Crime Fix with Angenette Levy - Dan Markel Murder: Will Wendi Adelson Face Charges?

Episode Date: September 18, 2025

Donna Adelson, the matriarch of the Adelson family, is demanding a new trial in the conspiracy to murder Dan Markel claiming juror misconduct and bias by Judge Stephen Everett. A Leon County jury found Adelson guilty on all charges earlier this month. Donna was charged after her son, Charlie Adelson, was convicted at trial in 2023. Now questions have surfaced about whether Wendi Adelson, Dan's ex-wife, could face charges. Wendi and her father, Harvey, have been named unindicted co-conspirators by prosecutors. Law&Crime's Angenette Levy talks with Markel's former attorney in this episode of Crime Fix — a daily show covering the biggest stories in crime.PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHOW:Think you’ve seen it all? Think again. 50 Ways to Catch A Killer brings you real cases where detectives had to flip the script to take down cold-blooded killers. Hosted by 50 Cent, this isn’t your typical crime show—it’s a high-stakes, twist-filled ride into the minds of investigators who think outside the badge to break the case. From unforgettable setups to shocking reveals, every episode proves: when killers think they got away with murder, think again. Watch 50 Ways to Catch A Killer with 50 Cent exclusively on Fox Nation!https://bit.ly/3JN4n11Host:Angenette Levy  https://twitter.com/Angenette5Guest:Stephen WebsterProducer:Jordan ChaconCRIME FIX PRODUCTION:Head of Social Media, YouTube - Bobby SzokeSocial Media Management - Vanessa BeinVideo Editing - Daniel CamachoGuest Booking - Alyssa Fisher & Diane KayeSTAY UP-TO-DATE WITH THE LAW&CRIME NETWORK:Watch Law&Crime Network on YouTubeTV: https://bit.ly/3td2e3yWhere To Watch Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3akxLK5Sign Up For Law&Crime's Daily Newsletter: https://bit.ly/LawandCrimeNewsletterRead Fascinating Articles From Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3td2IqoLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrime/Twitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lawandcrimeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Wondery Plus subscribers can binge all episodes of this Law and Crimes series ad-free right now. Join Wondry Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify. So that means that anything you say today can't be used against you if the state decides to arrest you later on. The state isn't going to decide to arrest me. That was Wendy Adelson back in 2019, but have things changed for Dan Markell's ex-wife, now that her brother and mother have both been convicted of conspiring to murder. murder the law professor. Do you need a moment to collect yourself? I look at what prosecutors could do next with Dan Markell's former attorney as the investigation appears to be far from over.

Welcome to Crime Fix. I'm Ann Jeanette Levy. Adelson family matriarch, Donna Adelson, is asking for a new trial. After a jury in Leon County, Florida, found her guilty. on all counts in the conspiracy to murder Dan Markell. We've talked about the case many times here on crime fix. Markle, of course, was a Florida State University law professor in Tallahassee back in July of 2014 when two hitmen drove to his home and one of them shot him as he sat in his car in his garage. The murder rocked the community and made national news. Dan Markell had dropped off his toddler sons at preschool earlier that morning and then went to the gym. No one could think of anyone who would want to hurt Dan Markell, except for members of one

family, the Adelson's. Dan Markell and his ex-wife, Wendy Adelson, they had a bitter divorce, and they were fighting over some custody-related issues, particularly how Wendy's mother, Donna Adelson, was acting around their children. Dan Markell's attorney at the time that he was killed Stephen Webster. He's going to join me here very shortly to dig into that a little more. Donna's trial ended a couple of weeks ago, and she wants a new trial. She's making a number of claims, including juror misconduct, biased by Judge Stephen Everett, and that the evidence for a conviction just wasn't there. Donna's lawyers point to a now deleted TikTok video from a juror talking about being on the jury before the trial had ended. But back to Wendy Adelson. She testified in her

mom's trial as she had in the trial of her brother, Charlie Adelson, and the trials of Katie Meg Banwa and hitman Siegfriedo Garcia. At the time of Dan Markell's murder, was the defendant, your mother, very angry at Dan Markell. Before he died? Yes, ma'am. Yes. And you hated him too, right? At certain points, I was very frustrated with him. Did you refer to him as an STD? I don't remember saying that tab five it looks like I mean that it looks like I made that analogy Danny is an STD one wrong mistake marrying him and this will never go away. Is that what you said? I did. Did you share that kind of sentiment with your mother? I don't remember ever saying that, so I don't think it's something I said very often.

