Crime Weekly - S3 Ep180: Dan Markel: Charlie Adelson VS Katherine Magbanua (Part 7)

Episode Date: February 9, 2024

In July of 2014, Florida State University professor Dan Markel dropped his two young sons off to preschool and made a quick stop at the gym before heading to his home in Tallahassee, Florida. Within minutes of arriving home, Dan Markel was shot execution style in his garage. In the aftermath, a lengthy investigation would follow that would include financial and phone records, surveillance cameras, wiretaps and a FBI sting operation, and what this investigation would uncover would shock everyone. In the case there have already been three criminal trials, four murder convictions and a fifth arrest, but new details and allegations are emerging every day, suggesting that there may still be more that we do not know about the shocking and tragic murder of 41-year-old Dan Markel. Use code CRIMEWEEKLY at www.CrimeCon.com for a discount on your CrimeCon 2024 Nashville tickets! Try our coffee!! - www.CriminalCoffeeCo.com Become a Patreon member -- > https://www.patreon.com/CrimeWeekly Shop for your Crime Weekly gear here --> https://crimeweeklypodcast.com/shop Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/c/CrimeWeeklyPodcast Website: CrimeWeeklyPodcast.com Instagram: @CrimeWeeklyPod Twitter: @CrimeWeeklyPod Facebook: @CrimeWeeklyPod ADS: 1. DailyHarvest.com/CrimeWeekly - Get $30 off your first box and FREE shipping! 2. 3DayBlinds.com/CrimeWeekly - Click the link to buy one, get one 50% off, and your FREE, NO obligation consultation! 3. SKIMS.com - Get FREE shipping on orders over $75! Check out SKIMS' Valentine's Shop, and when you've placed your order, select "podcast" in the survey and select Crime Weekly to let them know we sent you! 4. AloMoves.com - Use code CRIMEWEEKLY30 for a FREE 30-day subscription! 5. IQBAR - Text WEEKLY to 64000 for 20% off all IQBAR products and FREE shipping! 

History's masterpieces wouldn't be the same without their most notable accents. Neither would the Kia Sportage without its multiple drive modes. The Kia Sorento without its expansive 12.3-inch panoramic display. Or the Kia Telluride without its three rows of spacious seating. The 2025 Kia SUVs. Kia. Movement that inspires. Call 800-333-4KIA for details. Always drive safely. Limited inventory available.

Shop the Sherwin-Williams 4-Day Super Sale and get 40% off paints and stains June 6th through the 9th. With prices starting at $29.39, it's the perfect time to transform your space with color. Whether you're looking to revamp your interior or exterior, we have you covered with bold hues, soothing neutrals, and everything in between. Shop the sale online or visit your neighborhood Sherwin-Williams store. Click the banner to learn more.

Retail sales only. Some exclusions apply. See store for details. Hello, everybody. Welcome back to Crime Weekly. I'm Stephanie Harlow. And I'm Derek Levasseur. of the Dan Markell case. There's only going to be one more part after this and then we're going to be starting a new case, which Derek and I still have to talk about what that's going to be. But we are probably going to talk about that today and it's going to be a good one as always.

But we're still sitting here with Dan Markell because the arrests are just now starting to happen. Katie Magmanua has been arrested, Sigfredo Garcia, Luis Rivera. And now Katie went to trial and her first trial goes to a mistrial. The jury can't decide. It's two people that are holding out.

She's going to be tried again, right? So Katie may have lucked out in her first trial, but the prosecution was not going to give up. Not on Katie and not on Charlie Adelson either. Prosecutor Georgia Kappelman, who's a rock star, by the way, I watched so much of this trial and I just love Georgia because Charlie Adelson is so obnoxious and so annoying and so frustrating. She tries to hide it at first, but she can't do it forever. And eventually you start feeling like, oh, at least somebody gets it because this guy is so frustrating and annoying and obnoxious.

And to see Georgia just be able to express that and let him know that he's making her feel that way is great. She's smart. She's quick. She's a good lawyer. And Georgia Kappelman planned to put Katie on trial again and get a conviction against her, Katie, mainly so that it could be used to get Charlie. So Georgia Kappelman wanted to get a conviction against Katie McBanua so that she could use Katie against Charlie in his trial. Now, one of the major issues during that first trial was the video taken by undercover agents of Charlie and Katie at the Dolce Vita restaurant on April 20th, 2016. Remember, this is the day after the bump. This is the first day after Donna Sue had been approached by undercover agent Oscar Jimenez on the road, and he handed her a flyer with Dan Markell's picture on it and basically saying they want $5,000 to keep quiet about it. So the audio in that recording, it initially was not clean enough to actually hear what Charlie and Katie, the two lovebirds, were saying to each other. But the prosecution believed that if they could find a way to make that audio more clear, what they would hear were two people discussing a murder for hire that they had both been a part of. So Georgia Kappelman asked the FBI agent in Tallahassee, Pat Sanford, could he get in touch

with his FBI people, see if there's anybody there that could kind of modify and mess with this audio to make it clearer. Yeah, there's a lot of people who are able to do that stuff. There's a lot of really, really smart people that are good with the tech to not only enhance video, but audio. I use a company, this is a free plug, Ellington Forensics out of, I believe they're North Carolina. Derek Ellington. He's been on Breaking Homicide a couple of times.

Just a genius with like the tech stuff. I've actually referred other clients to him as well because of what he's capable of doing. And I can't even say what he done, but I can tell you there was one particular incident recently where a politician had something that they wanted off a phone from many years ago. And he was able to get into this phone when nobody else, including the FBI, could. So, yeah, I'll tell you off camera because I know you're probably like, oh, I got to know now. How did you know I was thinking that? Did you see it on my face? Yeah. You're like, oh, no, he's telling me. For legal reasons, I can't say it publicly. I was like, who is it? Who is it?

