As have ever or will have. That's their problem. They and their arrogant circle think they are special, when in fact they are pretty low rent.

 

[Weki]

One thing that’s stood out to me is that it’s not typical for an impact statement to be made under oath at sentencing. And it’s also rare for a judge to swear in a defendant who wants to make a statement at their sentencing. It’s not testimony. It’s not evidence. I want to say, conservatively, in at least half the trials I’ve seen it’s unsworn. The judge just asks the defendant if they want to say something and they just go from there without the oath. And I’ve never seen a prosecutor cross examine a defendant’s pre-sentencing statement. Clearly, Florida law supports this and it’s just Judge Everett’s preference.

JMO

 

[Wishbone]

One thing that’s stood out to me is that it’s not typical for an impact statement to be made under oath at sentencing. And it’s also rare for a judge to swear in a defendant who wants to make a statement at their sentencing. It’s not testimony. It’s not evidence. I want to say, conservatively, in at least half the trials I’ve seen it’s unsworn. The judge just asks the defendant if they want to say something and they just go from there without the oath. And I’ve never seen a prosecutor cross examine a defendant’s pre-sentencing statement. Clearly, Florida law supports this and it’s just Judge Everett’s preference.

JMO

I may be being too optimistic but his sworn statement could be used against him when it's his turn to be tried for the murder of Dan Markel. JMOO