And this was said in an email on February 26th of 2013, correct? It was. Approximately 17 months before the murder? Yes. I don't think it was an email though. It looks like it was sort of an eye message. Okay. Did you ever refer to your ex-husband as the dark lord? I don't remember saying that, but I certainly might have. And Wendy denied being involved in Dan Markell's murder. Were you in any way involved in the plot to kill your ex-husband? No. Did you maybe know it was going to happen but not know the details?

I did not know it was going to happen and I did not know any details. Did you provide any information even unknowingly in hindsight that you think could have been used to assist? the murderers? I don't think so. I didn't provide any information. What information do you have regarding your mother's involvement in the plot to kill your ex-husband? I don't have information. But you do admit that your brother said he looked into hiring a hitman to kill Dan Markell. I don't. I admit that my brother made a tasteless joke repeatedly about buying me a tea. because it was cheaper than hiring a hitman. But then someone did hire a hitman who did kill Dan Markell, right?

Yes, that happened. Was part of the plot to kill your ex for you to have plausible deniability? To know very little about it. I was not involved in any plot to kill Danny. Were you shielded from the plot because, I don't know, you couldn't be trusted to keep a secret. I was not involved in any plot to kill Danny. Think you've seen it all? Think again. 50 ways to catch a killer brings you real cases where detectives had to flip the script to take down cold-blooded killers.

Hosted by 50 Cent, this isn't your typical crime show. It's a high-stakes twist-filled. ride into the minds of investigators who think outside the badge to break the case. From unforgettable setups to shocking reveals, every episode proves when killers think they got away with murder, think again. Watch 50 Ways to Catch a Killer with 50 Cent exclusively on Fox Nation. Wendy Adelson has consistently said that she was not involved in the conspiracy to murder Dan Markell. But prosecutors call Wendy Adelson and her father, Harvey Adelson, unindicted co-conspirators. Wendy Adelson, she had been granted limited immunity to testify in every trial in which she has testified.

And there was a lot of talk about Wendy in Donna's trial. And what was the purpose of this murder as you understood it? That they wanted the kids? Who wanted the kids? Wendy. Okay. And did you understand that you were killing the father of the kids so that Wendy could have the kids? Yes, ma'am.

Have you previously referred to a dentist being in? involved? Yes, ma'am. Who was the dentist? Charlie. And how was he related? Katie's boyfriend, sidepiece, whatever you want to call them. All right, so Katie was the wife of Garcia but also the girlfriend of the dentist?

Yeah. Did you have any contact with the dentist ever? No. Did you have any contact with any member of the Aidelson family? No, ma'am. Everything went through Katie, right? went through Katie, right? Yes, ma'am. What did the dentist, if you know, have to do

with the lady in Tallahassee whose kids, who needed her kids? I don't know nothing about them. Again, I want to be very clear about this. Wendy Adelson has not been charged with a crime related to Dan Markell's death, but were the prosecutors possibly telegraphing what could be coming? Leon County State Attorney Jack Campbell's office told me no comment when I reached out about the possibility. I'd like to bring in Stephen Webster. He was Dan Markell's divorce attorney in his divorce with Wendy Adelson. So Stephen, just first of all, I'd like to get your reaction to Donna Adelson being found guilty by that jury in Tallahassee of her part in the

conspiracy to murder Dan. It's very satisfying. I feel for the children, Vince Sons, I mean, Danny Sons, been in Lincoln, who, you know, they're constantly, I guess, just on an emotional roller coaster. So it's, that's always in the back of your mind. It's, but it's very gratifying because I definitely, you know, had many days where I didn't think I would ever see justice for Dan being carried out. And there's no doubt that Donna was a critical component of the murder. So she needed to be held accountable.

Going back to that day when he was murdered, you pretty much immediately suspected that the Edelson's were involved, didn't you? I did. You know, I'd never thought about it before, ever. I didn't think that they posed a physical threat to Dan. I was concerned that Wendy may make some false allegations against Dan and try to trump up some charges, criminal charges, in order to gain leverage, but I never thought they'd pose a physical threat.