It's a crazy story. And it's actually a good story. Hopefully one day I can share it. Maybe he can. But anyways, there are people out there that have resources available where they can enhance all this stuff, even when it may seem like it's impossible. If the data is there, they can somehow go in there and enhance that code to be more, to be better understandable to the eye or to the ears. So exactly. And Pat Sanford, the FBI agent for Tallahassee, he sent to a bunch of his FBI contacts, you know, people who do this for a living and it was unsuccessful. So what this audio recording at Dolce Vita is continually referred to as like this cocktail party sort of background noise. It's people talking. It sounds from the kitchen. It's clinking glasses, silverware. And every time you have a sound like that, it's going to sort of just muddy the waters of the actual audio, the people's voices that you're trying to isolate. So they were really not having good luck with it. And Georgia Kappelman and Pat Sanford were like, this sucks. You know, we've sent it to like five, six people, FBI people. What the hell's going on here? We need this audio. We need this audio because Katie's over here saying she's completely innocent. Charlie's over here saying he's completely innocent. they need something. And as we know, because we've already discussed the Dolce

Vita recording, they eventually did end up getting it because somebody named Keith McElveen stepped into the investigation. And I found out a lot about McElveen's background in Stephen Epstein's book, Extreme Punishment, and it's really not hard to see why this one individual was able to get somewhere with the Dolce Vita video when so many others had not succeeded. Keith McAlveen had gotten his bachelor's and master's in electrical engineering from Clemson University, and for 10 years he had worked as a CIA war crimes investigator. So basically, CIA spies, they're going all over the world and they're recording conversations between, you know, people of interest, usually in public, right? Because you can't get these people in private. So Keith got really good at

figuring out how to analyze recordings and isolating voices from extensive and all different background noises. But Keith always felt there should have been an easier and better way to do this because they were manually going through. It took a long time. It was just tedious. So he started developing software tools that would be able to extract voices in noisy public environments, these cocktail party environments. And by 2020, McAlveen held 12 patents for technologies that were capable of doing exactly this. So FBI agent Pat Sanford from Tallahassee, he gave Keith McElveen, who I actually believe is from North Carolina, but he gave Keith McElveen the Dolce Vita recording in November of 2021. And everyone was hoping that this would get Keith enough time to work with the files before Katie McBanuel's scheduled date for her retrial, which is going to be in February of 2022. Now, this trial would have to be rescheduled for the following May because McElveen was still working on getting the audio cleaned up in January.

But listen to this. What was interesting was Katie McBanua's lawyers, for some reason, legitimately always believed she was innocent. So when the prosecution said, we need more time before Katie's trial, because Keith's still working these audio files. Katie's lawyers didn't even argue it, even though she'd been sitting in prison for like three plus years by now. They didn't even argue that they were like, absolutely take all the time you need because they genuinely believed that what would be heard on that recording would prove Katie's innocence, which, as we know, it didn't. Awkward. Yeah. And I mean, we could play it here, but it's going to be more difficult for you guys to hear it. You can go listen to it if you want. It is available. There's a transcript. That's the best thing to do. The transcript is the best way to go. There's actually a few YouTube videos that

have the recording and then they have the transcript underneath so you can follow along. We're not playing it here because the only time it was ever played was in the courtroom. And when you have that camera plus the additional courtroom noise, shuffling papers, once again, you're adding all this cocktail party environment sort of background noise. And you just can't hear it because it's already been enhanced so that you could hear it. But there is a transcript that will show you. Yes, both of these people, Charlie and Katie, were saying things left and right that let you know they knew both of them what was going on. Yeah, they both knew what was going on in the video itself. It's kind of underwhelming. It's it's it's like a button cam that's on a bag or something like that where they place it down. It could be like a set of keys or something. Yeah. Yeah. Something where. It could be like a set of keys. Yeah, you see like an arm or something.

Yeah, something where, and I talked about this last episode, the types of technology we can use, the types of cameras. They set it up and you're basically seeing like the back, I believe, of Charlie the whole time and they're talking. But it does, you can hear it. When they enhance it, you can hear it. And the transcript really reading the words while listening to what you're hearing, it all makes sense. But that was what really tied this case up in a bow. Having that happen after the bump really kind of brought everyone into the fold. The Dolce Vita recording being cleaned up was the linchpin.

Of course. For both Katie and Charlie. Well, yeah, Charlie's talking about a lot of things. We'll get into it. But yes, it was the final nail in the coffin. I mean, we talked about what he was saying. He said if they had anything, we'd be on a plane of things. We'll get into it. But yes, it was the final nail in the coffin. I mean, we talked about what he was saying. He said if they had anything, we'd be on a plane by now. You know, I think that's enough. Yeah, exactly. Yeah.

I think that's honestly all he had to have said. But it was enough, at least, where previously, we talked about this last episode, the state's attorney and the district attorney or state's attorney's office was like, ah, we arrested Katie, but we really just don't feel like there's enough to arrest Charlie. Once this recording was cleaned up and it was heard by the state's attorney's office, they approved his arrest, which we're going to talk about. But in the meantime, a grand jury was secretly gathering on April 20th, 2022, to decide whether or not Charlie Adelson was involved with the plot on Dan Markell's life. And by then, like I said, the prosecution had received Keith McElveen's Dolce Vita audio. In his book Extreme Punishment, Stephen Epstein writes,

quote, the audio forensics expert ultimately broke the recordings into three distinct segments, so his software tool could process digestible chunks of the audio rather than its entirety. Though the software tool had little success clarifying the audio in the first segment, it did a pretty good job reducing, though certainly not eliminating, the background noise in the second and third segments, 41 minutes in all. That said, because Charlie's voice was projected towards the undercover agent's surveillance cameras and Katie's in the opposite direction, and because his voice was stronger and louder than hers, what was most audible in the final version of the Hansed recording were Charlie's words rather than Katie's, end quote. This made the prosecution realize, hey, we don't actually need Katie McVanua to turn on Charlie at all. His words in this recording, they're incriminating enough.

The grand jury agreed, indicting Charlie Edelson on first degree murder charges. Charlie was arrested at his Fort Lauderdale home the next morning. Reportedly, he was wearing only his underwear. Apparently, the cops kind of like surrounded the house. They got there at 5 a.m. They like to do these early morning things. And they knew Charlie and they knew like this guy's got guns. We know he's got guns. He's talking about how he's got guns, how he thinks he's like some badass. So we don't want to really be going into his house when he's prepared for us. So they go there at five. He apparently like stumbles outside in his underwear and he's like, am I being arrested? They cuff him, put him in the car. They go in his house. What do they find? Well, they discovered what looked basically like a gun store.

There was firearms displayed everywhere. And get this. There was even a firearm, a rifle, it looked like, on a tripod with the barrel of that gun facing out the window, which, you know, maybe he's just using it for the scope. I don't know. No, when I heard this initially, I think there were some people that I spoke with were like, oh, he was ready to go down in a blaze of glory

if he had the heads up and maybe would have gotten a gun battle with law enforcement as they tried to take him down. I don't think that at all. This is my, and you're shaking your head no, so I have a feeling you agree with me. I think it was a situation where there was a situation where

there was a part of Charlie Adelson who felt that maybe this was a law enforcement sting, that this was an undercover operation. But there was also a major part of him that was like, oh, man, I brought in these people from Miami to take out Dan Markell, and now their brothers are looking for me. And there's a real possibility that if we don't pay them or they don't like what we're doing here, they can end up killing me as well. And so I think that gun was set up as well as the other guns was a form of protection against not law enforcement, but what he believed to be the family members of Sigfredo Garcia and Luis Rivera. So he was paranoid for sure.

