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

[Weki]

I’m glad to see some new names around here that are offering a fresh perspective and alternate theories – or less popular ones . I agree, its possible she was brought into the loop after the fact and perhaps out of necessity – maybe she knew or maybe she confronted them after she figured out (or highly suspected) they were responsible?. Did she know it was happening or have a hunch it was happening – did they tell her, or did she piece it together? Is that why she headed towards Trescott or was that just a coincidence? I have argued many times that if she was in on the plans, or simply aware the hit was talking place, and the plan was to murder Dan at his home, why would she venture out in the direction of the crime scene? That would make absolutely no sense – there is not a good explanation for a misstep like this.. especially if the TV repair was an alibi that Wendi was in on.

Yes! The TV repair alibi and the Trescott drive are inconsistent. If Wendi is this cunning and manipulative mastermind that set Donna and Charlie on this path and made sure she would never face the consequences as many believe then why in the heck is she driving to the murder scene when she presumably knew it was going down around that day/time???

JMO

 

[Going Rogue]

Yes! The TV repair alibi and the Trescott drive are inconsistent. If Wendi is this cunning and manipulative mastermind that set Donna and Charlie on this path and made sure she would never face the consequences as many believe then why in the heck is she driving to the murder scene when she presumably knew it was going down around that day/time???

JMO

Maybe we are overlooking the obvious? Maybe she thought they’d never suspect her if she actually drove to the crime scene – who would be that stupid? Same tactic she used when she told Jeff the chilling version of the hitman story and when she painted a giant bullseye on Charlie's back during the police interview – a coordinated and strategic use of reverse psychology... LOL

 

[AuDHD]

JMO but this thread could use less infighting and childish name calling, posturing, eye roll reacting, whatever else just bc you don’t agree 100% with the content of someone’s messages. No one is saying anything wild and crazy and out there- it is all just different interpretations of the publicly known facts. We all think they are guilty as far as I have seen in the weeks or so I’ve been on here. We vary in our thinking on what wendi was guilty of when.

I’ve not seen anyone positing that she should walk away clean or that justice will be served if she’s not arrested.

We should be able to be respectful when discussing this murder just as we seem to be able to discuss other tragedies without mud slinging or saying things like “if your opinion is different to all of ours consider you’re just wrong” (paraphrase from yesterday)
JMO

 

[Fromeaster]

Even if Wendi is not arrested I am glad that she is getting a lot of hate because she deserves it, letting your children grow up with their father's murderers is a crime. In my eyes, there is a monster who does not even allow children to visit their father's grave and communicate with their grandparents. Her roommate Jorge who supports her should also pay the price of publicity. The moral is not to kill and not to support murderers.

 

[LinasK]

Well said! I'll add that, in the past, I've often been accused of having an agenda for simply questioning the strength of the state's case against Wendi. You don’t need to outright disagree with the prevailing opinion that she is "definitely” guilty. Suggesting it's possible she wasn't involved in the plans is enough to be labeled as someone with an agenda, having nefarious motives, not posting in good faith or (yes I’ve hear this) not informed or just stupid.

The YouTube content creators have fed the echo chamber for years. Most channel hosts understand what gets clicks, views, and a happy subscriber base. Fair and balanced coverage is not their priority. Instead, they often amplify sensational narratives or lean into popular opinions to keep their audience engaged, drowning out nuanced discussions or alternative perspectives in favor of content that fuels outrage or confirmation bias. This creates an environment where questioning the dominant narrative, even with evidence or reason, is quickly dismissed or vilified, making it difficult for open dialogue to thrive.

But that's just it. You are speculating as well. Until the prosecution actually presents it's case against Wendi, you'll never know how strong their case is. It's customary for LE to hold their cards close to the vest as the expression goes, and oftentimes evidence is withheld from the public so that the murderer slips up and confesses knowledge of details that weren't released to the public. Since Wendi hasn't been charged yet, none of us can know everything that they have. What may appear weak now, may in reality be alot more that they have that will come out.

 

[LinasK]

I’m glad to see some new names around here that are offering a fresh perspective and alternate theories – or less popular ones . I agree, its possible she was brought into the loop after the fact and perhaps out of necessity – maybe she knew or maybe she confronted them after she figured out (or highly suspected) they were responsible?. Did she know it was happening or have a hunch it was happening – did they tell her, or did she piece it together? Is that why she headed towards Trescott or was that just a coincidence? I have argued many times that if she was in on the plans, or simply aware the hit was talking place, and the plan was to murder Dan at his home, why would she venture out in the direction of the crime scene? That would make absolutely no sense – there is not a good explanation for a misstep like this.. especially if the TV repair was an alibi that Wendi was in on.

I've never been as active as you Floridians on this case, or like Kathy that went down to one of the trials, but I've followed it ever since Dateline first aired the episode.

 

[Going Rogue]

But that's just it. You are speculating as well. Until the prosecution actually presents it's case against Wendi, you'll never know how strong their case is. It's customary for LE to hold their cards close to the vest as the expression goes, and oftentimes evidence is withheld from the public so that the murderer slips up and confesses knowledge of details that weren't released to the public. Since Wendi hasn't been charged yet, none of us can know everything that they have. What may appear weak now, may in reality be alot more that they have that will come out.