And when I found out, I didn't even find out he was shot, but I just spoke to a police officer who called me trying to figure out why I was calling Dan's phone minutes after he was shot. And she told me that I couldn't talk to him because something really bad had happened. And at that moment, I knew it. I can't explain it to you. It was still shocking to this day, But at that moment, I knew they had killed him. I just can't even believe being in that position. Did you tell law enforcement that? I mean, were you telling them, look, you've got to look at these people?

I do not remember anything that happened on that conversation after she told me that. I don't remember. I never had no memory of it. So I don't know what I said in response. I don't know how we terminated the phone call. um my wife was next to me and um you know she she basically said she has some memories about things that were said that i don't that i don't remember um as soon as the police officer told me that something really bad had happened to him i went into kind of a kind of a days um we we traveled

and we're around a bunch of uh other baseball families and i remember they were all kind of congress doing their thing. And I remember I was just, I'm a pacer. And I remember I was just pacing around, like just trying to come to terms with everything. And then I kind of intentionally stayed away from law enforcement. I knew some of the investigators pretty well. And I was kind of concerned that if I spoke to them, some of my memories and my knowledge of different things might get kind of transposed with information I may learn from them, and I knew they were busy, so I, you know, I really kind of stayed away. I only reached out one time to investigator Isam, and that was when Wendy, it was, I don't know, maybe, in my mind's eye,

it was two weeks or so after Dan was killed, maybe less. I got a phone call at my office that a pediatrician's office in Miami was calling and they wanted to speak to Dan Markell's lawyer and I was like well I don't know what I call myself now but anyway so I got on and a lady was asking if I would give consent for Dan's children to be treated and I didn't understand it and then I told I said I knew I didn't have any self

authority to offer, but I told her, I said, look, if the children need treatment, you've got my, you've got all my consent, you know, I'll deal with the consequences later, whatever fallout there may be. And then she understood that I was kind of panicked and she said, no, no, no, no, no, they're not, there's nothing wrong with them. Their mother's here and she just wants to change their primary care physician from the doctor in Tallahassee to our office. And I couldn't believe it. Um, that she was out just kind of running errands and doing things like that in Miami. Um, it just, it shocked my conscience, um, because I was still just in a day's, I mean, and just reeling from Dan's murder. And it was hard for me in those early days just to do my

day-to-day functions, the things I was supposed to do. And she was out there, like, just literally, like nothing had happened. Um, and it just shocked me. And, um, her, um, um, her, um, um, her Her attorney, his office called me shortly after, almost immediately after that phone call and told me that it was a mistake. They were supposed to be calling his office, not my office. I don't know how their wires got crossed. And he asked me if I would not mention anything about it to the Tallahassee Police Department. And I said, you don't know me if you think I'm not going to contact TPD and tell them about this. And so that was the only time I reached out to investigate her ice from.

Now that Donna's trial has concluded, and she's been found guilty, obviously we saw her reaction. I don't know if she actually thought she was going to be acquitted. I mean, it seemed like there was some clear evidence of her involvement in a conspiracy. And I think people need to realize a conspiracy, you know, is different from somebody saying you pulled the trigger. you're part of an agreement you're part of a plan you know that's that's all it takes is you have to be part of an agreement and a plan um so now it seems like each time we have a conviction in this case there's another domino that falls you know that's been the pattern in this case and i just felt in this trial from watching it that this was there was almost like a foghorn being put out and

that foghorn was all about Wendy. And so there's been so many questions about whether or not Wendy Adelson could possibly be charged in this conspiracy, in the plan to murder Dan Markell. What are your thoughts on that? What are you seeing coming down the pike? Because Jack Campbell, you know, right now is saying things like, you know, any decisions we make will be made in time. And, you know, they're giving the answers they're supposed to be giving. I believe that she will be indicted, and I agree with you. I didn't watch the trial. I was under subpoena, so I didn't have the ability to watch the trial as it was unfolding.