He thought his days were numbered. I think he, in a way, felt like he was like Al Pacino in The Godfather. And he was just concerned that this was all going to come crashing down in a blaze of glory out in his home where he was going to be in some gunfight with a bunch of Cubans who were coming to retaliate for not paying his brother's bills. Well, you know, Charlie definitely was paranoid after this bump, right? And he installed cameras at his house and at the Adelson Institute. You know, he's setting up these guns. I think you're right.

I think that it was more of a protection thing, especially that gun by the window. I don't think it was like, oh, if the SWAT team comes, I'm going to sharpshooter them because he doesn't have the balls. Let's be honest. He was less scared of the, this is a sad thing. He's way less scared of law enforcement than he is of retaliation from the family.

I don't think that's a sad thing. I think that's how it should be. I mean, he was like, hey, listen, the cops, I'm fine with that, man. They're just going to take me into custody. But he was like, if the Cubans come to my house, they're killing me.

Yeah, so that's the point. They're not taking me in. So he's, first of all, he thinks he's too smart to be caught by any legal means, right? So he thinks self-preservation is always going to be Charlie's first order of business. So he's not going to put himself in a situation where he's going to be taken out by, you know, suicide by a cop. That's not how Charlie Adelson goes out. What he was hoping was, yes, he gets taken in by law enforcement and he thinks like, listen, I'm white, I'm educated, I'm wealthy, I'm charming, you know, so handsome and just a ladies man and I can manipulate anybody with my words, let them arrest me. Who's going to believe some, you know, Cuban gang members over me?

I have a reputation. I have the resources. He truly thought once he got in front of the police, the detective or a jury, that there would be enough people who would have biases against those like Sigfredo Garcia and Luis Rivera and, you know, kind of look at him as the reliable, responsible one in the situation that they would just believe whatever he said. So he wasn't going to go shooting at the cops. Absolutely not. But would he have shot like some gang members if they came up to his house? Probably. Probably. But then he would, his house would be on fire and he would be gone.

Yeah. So good luck with that. Good luck, Chuck. Good luck, Chuck. So yeah, he's got a bunch of guns, but he doesn't seem, you know, he comes out in his underwear. I don't know why. Like, put some pants on. Why do they always do that? Why do they do that? I don't know. Do you not know you're going to be on a body cam? Is it an eagle thing? Like, you're going to see my six pack before I go away. I don't know, man. All right, let's take a quick break. We'll be right back. Going to the gym can be discouraging, especially if you're putting in the work but barely seeing changes.

But with Tonal, you can actually see your progress with every workout. Tonal provides the convenience of a full gym and the expertise of a personal trainer anytime at home with one sleek system. Designed to reduce your mental load, Tonal is the ultimate strength training system, helping you focus less on workout planning and more on getting results. No more second-guessing your technique. Tonal gives you real-time coaching cues to dial in your form and help you lift safely and effectively. After a quick assessment, Tonal sets the optimal weight for every move and adjusts in one-pound increments as you get stronger, so you're always challenged. Tonal lets you choose from a variety of expert-led workouts, from strength to aero hit to yoga and mobility to keep you coming back for more.

For a limited time, go to Tonal.com to get $500 off your tonal purchase plus a free four-year warranty. That's tonal.com for $500 off plus a free four-year warranty. Tonal.com. So during Katie McBaniel's new trial, her attorney Tara Quass presented the defense that Katie had been the unknowing pawn

in a web of lies spun by Charlie Adelson and Sigfredo Garcia. So remember, before in her first trial, it was just Katie knows nothing. She has no idea what's going on. She was defending Sigfredo, the father of her children. Now in this retrial, because Sigfredo's in prison, What are you going to do? And then Charlie's not. The defense is it was Charlie and Sigfredo who were conspiring together. And Katie is the collateral damage. She got caught in the middle, but she did not do anything wrong. Now, I want to be clear from the very beginning, because the state and I can actually agree on two very important points about this case. Number one, Charles Adelson had Dan Markell killed. We absolutely agree

with that. Number two, Luis Rivera and Sigfredo Garcia carried out the hit for Charlie Adelson. We agree with that too. What we do not agree on is whether or not Catherine Magbanwa knew about a plan to have Dan Markell killed. That's the only thing we don't agree on. We are going to prove to you beyond any doubt that Charles Adelson conspired directly with Sigfredo Garcia behind Katie's back to have Dan Markell killed. The only question that you are's back to have Dan Markell killed. The only question that you are all going to have to answer

at the end of all of this evidence is, did Catherine know? That's it. It's that simple. Because according to the law and common sense, and I'm sure the state will get up here and agree with me as well too, if she did not know, she is not guilty on all three counts. It's that simple. They won't disagree with what I just told you because that's the law. Very well said, right? Very well said at that point on its surface, very well laid out argument. We're going to prove that everything you believe for the most part is true. However, there is no bridge between using Katie. It's a direct

connection from Charlie to the hitman. That's what we're going to prove to you through this trial. And if we can prove that she didn't know, as the state will agree with, you have to find her not guilty. That's your reasonable doubt. So it was a good argument on its face. Yeah. Needless to say, based on everything we know about Katie and based on everything that the prosecution presented during the second trial, that did not work. We're in part seven of this series. So our audience members at this point are very well caught up on this case and understand the significance of Katie Magmanua and this whole thing. And I would even say without her, this doesn't happen because Charlie was looking for that fall guy. I literally think I said that last episode.

Yeah. Without her, it doesn't happen. I mean, he didn't have the direct connections. He would brag to his friends and colleagues about the people he knew down in South Florida who could do this. It wasn't necessarily him, or maybe he knew of some people, but ultimately it was Katie that was connected directly to his people. She had kids with him. So that was his connection. So without Katie, I don't know if he's able to facilitate this whole thing.

I don't think he, and he may have found another way. We don't know, but we wouldn't know, right? That's the thing. Katie agreed. And I do feel bad for her because she's found guilty of first degree murder. Okay, she's found guilty of first degree murder because remember, a conspirator, a conspirator to murder is going to be held responsible in the same way that the actual person who pulled the trigger is.