I agree with you in principle, which is why I always emphasize that I am only basing my opinion on information that’s public…. and based on what’s public, I believe the case against her is weak. Of course we don’t know what other evidence that state has…. but you never hear anyone suggest they might have a mountain of exculpatory evidence, do you? No, its always the opposite… It should be looked at both ways – correct? We can only base our opinion on the information in the public sphere.

 

[Weki]

But that's just it. You are speculating as well. Until the prosecution actually presents it's case against Wendi, you'll never know how strong their case is. It's customary for LE to hold their cards close to the vest as the expression goes, and oftentimes evidence is withheld from the public so that the murderer slips up and confesses knowledge of details that weren't released to the public. Since Wendi hasn't been charged yet, none of us can know everything that they have. What may appear weak now, may in reality be alot more that they have that will come out.

Also, the case against Wendi may appear weak now because it IS weak and they have nothing more, right? The argument goes both ways. The state could have more or they could have nothing more. In either case, we are ALL discussing it because this is a discussion forum for criminal trials. Or are you saying we need to stop all discussion until the state presents their case against Wendi?

JMO

 

[opt]

I doubt that betting is allowed here, but would anyone here put money on Wendi's being found not guilty on all counts? Based on Donna's verdict, that would be a foolish bet.

 

[Fromeaster]

I doubt that betting is allowed here, but would anyone here put money on Wendi's being found not guilty on all counts? Based on Donna's verdict, that would be a foolish bet.

Why not, if there was a juror who acquitted K M in the first trial, where everything was obvious.

 

[Weki]

I doubt that betting is allowed here, but would anyone here put money on Wendi's being found not guilty on all counts? Based on Donna's verdict, that would be a foolish bet.

Hypothetically speaking, I would bet $1,000 that Wendi will never be arrested and charged.

 

[Zedzded]

I doubt that betting is allowed here, but would anyone here put money on Wendi's being found not guilty on all counts? Based on Donna's verdict, that would be a foolish bet.

The way the jury so willingly accepted a lot of the potentially arguable evidence that incriminated DA, WA would not stand a chance.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

PS....especially the part alluding to past "bad deeds" by the A's. Apparently scary enough to make one wary of being in their crosshairs, even now.

Thank you for the link, that was great.

 

[Fromeaster]

My other theory is that Charlie and Donna told Wendi without telling Wendi about the murder. Don't buy the house, everything will be fine, we'll solve your problem, here's your alibi. She understood everything, but it was like, do whatever you want, I don't know anything. But out of curiosity, she drove to the crime scene.

 

[BearWatcher]

But if that was the case, why: 1) Queey if he was going to be in town that week? 2) why did she go into detail, after she and JL broke up did she ask the details about his travel plans? 3) why was she pulling the pictures off the walls? etc

 

[Fromeaster]

But if that was the case, why: 1) Queey if he was going to be in town that week? 2) why did she go into detail, after she and JL broke up did she ask the details about his travel plans? 3) why was she pulling the pictures off the walls? etc

The idea is that she knew everything or agreed to it, but it was not said in words, we will solve your problem and she understood everything and followed their instructions. As for Jeff, I agree with you.

 

[Fromeaster]

I also think that when Charlie started joking about the murder, Wendi laughed along with him, and somewhere deep down she realized that she wanted Dan dead.

 

[opt]

The idea is that she knew everything or agreed to it, but it was not said in words, we will solve your problem and she understood everything and followed their instructions. As for Jeff, I agree with you.

The only way to persuade a jury that the agreement was not explicit would be for Wendi to testify. Bring it on.

 

[StarryStarryNight]

Even if Wendi is not arrested I am glad that she is getting a lot of hate because she deserves it, letting your children grow up with their father's murderers is a crime. In my eyes, there is a monster who does not even allow children to visit their father's grave and communicate with their grandparents. Her roommate Jorge who supports her should also pay the price of publicity. The moral is not to kill and not to support murderers.

I don’t know if Wendi will ever be arrested but her behavior before, during, and after the murder is certainly sketchy. At the very least, I think she knew what her family was getting ready to do.
The most telling thing to me is that she allowed her children’s last name the to be changed to Adelson. Absolutely no regard for her murdered husband or his family. Not even now. He was the problem, and he was removed.
A family of sociopaths.

 

[Zedzded]

My other theory is that Charlie and Donna told Wendi without telling Wendi about the murder. Don't buy the house, everything will be fine, we'll solve your problem, here's your alibi. She understood everything, but it was like, do whatever you want, I don't know anything. But out of curiosity, she drove to the crime scene.

That's sort of the defence I've mooted that WA might adopt. She grew suspicious that maybe her family had planned on killing Dan and on the morning of the murder, she was very emotional as she became even more suspicious with odd behaviour from DA and CA e.g insisting on having a TV repair guy come out. This prompted her to drive to the crime scene, fearful Danny had been shot. She saw the police tape, panicked and fled hence the reason she didn't stop to check.

When being interviewed by LE she was in denial, couldn't bring herself to accept CA and DA plotted to kill DanM so told police that her family were not resposible. She continued to be in denial until SG was arrested, phoning SY after having an ephihany that her family really were involved in his murder.

It won't work, but it has a better chance than going with the fallen tree defence. But I think she will still roll the dice and stride in to court defiantly claiming she had no knowledge blah blah blah.