But I've had a chance to go back and see some snippets. And there's no doubt in my mind that the state highlighted a lot of pieces of evidence that really were damning for Wendy. And I agree with you. I feel like that was by design. And I think there certainly is enough evidence to not only indict Wendy, but to convict her in less than four hours, just like these last two juries do. What specific evidence do you think is the strongest against Wendy Adelson

since you had a front row seat to all of this? I mean, you were there for the divorce for everything. You know, the strongest evidence for me is the drive-by. There's people in Tallahassee will not conclude that that was just by happenstance. And even if it was by happenstance, what mother pulls up to the street where her children live with her ex-husband and sees crime scene tape, like blocking that road and the police all around the house of her children and her ex-husband and just makes it a three-point turn and goes on to the liquor store

and doesn't bother to call anybody just to make sure and you know in her testimony about what I thought a tree maybe come down there have been thunderstorms the day before trees come down in Tallahassee all the time okay I mean we have big canopy oaks and

they don't come out with crime scene tape and rope off the streets and our our Florida Highway Patrolman and our police officers they actually have chainsaws in their tailgate or their trunks or their cars, many of them. And they literally will get out and just cut the tree if it needs to be and roll it out of the way, out of the road. So, you know, that, there's no reasonable explanation for her driving up to the crime scene, seeing all that and then driving away and not making any attempt to verify that her children were safe or even that Dan was safe.

I mean, I know she hated Dan. But still, I mean, if something happened to Dan, wouldn't she want to go get with her children and make sure they were okay and shield them from how they learned that something bad happened to Dan? So that to me is always going to be the strongest and that to me it's a direct piece of evidence

because she needed confirmation that Dan was killed and she couldn't wait. Tell me about the significance of the day that Dan was murdered in the custody case because the divorce was final. But there was more going on behind the scenes that you were preparing to do and preparing to file. Wendy had filed a motion to enforce the marital settlement agreement

and a motion for contempt because Dan had not paid some of the monies that he was required to pay under the marital settlement agreement. Dan was upset because he was convinced that Donna and Wendy, were engaging in a pattern of behavior that was intentionally designed to alienate him from his sons. She wasn't honoring his time with the children the way the marital settlement agreement required it. She wouldn't take the children to school a lot of times, which is a real problem for him because he would go and sit with him at lunch. And plus, and even the director of the school was saying, these boys need to be in school more than they are. She was enrolling them in things

without consulting Dan. And then the biggest thing for Dan was that he knew Donna was saying ugly things about him around the children, calling him stupid, saying she hates him. And so he knew that that was what she wanted to do. Donna wanted to do everything she could to drive a wedge between him and his sons, and he wasn't going to have it. And that was the tipping point for Danny. at that point he decided I'm not paying you any more money and he knew she was going to file motion for contempt and he filed a cross motion for contempt and he pointed out primarily that Wendy had fraudulently concealed significant assets that she had possession dominion and control over when she submitted her financial affidavit so in a divorce you submit a financial affidavit where you

you attest to what your assets are and your liabilities, the other party does the same thing. It's critical because the court has to have a full picture of the assets in the estates in order to equitably divide those assets. So it's a critical, critical part of a divorce. And if you intentionally conceal those assets, you're preventing the court from having a full picture of what's what, so the court can figure out what's equal, what's an equal divide. And it's just straight up fraud. And so Dan had really, really solid proof that Wendy had done that.

I mean, unequivocal proof. I think she would come in now, say, oh, there's no big deal or whatever. But he was alleging a total. It was about $200,000 worth of assets that she had not identified. So that was when Dan hired me. They had already filed his motion for contempt had already been filed. And he hired me to try. try to help navigate that and litigate those two motions for contempt.

And so what I told Dan was, I think the best thing we can do is file what's called requests for admissions. It's a civil discovery tool that you send over to the other party asking them to admit certain things or deny certain things. And primarily, I wanted her to admit that she had concealed those assets, that she had not listed them on her financial affidavit as she was required by law to do. And, like I told Dan, it doesn't matter to me if she admits or denies it, because we're going to prove it one way or the other. So if she denies it, it's going to be a second act of fraud on the court that she'll be committing and perpetrating.

Given that she was a lawyer, and I guess presumably still is, and a law professor, I told Dan, I said, look, I don't like the idea of doing this. I don't like the idea of proving these things because I really believe it will have dire consequences for, her professional licensure, I don't think the bar, Florida Bar, would have taken it lightly if we proved that she committed fraud on the court. There's, you know, you can get, you know, the bar can be forgiving on many things, but they're not forgiving when you're dishonest as a lawyer. They're not forgiving when you, you know, commit perjury or when you steal money from your client's trust account. That's the kind of stuff that gets you disbarred. So I told him, I said, I have, you know, real kind of reservations about doing it.