Absolutely. She's she's found guilty of first degree murder. She's sentenced to life in prison. She's been arrested since 2016. She's been sitting in prison for three years, not talking because she doesn't want to like throw Siegfriedo onto the bus. Why after Siegfriedo's found guilty does Katie not finally come forward and say, I will speak out against Charlie and I'm ready and I'd like the deal? She did not do that. And I don't understand why, because she ends up instead of of going home to her children, who now have no parents, she's in prison for life because of this.

And that is very sad. So an hour after Magbanu was sentencing, the judge held a case management hearing for Charlie Adelson, and they agreed to do an Arthur hearing. And this hearing would take place within the next 30 days. These hearings are typically held when someone's been arrested on a non-bondable crime. So Charlie and his attorney, Daniel Rashbaum, they were seeking pretrial release. Both sides wanted the trial to happen as soon as possible. But Charlie and his attorneys, they obviously wanted him, like, out until the trial happened.

And during this Arthur hearing, Judge Robert Wheeler denied the release, saying, quote, the court will not exercise its discretion to release the defendant due to the nature of the crimes. I find that he is a danger to the community. I additionally find that he is a substantial flight risk based on the evidence that has been presented. Particularly concerning is his statement in the Dolce Vita restaurant video about getting to the airport if there was any evidence. But there is other evidence that he is a substantial flight risk. Therefore, the court will continue to hold him no bond at this point. End quote. What's the other evidence that Charlie's a

substantial flight risk? Well, we know he flies all over the world for the sex tourism. He's got the resources. He has enough money to hire a private plane if he wants, right? So definitely a flight risk. This is the right decision. 100%, this was the right decision. And we've talked about it in the past where bail is to hopefully ensure that the defendant will show up for court. And when the judge is evaluating what bail should be set at, those factors that you just laid out are all considered. What are their resources? What are the statements they've made? Are they a potential flight risk? It's very, I don't think it takes a judge to realize based on that Dolce Vita video and obviously what has been said in the past about Charlie and his, like you just said, his travel outside the country. He's very familiar with it,

probably has some places he can go and disappear. The judge knows that if Charlie gets out, he ain't never showing up for trial. He ain't showing up. He's gone. And so that's why he decides to make this decision. And we will never fully know what Charlie would have done. But in my opinion, and I think the opinion of many, Charlie would be gone. And this was the right call in this situation. If're above the law, is probably not going to follow the laws of the court and be like, yes, I will come back for my trial. Pinky swear. He's not going to be upset to lose his bond. They could have set it at $5 million. Charlie would have put up his house.

He would have done whatever he had to do because he's not going to need it. Yeah, you don't care. He's out. He's not going to need it. He would have sold his soul to get out, and then he would have been gone because he probably had a cash reserve somewhere for this. But if he was set up with guns in the windows, he probably had a bug out bag, for those of you familiar with that term, just a small backpack or something. Or an offshore bank account, something like that. Yeah.

But he could have a bag with some passports, some money, just the bare necessities where he can literally walk out of his house with that backpack and have everything he needs to travel all over the world. Hop a flight to Epstein Island. Yeah, exactly. No, you know, that's probably where he would go, but. He tried to probably. Yeah, I'm not, I'm saying like these kinds of people stick together, honestly. So

Charles Adelson's trial began in October of 2023, and his defense team started off during opening statements claiming that they would prove that Charlie had nothing to do with the murder of Dan Markell. So I'm going to let Charlie's attorney, Daniel Rashbaum, tell you about it himself. But what I'm going to tell you today is what actually happened. You will see that Charlie Adelson had nothing to do with the murder of Professor Markell. You will see that the state cannot come close to meeting its burden. Why? Because Charlie Adelson is innocent. I love jigsaw puzzles. I've loved them since I'm young. The reason why I love them is because they only work if every piece fits.

No matter what you do with a jigsaw puzzle, if a piece doesn't fit, it becomes a mess. You can't hammer it and you can't ignore it because if you ignore it, you have holes in the puzzle. What you're going to see is with regards to this case, that's exactly what the state tried to do. They heard things. They saw things. But there were problems. They couldn't fit all the pieces together under their theories. Their theories that they told you about today. I'm going to show you how those puzzles, those pieces, they

didn't fit, they don't fit. And why? Respectfully, the state does not know what happened on July 18, 2014. But by the time of this case, in the 2013-2014 time period, you're going to see that Charlie Adelson was making a lot of money. His practice was booming. He was working six, sometimes seven days a week. You'll see it on the wires. You'll see it in text messages. He would start his day early in the morning, and most days he wouldn't get home until

8, 9, 10 at night. At the time when this murder occurred, he was not married. He had no kids. He had a lot of money, and he was living a very good life. October 2013, Charlie started dating Catherine McBanuel. We'll call her Katie. She was beautiful. She was smart. Like Charlie, she graduated from UCF. She was hardworking.

He met her in one of the dental practices. At first, the relationship was casual. They wanted it that way. Charlie particularly liked it, and liked Katie, because she had two children. He worked a lot. His priority was his job. And Katie didn't bother him a lot. He only saw her like once, maybe twice a week. That's what he liked. And she was smart, she was fun, and he treated her very well. And that was very

different, you'll learn, from how she was treated previously. Now you'll hear that he spent a lot of time with Katie over the months that they dated. And remember how I told you Charlie talks a lot and repeats himself a lot? Well, when they were together, he did just that. He talked about his day. He talked about what was going on in the world. He talked about his family, which, by the way, was a constant topic every single day. Because when Charlie's driving in the car, every morning for an hour to work and an hour home, sometimes longer, he talked to his mom on the phone.

And when he talked to his mom on the phone, what would be a topic of heavy conversation quite frequently? Wendy's divorce. All the problems in the divorce. And what would Charlie do? He would tell these things to his girlfriend. And what were some of the things he told her? Well, he told her about the million dollar offer. He told her that he could pay it in cash.

She said, that's a lot of money. He said, no, have it in cash. And I'm going to get it back. He told her several times the joke. Over time, you're going to see through text messages that Katie wanted a deeper relationship, and you'll see that Charlie didn't want that. You're going to see that over time, it takes a couple months, Charlie starts to learn a little bit more about Katie's ex, Sigfredo Garcia. And what you're going to learn is that Charlie Adelson never meets Sigfredo Garcia officially,

but by all accounts, he was not a good guy. Violent. Long criminal history. Sigfredo Garcia and Katie had been high school boyfriend-girlfriend. And Katie was the love of Sigfredo's life. He lived for her. And you're going to see that Sigfredo Garcia hated Charlie Adelson. The shooter of Professor Markell, the man who murdered him, hated Charlie Adelson. According to them, he's co-conspirator.

