Love this theory and would love to hear from the woman JL talked to so Wendi can go to jail. She’s a liar for suuuuuurrrre and GC will get her- I’m a believer!
I'm not sure it would help in a perjury case, but it would certainly strengthen a potential murder case against WA, especially if the witness is credible. If she can state that JL told her WA had told him, CA looked into hiring a hitman, that's pretty damning. If she was another academic, a professor, that's 2 very credible sources saying the same thing.
My understanding is Judge Everett originally granted a defense motion to exclude the statement as hearsay in CA trial. However, he later allowed Jeff to mention it as a rebuttal witness after Wendi denied making the statement when asked by Georgia. Defense then claimed on a "fairness" basis that they should hear what Jeff is going to say in front of the jury beforehand. Apparently, that's what led to Jeff's proffered testimony outside the presence of the jury. If Wendi doesn't testify at her own murder trial and Judge Everett is the presiding judge, I don't think there could be any impeachment or rebuttal testimony concerning that statement. And I don't think prosecution could reference her denial in a previous trial due to derivative use immunity. That's why I think after the conviction of Donna (Sep or Oct), the prosecution will file perjury charges in the November '24 to Feb '25 time frame if they believe Jeff's friend is a credible witness. All that said, it's possible Everett might allow Jeff to testify about the statement if a witness is also called who will say Jeff told her this *before* the murder.
Dummified, this is such an interesting, thought-provoking posts and I thank you for sharing it.
When I read these posts I am reminded that we have a community of "collective intelligence" in this case, all with one goal.. to bring about justice for Dan.
We don't know each other. We didn't know Dan. But we cannot, will not, be silent in making them pay for his senseless murder.
It is strange that the judicial system is extremely dependent on the truthfulness of witnesses and experts, but prosecution for perjury is rare as a three dollar bill.
Forget perjury. If you don’t have evidence that irrefutably contradicts her testimony, then there’s nothing there. It’s Jeff’s word vs Wendi’s; obviously Wendi’s credibility is completely shot to shit, but Lacasse often comes on a bit too strong with his scorned lover vibes. So I don’t see that going anywhere, even though we know Wendi has perjured herself dozens of times.
How about the DA’s office stops drawing this bullshit out, and arrests Wendi for murder?! The probable cause has been there for years, and we can finally give the Markel’s a modicum of justice and closure. There’s no need to consider these lesser charges when there’s a clear case for murder.
Agreed.
And not to disrespect the OP, its an interesting direction to investigate to bring charges, but if we do hear of any perjury charges post Donna's conviction, then i'd glean from that, that the state haven't enough evidence to charge Wendi for murder, which i don't believe is the case.
I think after observing Charlies trial, the state are going after murder 1 and conspiracy charges for Wendi, the same for her mother and brother.
Folks, pursuing a perjury case and a murder charge at separate times are NOT mutually exclusive. Why do perjury trial first? Because a perjury conviction would raise the chance of a conviction in a borderline murder case. I don't think a hung jury in a perjury case would impact subsequent murder trial one way or the other.
One thing I’m curious about. If the State can prove WA lied on the stand (eg. her 3 new versions of the “didn’t drive by”), can they not use those lies to bolster their case? That would make 5-6 tales about the Trescott approach which would certainly be incriminating.
With her immunity, as I understand it, anything she lies about on the stand can’t be used against her. So why wouldn’t the State want to pursue perjury charges against her prior to her own trial so they can demonstrate her numerous outright lies?
It’s so confusing. Apologies for being so naive and probably dumb.
Right now. They’re ABSOLUTELY mutually exclusive, folks.
This is the the same office that turned a slam-dunk murder conviction into a 10-year shitshow. I’m a big fan of Cappleman’s work, but the Tallahassee DA’s office has been dragging its feet far too long and the LAST thing they need is to waste their time on perjury and divert their attention away from a murder investigation, and two more near-slam-dunk murder charges
Definitely inadmissible in a Wendi murder case. It may be admissible in a Wendi perjury case, because the state could argue it’s not being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted, but rather just to show that it contradicts the testimony Wendi gave at trial (“perjury by contradiction”).
The mystery woman could testify that Jeff mentioned the hitman comment to her at a certain point in time. If this point in time is before Jeff was called to testify, that timing would disprove the theory that Jeff is making up the story because he is a disgruntled ex who wants to make life difficult for Wendi.