If we have to do it, the truth is the truth. So if we have to go to court, I'm going to go in with the truth. But I said, I feel like I owe it to you, your children, primarily, to at least try to speak to her attorney to see if we can't find some resolution for these disagreements short of, you know, full-on hardcore litigation that might ultimately cause her to lose her license. So it's the only time of my career ever did it. People who criticized me and maybe justly so. But I went over and had a meeting with her attorney on June 24th, and, you know, I just kind of told him.

I said, look, I feel like this litigation is going to be consequential, and I really believe for your client, more so than mine, I'm not in here like just boasting or, you know, saber rattling. I legitimately think that if I'm forced to defend these allegations and advance Dan's allegations, that it could cost your. client, her law license. I said, my client's got the proof that she, she engaged in some really bad faith conduct. And he was just kind of dismissive. And so I was leaving. And I said, thank you. And I appreciate your time. And I was on the way out the door. And he called my name. He said, Stephen. And it was the first time I felt like he was being serious. And he said, I know what you're trying to do and I appreciate it. And I said, well, you know, I feel like we owe it to our clients and the children, you know, to at least try. I said, but if I haven't heard, you know,

from you, I'm going to make, I'm going to file something on July 18th that I genuinely believe is going to be monumental. And once I do it, there's going to be no going back. And so that was it. I told them that was the day I was going to file it. And Danny and I were working on it the day before the request for admissions. And we were supposed to finalize him that morning. I spoke to him that morning on the phone, but I couldn't. At that moment, I was like to have a bunch of distractions going on. And so I just told him, I'll call you back once things that settled down in a couple of hours. And that was when I called him. It was about probably 30 minutes after he had been shot. It was when I called him to finalize those requests for missions. Have Jack and Georgia

been in touch with you at all, or at least Georgia, about testifying in front of a grand jury or anything to that effect? Not in the grand jury. You know, they've had me under subpoena the last couple of trials. I testified in Charlie's. It was more so about pushing back against the idea

that it wasn't a contentious divorce. And I think they kind of wanted to humanize Dan a little bit more. You know, Dan had a real profound impact on me, personally, because of the way he loved his children and the way he acted as a father. He really didn't inspire me to want to be a better, more attentive father.

I've never seen a dad like him. So I think they wanted a little bit more me to add some of that flavor, if I could. So if you were a betting man, Stephen, I mean, what would your crystal ball? Where would you put, you know, where would you put your chips on this? Like, do you think we've got something coming soon or do you think it's going to be a couple of months? I mean, there's really no statute of limitations. on this. So do you think, I mean, where would you, where would you place your bets? Yeah, I think I was on your show once before. And it was like around Christmas.

Yeah. I guess it was. 2023. 23. Yeah. Man. Wow. And I told you then that I believe they will ultimately indict Wendy. And she will be convicted in my opinion. And I still feel that way, even more so now. Like you said, the fog morn. I mean, I, I mean, I. I don't think it was just coincidental that there was so much attention paid to the evidence that points to Wendy's involvement in knowledge, for knowledge, of the murder. And I think, I would expect, I kind of think we're looking around three months is what I think.

You know, I think that's probably a reasonable time for a grand jury to be impaneled and for them to bring it. Why three months? What is that, why that time frame? I just, my gut just tells me that. I think, you know, it gives the state an opportunity to kind of take a breath. Go back, work on all the cases that they weren't working on for the past two months. You know, make sure they're kind of up to speed on those. And then get a, you know, regroup and get their game plan on how they want to approach the next grand jury.

And so I just think that's a reasonable kind of time frame. I think also, you know, that would probably put trial somewhere in early, fall of next year, which I think is a good time for the state. You know, we'll have the students would be back at FSU and at FAMU. So I think that that's kind of a good time for a jury pool. My understanding is that this jury was skewed very young and it worked. So, and in Tallahassee gets a lot smaller when when school's out. so well and just thinking about you're talking about three months i mean that puts us then past

donna's sentencing as well the formal sentencing so yeah well stephen webster it's been good talking with you again i'm sorry it had to be about something so horrible but i thank you for coming on i appreciate it 100% you know look it's important to keep dan's memory alive and i never ever could have imagined the movement that was going to come that was kind of coalesce here behind uh dan's murder and to push for justice and i'm grateful for it thank you thank you and i reached out to wendy adelson's lawyer at the time of this recording i have not yet heard back and that's it for this episode of crime fix i'm janet levy thanks so much for joining me i'll see you back here next time