And you're going to hear, not from our witnesses, from their own witnesses, that he wanted to kill Charlie Adelson. You're going to hear that in March of 2014, just seven or eight weeks before that first attempt of murder that they talk about, he tried to kill him. Puzzle pieces. You're also going to hear about a phone call on July 1, 2014. You're going to actually hear that that July 1, 2014 call is how they found these guys. It's actually the craziest fact in this entire case, and there's a lot of crazy facts. You're going to hear that on July 1, 2014, Sigfredo Garcia made a call to the cell phone number of Harvey Adelson.

It's the only call that helped investigators connect these folks to the Adelsons in the beginning. It actually broke the case. What they don't know, what you're going to see, it's in text messages. It's discussed on the wires.

They don't know it because they don't understand it because they weren't there. Is that on July 1st, 2014, just three weeks or so after the first murder attempt, and by the way, just 17 days before the murder. Let me repeat that. The murder happens on July 18, 2014. On July 1, 2014, Sigfredo Garcia tries to run Charlie off the road. He threatens him. And what you're going to hear is that on July 1, he's so upset that he calls the Adelson Institute.

He doesn't realize that Charlie isn't the doctor at the Adelson Institute. He just comes in and out of the place. So he gets their voicemail machine, and you know how dentists are. They say in an emergency, call a cell phone number, take your call at home on the cell phone number. What he hears in an emergency, call Dr. Adelson at such and such number. He thinks he's calling Charlie Adelson, but he calls Harvey Adelson. And he calls him and he threatens him. He tells him, if you keep dating Katie, we're going to go mano y mano I'm going to kill you 17 days

before according to them he conspired with this man to kill Professor Markell puzzle pieces what you're going to learn is that in the spring of 2014 it became apparent to Katie that her dreams of financial security with Charlie were not going to work out.

You will learn that Katie heard the hitman joke. You will learn that she heard the million-dollar offer, and she got some ideas in her head. But you're going to learn that the state thinks Wendy Adelson was involved with her brother in a murder for hire, and she chose for the killers to kill her ex-husband when he had custody of her kids. Puzzle pieces. July 18th for Charlie starts as a normal day. He works.

You're going to see he lives in Fort Lauderdale. Now, I don't know how many of you are familiar with South Florida, so I'm going to give you a little bit of geography lesson. He lives in Fort Lauderdale. That day he's working in two offices, because he'd often work in two offices a day.

He'd work in the morning at one place and the afternoon at another. So he's working in two offices. The first office he's working in, both of them actually, are in Jupiter, Florida. Now, if you're familiar with South Florida, Fort Lauderdale and Jupiter are not close. With South Florida traffic, in the morning, he was in the car for at least two hours. Now, he came home late that night, you're going to hear, so traffic was a little bit better, but it's probably still an hour to an hour and a half. He's in the car, and he's talking on the phone.

And you're going to see it. We're going to show you what the phone calls are about. He talks to his sister, talks to his mom, talks to his girlfriend. There are phone calls. You're going to see it. There are a lot of phone calls. And there are a lot of phone calls to his girlfriend, and there are a lot of phone calls to his mom. We're not going to deny that. And he works in these two offices. And at around six o'clock, you'll see a text message that he's

about to start a very long surgery, a big procedure. By the way, the text messages throughout the day are normal. Just after 7 p.m., he gets a call from his mom, and he's told that Professor Markell has been shot. And he's shocked. He's upset. His first reaction is, Wendy and the boys are okay. He's supposed to have dinner originally with a friend that night. But earlier in the day, that changes, and he's supposed to have dinner originally with a friend that night. But earlier in the day, that changes, and he's supposed to have dinner with Katie. And you're going to hear that Katie and him had gotten in a fight a couple days earlier about dinners. You'll hear it. And what you'll learn is after he finds out what happened, he tells Katie he doesn't want to go to dinner.

He leaves the office at around 8 o'clock in Jupiter. And you'll learn that Katie tells him she'll come to his house that night to comfort him. He shook up. Now, let me be clear. You're going to hear he wasn't close with Professor Markell. They weren't friends. They had nothing in common. But he shook up because someone he knew, the father of his nephews, had been shot.

When Katie arrived that night, you're going to learn more details of how she gets there, what she has to do to get there. It's not planned. You're going to see that. The state's going to put on that evidence. You're going to learn that she's scrambling to get a babysitter. You're going to learn, by the way, that Charlie had seen her for lunch the day before. So if it's a murder for hire, why didn't she get the money then? Puzzle pieces. You're going to learn that she gets there that night, sometime after 11,

and when she gets there, she is frantic. She's upset. And he's scared because he's never seen her this way. And she sits him down, and she tells him something terrible has happened. She says that a friend of hers had shot Professor Markell. She tells him over and over that she had nothing to do with it. But these people, she was talking too much. And her friend and these people learn about the problems that his family was having with Professor Markell. They learned about the million-dollar offer, and they got it in their minds to do this.

As you can imagine, Charlie is, his life has just forever been altered. He asked, who are these people? She won't tell him. It's not safe for you to know. Screaming at her, she won't tell him. Charlie had a guess. You will hear in detail what happened

that night. You will learn that Charlie Adelson was told if he didn't pay within the next 48 hours, he or one of his family members would be next. You will learn that Katie repeatedly said that she had nothing to do with it and acted distraught. You will hear how she said that she would help him. You will learn about the initial payment. It wasn't $100,000. It was more than $100,000. He took out everything he had in his safe. You're going to learn about that. The state doesn't know it.

It was more money. But you're going to learn he didn't have a third of a million dollars. So he had to pay every month. They don't know about that either. Payments every month. Does that sound like a murder for hire? Or does that sound like extortion? You're going to hear about these gifts and you're going to learn that the gifts were just that. They were gifts. Because as time went on, he became more and more certain that Katie was not involved. He became more and more certain that Katie was not involved.