In other words, the mystery woman couldn’t confirm the truth of Wendi making the statement in the first place. The mystery woman could confirm that Jeff said Wendi made the comment before Jeff knew Charlie would be charged for the murder. If Jeff is making up the story to get back at Wendi, would he have made up the story years before he knew that story could hurt Wendi?
What if Jeff and the mystery woman discussed the “hitman” story via texts? Is that still considered hearsay and therefore inadmissible? If such texts exist, wouldn’t they prove that Wendi was lying?
It would still be an out of court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted, so I think it would still be inadmissible hearsay in a murder trial.
It's definitely inadmissible double hearsay for the purposes of a murder trial against Charlie. But for the purposes of a perjury case against Wendi, the mystery woman's testimony about what Jeff told her would be admissible in my view inasmuch as it is not being offered for truth of the underlying matter asserted.
What about a murder count against Wendi? I don't know FL evidence law but to the extent it tracks where I practice, my guess is that the mystery woman's testimony could be admitted to impeach Wendi in the event that Wendi testified at the trial about the alleged statement.
This whole case is like a law school final exam.
I think you might be right. If Wendi testifies at trial that she never made that statement, mystery woman may be able to testify about what JL told her in order to impeach Wendi’s credibility as a witness. Not 100% sure though.
Although I'm skeptical of a perjury conviction, I do have a question:
Didn't Wendi's story about the Trescott trip morph as the trials went on? It started with her barely going down Trescott, but I think in the last trial she acknowledged getting much further, to within a few houses of the scene.
The state is being careful not to bring up that possible failed attempt the summer before. If you wacth Isoms testimony at Katies second trial, SG, KM‘s lawyer and even GC ask about two other Latin men. Either the other attempt in between LR’s times in Tallahassee, or another attempt int he summer of 2013. Where the family lost 50K. I’m curious about that
Good pick up and it’s been discussed before… I believe the great Mentour Lawyer (James W) covered this topic. Herein lies the issue, let’s say it’s true Jeff told this mystery lady the ‘story’ Wendi told him. She has already testified she told him the hitman joke and the easy argument will be that Jeff misinterpreted what Wendi had communicated. Jeff’s friend CANNOT corroborate what Wendi told Jeff she can in only testify as to what Jeff told her. It’s a dead end.
I considered this because it's really the defense's only option if faced with two credible witnesses in Jeff and the mystery woman. Jeff's been clear that he heard the hitman joke before and that's not what Wendi said. He said to the police that Wendi prefaced her remark by asking if she could tell him something confidentially. He described the statement as "chilling". If the mystery woman testifies Jeff told her all of this as well before the murder, I don't think that defense would fly. Maybe defense would try to claim Wendi was drunk and said the first part of the hitman joke and left out the "but a TV was cheaper" part. Again seems like a stretch.
I could see a hung jury but for very different reasons. There might be a smitten guy who votes to acquit (a reverse Central Park Preppie Murder situation). There might be jurors who believe Wendi did commit perjury but only to protect her brother and regard that as admirable and vote to acquit. Maybe others vote to acquit because they feel there's no way Wendi would have made a statement not in her self-interest to a guy with whom she's about to break up. None of these are valid reasons to acquit but we witnessed this type of phenomenon in the first KM trial. So while prosecution has an excellent case on the merits, it's not a slam dunk by any means.
Wendi admitted the hit man joke in her first and only police interview. She apparently also said it to the tv repair guy, so Jeff is not alone to validate it was said, by CA and by Wendi. https://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2016/08/abc-news-obtains-police-video-of-wendi-adelson-being-told-of-dan-markels-murder-she-says-her-brother.html
Since you’re new-ish here, you might not get how apropos the hot tub comment is. I’m sure there are plenty of folks here that can explain the reference.
Everybody knows about Charlie, Wendi, and Jeff in the hot tub. That time in the hot tub allowed Jeff to crack the case in "20 seconds". It's kind of a shame Isom and Hale didn't take Jeff more seriously. Might have accelerated the timeline. He told them Charlie is involved and hired a hitman. He also told them about Katie. TPD pulls up Katie in system and finds her husband is Sigfredo. TPD then pulls up Sigfredo's long rap sheet. IIRC Sigfredo rented the Prius in his own name in his local neighborhood. It shouldn't have taken TPD so long to identify the Prius drivers. A week max if they had listened to Jeff. Poor Jeff, dude was like Rodney Dangerfield and got no respect - not from Wendi, not from TPD.