He became more and more certain that she was helping him. And he wanted to keep her happy, too, because he needed her. He needed her help. And you will hear that the payments changed a couple months after the night of the extortion. You'll hear that the payments changed. And that Katie was put on the books of the Adelson Institute paper trail, they created a paper trail puzzles don't fit, pieces of the puzzle don't fit and you'll hear that in order to put her on the books

despite Katie telling him the night of July 18 you can never talk about this with anyone you can never talk on the phone about this despite Katie telling him the night of July 18th. You can never talk about this with anyone. You can never talk on the phone about this. You can never talk about it in public. You can never talk about it anywhere, because if they find out, they will kill you and your family. If they think the police are coming to you to talk to you,

they will kill you. Look at what they did to Professor Markell. But you will hear that he told someone. He had to. He told his mom. You'll learn that she was the bookkeeper for the Dental Institute. You'll learn why he had to tell her. You'll learn about those checks.

They've never been able to understand why are they so sequential? Why are they back and forth? You'll learn why. They talk about the bump in 2016. What I like to call is the second extortion. What they don't realize is that their undercover operation was an extortion on an extortion. And we're going to go through the wires with you. We're going to go through Dolce Vita with you. And we're going to show you how they actually prove his innocence. We're going to show you how they are talking

carefully. They're happy if this bump is the police, because if it's the police, none of them are going to get killed. If it's a bad guy, they're in danger. If you do a murder with someone, the last person in the world you want this bump to be is the police, because it means they're onto you. Okay, so we have a lot to talk about after that clip. We're going to take a quick break we'll be right back first thing i want to say is puzzle pieces puzzle pieces man because this attorney and i his name's daniel rashbaum but tell me he doesn't like remind you of a mix between like charlie charlie day you know from horrible bosses yep and steve carell Like there's just something about- He does. I didn't see that before, but yeah. His demeanor, like his face- Charlie Day for sure I was thinking that.

Charlie Day for sure, right? Okay. So I hate when attorneys do these little like quippy things like puzzle pieces, puzzle pieces. I cut it out. He said it way more times, puzzle pieces, he kept saying. And it's so funny because towards the end, I think you'll hear it. Georgia Kaplan says once to Charlie, puzzle pieces. I think she's making fun of Rashbaum. But either way, we don't need to get into a ton of detail about what he said because Charlie is going to add texture to this and Charlie's texture is better. But the essential point is Daniel Rashbaum is saying Charlie had nothing to do with this. It was Katie and Sigfrido. And they planned this because he talked.

Charlie talked about how much money he had, about the issues he was having with his sister's husband. And they put two and two together. And they were like, if we handle this problem for him, then we can get that money, right? They don't have to pay a million dollars to Dan Markell to go away. They can pay us money to make Dan Markell go away. But they're not going to tell Charlie about this plan until after they do it. And then they're going to extort him for this money.

This is the plan. Charlie had no idea. He's completely innocent. It's Katie and Sigfrido. Remember that. What do you think? So on the surface, without knowing this case as much as we do, I would say that initially, just trying to stay objective here, I think it's a pretty good scenario. I think it's a pretty good argument. I think the defense that he's going to put forward, just without going into the actual evidence, on the surface, I could see a world where this would be the case let's just let's read let's let's go back to a couple things he said again on the surface sigfredo garcia this charlie adelson is having

sex with his the mother of his child and his someone he wants to be with clearly he does not like this guy right he's not going to do any favors for him. He can't stand him. And they have the voicemail and all that stuff to prove it. But just by the way, that's that's why Sigfrido Garcia called Harvey Adelson. Right. It was an accident. Yeah. All the Adelson Institute looking for Charlie. Yeah, we talked about that. He got the message saying, oh, if it's an emergency call, Dr. Adelson. He thought, and this is what the defense says, but Garcia thought he was calling Charlie when he called that emergency number, got Harvey Adelson. Now, the initial reports make it look like nobody ever answered that call, but according to Daniel Rashbaum, the voicemail picked it up and Sigfredo Garcia left a threatening voicemail on Harvey Adelson's voicemail. So was Harvey completely unaware at that point? Did he not ask, like, who is this? Why is this person calling me? What's going on?

Yeah, maybe he did. Who knows? Who knows? To keep it on Charlie, the argument that this guy would work for him when he can't stand him, that he couldn't be on further different sides of the aisle if possible, right? To think that he would go and do a favor for him or carry out a job for him to help him in any way, shape or form. I could see how that argument could be made. And then the way the payments were paid, you could look at it both ways, right? Like obviously the prosecution's going to describe this as a different way. He paid them in this manner to avoid detection, to avoid one big lump sum.

But if we're just going off Rashbaum here and we're just taking off what he's saying, this was an extortion plot. This was something where Charlie was confiding in Katie, letting her know they had offered Dan Markell a million dollars just to let the kids go to South, uh, to go to Florida, to Southern Florida. And Katie's going back and relaying this to Sigfredo Garcia and Luis Rivera. And they're like, man, this guy's got a lot of money, which by the way, this type of stuff does happen where someone's running their mouth and they realize there's a large sum of money somewhere and they make a plan to go after it. So on the surface, I could see how this, if it were true, could have been the scenario where they kill this guy for two ways. One, they kill him knowing he has the money saying, hey, we took care of it. You don't have to pay a million dollars to them. You can pay the money to us. Another scenario could have been

because Sigfredo Garcia hates Charlie Adelson so much, he's going to kill a guy that could be directly tied back to Charlie. And unless Charlie pays him, he's going to implicate him somehow without implicating himself. I don't know how he would do that. And therefore, Charlie could be sent to prison for it. So it's kind of like, hey, you just said it. You just said it. That doesn't make any sense. Right. No, no, no. Charlie, if Charlie didn't ask them to do this and then they did it and then they came to him, they're like, we did it. What's stopping Charlie from going to the police now? He has nothing to do with course. So not only will he not have to pay any extortion money, but he doesn't have to implicate himself in a crime that he previously had nothing to do

with because as soon as he starts paying them money, he's implicated. You're trying to shut them up now, whether you're trying to shut them up because you didn't know they did it or because you asked them to do it. You're still trying to keep it quiet so that it doesn't go to the police so that the murder of your brother-in-law never gets solved. Instead of just being like, okay, I'll pay you and then going to police and being like, yo, the murderers you. And then going to police and being like, yo, the murderers of Dan Markell just came up to me, tried to extort me for money,

put a wire on me. Let's catch them. There's no logical reason why you would go along with it if you were not implicated in it previously. Yeah, no, you're talking common sense right now. You're talking common sense. Oh, because he was afraid

they were going to kill him or kill his family. Okay, maybe. Maybe Sigfrido Garcia gets arrested. Maybe Luis Rivera gets arrested. And then their gang member friends come after Charlie. I suppose that's a concern. I suppose.