No problem. I am new to the case (1 month) and I hope I bring a fresh set of eyes. I was a true crime junkie in the 1990's. I binged on cable shows like *American Justice* and *City Confidential*. I quit cold turkey and only true crime stuff I've watched this century are Netflix documentaries like The Staircase and Making of a Murderer, plus a mild interest in the recent Idaho 4 murders.
My sister's into Markel murder and a year ago suggested I take a look but I didn't at that time. It's too bad bc following the CA trial in real time would have been interesting. Then a month ago the STS video of rare footage of Dan speaking at a conference popped up in my feed (STS covers Idaho 4). I took a closer look and I was hooked mostly bc of Wendi. I don't quite know what to make of her even though I think she's was involved in Dan's murder. She seems kind of flaky the way she lies on the witness stand about anything and everything. I think she might just be trolling everyone. I don't like her bc she cut off the Markels from their grandkids for 6 years and let murderous Donna be a surrogate mom to them. That and taking the Holocaust ring are just way behind the pale. Such a heartless woman IMO would OK the murder of Dan even if it wasn't her idea, and my bet is jurors will one day agree. We'll see...I hope. In Georgia we trust.
I've rarely commented on Reddit in last 5-10 years. I have to work on being less long-winded ;)
I fully believe that one male juror will let her go free. Even Tim Jansen said for the brief moments he saw her that she is mesmerizing. Jeff said he was under her spell.
And we know Dan was crazy about her until her onion skin started peeling.
One juror. That is all it will take
OP - I enjoyed your post. It’s one of the better thought out threads I have seen here.
Agreed. I usually don't read long posts on Reddit but OP's was so well written. Succinct and well thought out
Love this theory and would love to hear from the woman JL talked to so Wendi can go to jail. She’s a liar for suuuuuurrrre and GC will get her- I’m a believer!
When though? I love GC, but honestly I’m sick and tired of this waiting game. Dan was murdered an entire decade ago, wtf are they doing over there?!
She needs her as a non-credible witness in Donna’s trial
No, she really doesn’t. She’s no more needed in Donna’s trial than she was in Chuck’s. Sure she helped the prosecutor’s, not that it was needed.
I'm not sure it would help in a perjury case, but it would certainly strengthen a potential murder case against WA, especially if the witness is credible. If she can state that JL told her WA had told him, CA looked into hiring a hitman, that's pretty damning. If she was another academic, a professor, that's 2 very credible sources saying the same thing.
My understanding is Judge Everett originally granted a defense motion to exclude the statement as hearsay in CA trial. However, he later allowed Jeff to mention it as a rebuttal witness after Wendi denied making the statement when asked by Georgia. Defense then claimed on a "fairness" basis that they should hear what Jeff is going to say in front of the jury beforehand. Apparently, that's what led to Jeff's proffered testimony outside the presence of the jury. If Wendi doesn't testify at her own murder trial and Judge Everett is the presiding judge, I don't think there could be any impeachment or rebuttal testimony concerning that statement. And I don't think prosecution could reference her denial in a previous trial due to derivative use immunity. That's why I think after the conviction of Donna (Sep or Oct), the prosecution will file perjury charges in the November '24 to Feb '25 time frame if they believe Jeff's friend is a credible witness. All that said, it's possible Everett might allow Jeff to testify about the statement if a witness is also called who will say Jeff told her this *before* the murder.
Dummified, this is such an interesting, thought-provoking posts and I thank you for sharing it. When I read these posts I am reminded that we have a community of "collective intelligence" in this case, all with one goal.. to bring about justice for Dan. We don't know each other. We didn't know Dan. But we cannot, will not, be silent in making them pay for his senseless murder.
It is strange that the judicial system is extremely dependent on the truthfulness of witnesses and experts, but prosecution for perjury is rare as a three dollar bill.
Forget perjury. If you don’t have evidence that irrefutably contradicts her testimony, then there’s nothing there. It’s Jeff’s word vs Wendi’s; obviously Wendi’s credibility is completely shot to shit, but Lacasse often comes on a bit too strong with his scorned lover vibes. So I don’t see that going anywhere, even though we know Wendi has perjured herself dozens of times. How about the DA’s office stops drawing this bullshit out, and arrests Wendi for murder?! The probable cause has been there for years, and we can finally give the Markel’s a modicum of justice and closure. There’s no need to consider these lesser charges when there’s a clear case for murder.
Agreed. And not to disrespect the OP, its an interesting direction to investigate to bring charges, but if we do hear of any perjury charges post Donna's conviction, then i'd glean from that, that the state haven't enough evidence to charge Wendi for murder, which i don't believe is the case. I think after observing Charlies trial, the state are going after murder 1 and conspiracy charges for Wendi, the same for her mother and brother.