But still, still, you would just pay? You would just pay it and not tell anybody? Exactly. I mean, no. Again, you're talking from a commonsensical perspective where once the evidence comes into play, it completely disputes what he's saying. But just as far as this opening statement, I, it's not the worst opening statement I've ever heard. That's what I'm going to say. That's what I'll leave on this. If I'm a jury member and I'm

sitting here and I'm listening to this and I'm going into it with an open mind, I could see this as a possibility. I could see it on the surface. That's the point. It doesn't have to make complete logical sense. It just has to make the jury feel like maybe there's some reasonable doubt. Stephanie, you need one. Yeah, I agree. You need one. Let's talk about this. Catherine McBaniel proved that, right?

You need one, guys. Everyone listening, watching this, he's not trying to prove his innocence. He's just trying to create reasonable doubt. That's all he has to do here is convince one jury member that it's possible that maybe poor Charlie Adelson was extorted for all of this money from big, bad, uh, Sigfredo Garcia, the hit man that, you know, that had nothing to lose, bad guy looking for a quick payout, had an ax to grind with Charlie because of the inner workings of their relationship through Katie Magmanua. So I get all of it and I can see how he's going in there going, listen, I don't got to convince all of you. I just got to convince one of you that this is a possibility. And if he's able to do that, his client goes free. So that's the situation we're looking at here.

So that's the thing too. That's the thing that kind of bugs me because it's interesting that Daniel Rashbaum, you hear him towards the end of that clip. He's speaking so confidently about the wiretaps and the Dolce Vita recordings. And he's saying, I'm glad we have these things. They're going to prove that Charlie's innocent. Well, first of all, that's funny because he and his legal team did the very most to suppress these items of evidence from trial. So if you thought they were going to actually exonerate your client, why did you not even want them allowed to

be into trial? Secondly, Rashbaum's not pulling like a Jose Baez, which actually would be smarter. He's not saying, all you need is reasonable doubt, guys. He's saying, I'm going to prove to you my client's innocent. Innocent had nothing to do with this, right? He's not going down the reasonable doubt path. He continues proclaiming that Charlie Adelson is innocent, had nothing to do with this. And the jury is going to hear that. And psychologically, they're going to be like, okay, well, if I see anything in here that suggests to me that he's

not innocent, it's going to make me not trust you. Instead of going the reasonable doubt method, whereas like, you know, my client could have or couldn't have had something to do with this. But the point is, do they have enough evidence? They have circumstantial evidence. Do they have enough where it takes away your reasonable doubt altogether? That's what he should have done. Well, maybe you got to go back to school, take that LSAT, go represent some of these guys, show them how it's done. I think I want to intern in Florida with somebody like Jose Baez. I think he could really teach me the ropes. You are a fan. Huge fan. Okay. So obviously it's the defense team's position

that Sigfrido Garcia and Katie McBanuel worked together to kill Dan Markell in the hopes of extorting Charlie. And Charlie only knew that this had happened when Katie told him the night of Dan's murder. So Wendy Adelson also testified during her brother's trial. And she claimed that although Charlie and Donna Sue were aware of the murder for hire plot from the point of like July 18th on, because as soon as, allegedly, as soon as Charlie heard from Katie, he did tell somebody, right?

His mother, conveniently enough, he told his mother. So Charlie and Donna know that who killed Dan Markell basically and why, and that that person's still still running around out there. And not only do they not tell Wendy, but they encourage her to bring her two children to South Florida, closer to where the killers live, closer to where the Latin kings are roaming around,

extorting Charlie and threatening to kill his family members. And they want to bring Wendy and her kids there? It's interesting. Are you mad? Are you angry that according to your brother's theory, he and your mom have known who killed your children's father since 2014? And you weren't told who it was? I'm more angry that somebody killed my children's father.

So you're not mad about that, that they knew this whole time? That's what they're saying. I'm sorry, can you repeat the question? That's the theory of the defense in this case, is that he's known the whole time, your brother's known what happened to Dan. Does that make you angry? I'm angry about so many things, it's hard to separate them. Well, try.

I'm confused. It's hard to process. And apparently, according to his lawyer, these killers had threatened to kill your brother's family members as well. Did you hear that? I did hear that. And that would be you, right? It would. Were you told that a specific threat had been made

by the same people that had killed your ex-husband to kill your brother's family members? I was not told. Would that have been information you would have liked to know back in 2014? Yes. Would you have made the same decision to move down to South Florida, closer to the killers? No, I would not. And even after the killers were arrested in 2016, you weren't told that that's what was going on the whole time?

I found out yesterday. Do you think Wendy found out the day before she was sitting on that stand? Just not what you think to be true, what you instinctually believe. Then at no point before that did Donna Sue or Charlie tell Wendy what had happened. I won't go that far. I don't know. So maybe, but this is what I know. This is what I believe. And I've said this before already, and I'll say it again. The minute that detective told her, Wendy Adelson, that Dan Markell had been shot in his driveway, she knew in that very moment what had happened. She didn't know the how, she didn't know the who, but she knew the overall what happened. She didn't know who pulled the trigger, but there was very little doubt in her mind what had transpired and that's what I got from her initial reaction to being told that and how She was nervous about calling her mom all these things. I I still believe that to this day real quickly about this video such a great job such a great job because initially we're getting more of wendy trying to

Not answer a question with an answer, right? But really giving no answer at all. And so prosecutor steps back. Okay. I'm not going to allow you to give this vague, ambiguous statement. I'm going to break it down systematically question by question, where the only answer you can now give is the one that I want you to give. Because if you give any other answer, you look like a moron. Did you know, did it make you mad? Oh, that's, that's, you know, subjective, right? The way you're framing it. I can, I can get out of that one. But when did you learn about, did you know that they said they were going to come after the family members? Can't say you didn't. She just said, did you hear that? Yes, I did. Well, did that make you upset? Yeah, of course it did. Would you have moved your kids to Florida at that point if you knew that?

No, I wouldn't have. There's no other way to answer. So the prosecutor is asking questions that she already knows the answers to. And you can see by how uncomfortable Wendy is in that moment. She's now backed Wendy into a corner and Wendy can only give her the answer she wants. It's, it's a verbal version of checkmate in that conversation. That's what's so intriguing about it. It's two lawyers who are very smart going at each other. And one of those lawyers is realizing shit. She has me in a corner right now. And the only way I can answer her is the way she wants me to, this sucks, but it's fascinating to see. The only way that's logical to answer. The only way that's, if she. The only way that's, if she had answered it any other way, people would have called bullshit, right?