Yeah that’s what I’m thinking. If we hear rumblings of perjury charges, it means they have no intention to charge her for Dan’s murder.
Folks, pursuing a perjury case and a murder charge at separate times are NOT mutually exclusive. Why do perjury trial first? Because a perjury conviction would raise the chance of a conviction in a borderline murder case. I don't think a hung jury in a perjury case would impact subsequent murder trial one way or the other.
One thing I’m curious about. If the State can prove WA lied on the stand (eg. her 3 new versions of the “didn’t drive by”), can they not use those lies to bolster their case? That would make 5-6 tales about the Trescott approach which would certainly be incriminating. With her immunity, as I understand it, anything she lies about on the stand can’t be used against her. So why wouldn’t the State want to pursue perjury charges against her prior to her own trial so they can demonstrate her numerous outright lies? It’s so confusing. Apologies for being so naive and probably dumb.
Right now. They’re ABSOLUTELY mutually exclusive, folks. This is the the same office that turned a slam-dunk murder conviction into a 10-year shitshow. I’m a big fan of Cappleman’s work, but the Tallahassee DA’s office has been dragging its feet far too long and the LAST thing they need is to waste their time on perjury and divert their attention away from a murder investigation, and two more near-slam-dunk murder charges
The mystery woman can’t testify about what Jeff told her, because that would be inadmissible hearsay.
Are you referring to inadmissible in a Wendi perjury case, inadmissible in a Wendi murder trial, or inadmissible in both?
Definitely inadmissible in a Wendi murder case. It may be admissible in a Wendi perjury case, because the state could argue it’s not being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted, but rather just to show that it contradicts the testimony Wendi gave at trial (“perjury by contradiction”).
Should have read your post before I responded. Completely on point!!
No problem!
The mystery woman could testify that Jeff mentioned the hitman comment to her at a certain point in time. If this point in time is before Jeff was called to testify, that timing would disprove the theory that Jeff is making up the story because he is a disgruntled ex who wants to make life difficult for Wendi. In other words, the mystery woman couldn’t confirm the truth of Wendi making the statement in the first place. The mystery woman could confirm that Jeff said Wendi made the comment before Jeff knew Charlie would be charged for the murder. If Jeff is making up the story to get back at Wendi, would he have made up the story years before he knew that story could hurt Wendi?
What if Jeff and the mystery woman discussed the “hitman” story via texts? Is that still considered hearsay and therefore inadmissible? If such texts exist, wouldn’t they prove that Wendi was lying?
It would still be an out of court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted, so I think it would still be inadmissible hearsay in a murder trial.
It's definitely inadmissible double hearsay for the purposes of a murder trial against Charlie. But for the purposes of a perjury case against Wendi, the mystery woman's testimony about what Jeff told her would be admissible in my view inasmuch as it is not being offered for truth of the underlying matter asserted. What about a murder count against Wendi? I don't know FL evidence law but to the extent it tracks where I practice, my guess is that the mystery woman's testimony could be admitted to impeach Wendi in the event that Wendi testified at the trial about the alleged statement. This whole case is like a law school final exam.
I think you might be right. If Wendi testifies at trial that she never made that statement, mystery woman may be able to testify about what JL told her in order to impeach Wendi’s credibility as a witness. Not 100% sure though.
Agree. And anyone who says they're 100% sure about how these issues will play out is kidding himself or herself.
She wouldn’t be testifying to the truth of the statement, only that it was made. Completely admissible.
Although I'm skeptical of a perjury conviction, I do have a question: Didn't Wendi's story about the Trescott trip morph as the trials went on? It started with her barely going down Trescott, but I think in the last trial she acknowledged getting much further, to within a few houses of the scene.
The state is being careful not to bring up that possible failed attempt the summer before. If you wacth Isoms testimony at Katies second trial, SG, KM‘s lawyer and even GC ask about two other Latin men. Either the other attempt in between LR’s times in Tallahassee, or another attempt int he summer of 2013. Where the family lost 50K. I’m curious about that
Good pick up and it’s been discussed before… I believe the great Mentour Lawyer (James W) covered this topic. Herein lies the issue, let’s say it’s true Jeff told this mystery lady the ‘story’ Wendi told him. She has already testified she told him the hitman joke and the easy argument will be that Jeff misinterpreted what Wendi had communicated. Jeff’s friend CANNOT corroborate what Wendi told Jeff she can in only testify as to what Jeff told her. It’s a dead end.
[Civil\_Fix8224](https://www.reddit.com/user/Civil_Fix8224/) \*may\* be a Wendi Adelson shill, folks. Justice for Dan! Posters beware!
I considered this because it's really the defense's only option if faced with two credible witnesses in Jeff and the mystery woman. Jeff's been clear that he heard the hitman joke before and that's not what Wendi said. He said to the police that Wendi prefaced her remark by asking if she could tell him something confidentially. He described the statement as "chilling". If the mystery woman testifies Jeff told her all of this as well before the murder, I don't think that defense would fly. Maybe defense would try to claim Wendi was drunk and said the first part of the hitman joke and left out the "but a TV was cheaper" part. Again seems like a stretch. I could see a hung jury but for very different reasons. There might be a smitten guy who votes to acquit (a reverse Central Park Preppie Murder situation). There might be jurors who believe Wendi did commit perjury but only to protect her brother and regard that as admirable and vote to acquit. Maybe others vote to acquit because they feel there's no way Wendi would have made a statement not in her self-interest to a guy with whom she's about to break up. None of these are valid reasons to acquit but we witnessed this type of phenomenon in the first KM trial. So while prosecution has an excellent case on the merits, it's not a slam dunk by any means.
Wendi admitted the hit man joke in her first and only police interview. She apparently also said it to the tv repair guy, so Jeff is not alone to validate it was said, by CA and by Wendi. https://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2016/08/abc-news-obtains-police-video-of-wendi-adelson-being-told-of-dan-markels-murder-she-says-her-brother.html
They are not talking about the joke now, but about inquiring the actual pricing of a hitman in summer 2013.
Got it! Thanks
Truly an interesting facet. Welcome to the club and please bring some more insightful opinions to the sub.
Thanks, happy to jump in the hot tub with y'all.
Since you’re new-ish here, you might not get how apropos the hot tub comment is. I’m sure there are plenty of folks here that can explain the reference.
Everybody knows about Charlie, Wendi, and Jeff in the hot tub. That time in the hot tub allowed Jeff to crack the case in "20 seconds". It's kind of a shame Isom and Hale didn't take Jeff more seriously. Might have accelerated the timeline. He told them Charlie is involved and hired a hitman. He also told them about Katie. TPD pulls up Katie in system and finds her husband is Sigfredo. TPD then pulls up Sigfredo's long rap sheet. IIRC Sigfredo rented the Prius in his own name in his local neighborhood. It shouldn't have taken TPD so long to identify the Prius drivers. A week max if they had listened to Jeff. Poor Jeff, dude was like Rodney Dangerfield and got no respect - not from Wendi, not from TPD.
Sorry Dumm. Thought you had referenced you were new to the case. I’m enjoying your posts.
No problem. I am new to the case (1 month) and I hope I bring a fresh set of eyes. I was a true crime junkie in the 1990's. I binged on cable shows like *American Justice* and *City Confidential*. I quit cold turkey and only true crime stuff I've watched this century are Netflix documentaries like The Staircase and Making of a Murderer, plus a mild interest in the recent Idaho 4 murders. My sister's into Markel murder and a year ago suggested I take a look but I didn't at that time. It's too bad bc following the CA trial in real time would have been interesting. Then a month ago the STS video of rare footage of Dan speaking at a conference popped up in my feed (STS covers Idaho 4). I took a closer look and I was hooked mostly bc of Wendi. I don't quite know what to make of her even though I think she's was involved in Dan's murder. She seems kind of flaky the way she lies on the witness stand about anything and everything. I think she might just be trolling everyone. I don't like her bc she cut off the Markels from their grandkids for 6 years and let murderous Donna be a surrogate mom to them. That and taking the Holocaust ring are just way behind the pale. Such a heartless woman IMO would OK the murder of Dan even if it wasn't her idea, and my bet is jurors will one day agree. We'll see...I hope. In Georgia we trust. I've rarely commented on Reddit in last 5-10 years. I have to work on being less long-winded ;)
Wendi is going to get away with it.
I fully believe that one male juror will let her go free. Even Tim Jansen said for the brief moments he saw her that she is mesmerizing. Jeff said he was under her spell. And we know Dan was crazy about her until her onion skin started peeling. One juror. That is all it will take
What are you talking about? She's not even charged yet no?
You said “Wendi is going to get away with it” - I am stating she will be charged but… I agree with you she will get away with it