And that's why she can't because there's so far, she can take it so far. Like for example, to go back, were you upset about it? I was upset about a lot of things. You can say that and not sound like an idiot. I'm confused. Right. You can say I'm upset about a lot of things. That's all encompassing. Yeah, that may be one of them. So when the prosecutor says, okay, we're going to play that game, I'll just ask you question by question. And now Wendy's getting flustered, getting red. You can see it. And now you want to take this a step further and say that this is indication she's known about this thing the whole

time and may be involved. That's fine. But my, my, at minimum, not me, not you. I'm just saying at minimum, I think it's a situation where Wendy has her minimum. Not me, not me. Not you. I'm just saying at minimum, I think it's a situation where Wendy has her mother. Well, her mother at this point had not been arrested yet, correct? No, correct. So you got a brother on the stand. And by the way,

Wendy at this point has probably put it together that mommy was involved as well. So she knows where this is going. So she's trying to put a hurdle on the track to say, I have to stop this because I can see how this is going to play out. So she's doing everything she can without potentially implicating herself in something she wasn't involved in to prevent Charlie and Donna from being found guilty of these crimes because she loves them. They're her family members. I think she's probably rationalized it in her head that they did it for her and her kids. So I'm sure behind closed doors, she's probably found a way to be okay with it. Yeah. Or maybe even feels really guilty about it. Yeah. Potentially. So she's doing whatever she can as an attorney herself

to try to save her brother. But this prosecutor, again, what was the prosecutor's name? I apologize. Georgia. Georgia Kappelman. She's not going to allow it. She's not going to allow it. And even her facial expressions, it's a song and dance. It dance it's all a show and even her you heard that part right like it's just every one when he was like i can't really probably she's like well well try real hard try real hard yeah that's listen this is what it's like if you're gonna act like a child i'm gonna treat you like one this is it's a it's if you've ever had the chance to attend a trial or obviously you can just watch them on youtube now, but this is how it goes. There is personalities, there's acting, there's theatrics, all of it is in play. There's like a dance, like a manipulation dance happening.

Yeah. It's all in play. And they do this, defense attorneys do this all the time to police officers. Oh yeah. They do the same. They've done it to me hundreds of times where they'll talk down to me like I'm a moron and they'll break everything down like i can't understand it and they'll i'll give i'll give a response and they'll make it seem like it's so absurd that it could be true what i'm saying as they're as they're answering me it's it's again but it's part of the game triggering it's part of the game right yeah no it's not even triggering i kind of found it funny because i'm like, just refer to my report. Some people get triggered by it.

Charlie gets triggered. For sure. For sure. Somebody with a big ego, somebody who thinks that they're smarter than everyone would get triggered by that. And I want to clarify, when I said Wendy was feeling guilty, I don't mean feeling guilty that Dan Markell was dead. I mean feeling guilty that her mother and her brother most likely did this for her and now they are facing murder charges and their lives are ruined. Exactly. That's why she's feeling guilty that her mother and her brother most likely did this for her. And now they are

facing murder charges and their lives are ruined. Exactly. That's why she's feeling guilty. Not about Dan Marconi. I don't disagree with you there. I don't disagree with you. The whole point, I think, of this line of questioning is Georgia Kappelman's over here like, OK, we've talked to Charlie. We've talked to everybody. We've talked to Wendy. From all reports, Charlie and Donna Sue loved Wendy and loved her kids. So if they thought there was any chance that Wendy or those two little boys could be in danger, would they have had them moved to South Florida? No? Okay. Then they didn't actually think that there was any danger because they were a part of this plan and they knew that Wendy and her sons were not a target. And that's where Wendy knows she's going.

Yeah. Yeah. Right. And that's why she's so pissed that she has the answer. Exactly. She knows she's not asking her because Georgia doesn't care about Wendy or her children in that moment. Like, oh, she's just asking her commonsensical questions. Like, well, if you knew there were hitmen down there that wanted to potentially kill you, you wouldn't move your kids there, right? Like that's, that's pretty obvious. And she's like, no, I wouldn't. But

she knows that this, the question she's asking is not what she's really concerned about Georgia. I mean, Georgia's trying to paint a picture that like you just said, if you didn't, if that were the case, you never would have moved there. So you had to be in on this. And they never would have let you. They never would have let you. So they are lying. It's not about Wendy. It's about Wendy being in on it. It's about Wendy saying, no, I wouldn't because I care about my kids.

When you care about somebody or more than one somebody, you don't move them closer to people that want to kill them or have a potential to kill them. So if Wendy isn't going to move her kids to South Florida where the hit men live, then why would Donna Sue and Charlie want Wendy and her sons to move there? It's just like an- They were in on it. They knew there was no danger to them. They knew there was no danger to them. That's the point. Wendy also testified that she tried to hold her ex-husband Dan Markell in contempt during the divorce because he hadn't held up his end of their divorce agreement. Specifically, he was supposed to be paying her half the value of the house that they'd once shared on Trescott Drive because he stayed in the house and she moved out. So he was supposed to be making her monthly payments towards the half that she'd be entitled

to the divorce. But he wasn't doing that. So during Charlie's trial, Dan's divorce attorney, Stephen Webster, he got on the stand and he testified, listen, like, I don't think Dan was the problem here. I think the Adelsons had been the one who were making the divorce contentious. And in fact, I think Wendy should have been held in contempt. I had just started my firm. And, you know, like any small business, you're scared and you're hungry.

And a friend of mine called me, Tor Friedman, and said, I have a client for you. And I was like, okay. And he said he's a law professor. And I was like, okay. And he said, it's a family law case. And I said, well, Tor, I don't do family law and you know that. And he said, well, it doesn't matter. He's a law professor.

He'll teach you everything you need to know. And I said, okay, well, that makes sense. So I agreed to meet with him. And the night before, I read all the papers, and they were voluminous. I printed them and actually read every word. And we'd already set up a meeting at Voodoo Coffee on Tennessee Street, and I really didn't think I was going to accept the case. I could just tell from the tenor of the papers that it was really, really contentious,

and it just didn't feel like something I probably wanted to get involved in. But I wanted to meet him anyway, and so I met him, and I liked him. I liked him a lot, and so I decided I would take the case. I mean, it's not a prerequisite that I like you to represent you, but in something like that, I didn't want to get involved in a contempt-type case with law professors where ultimately it could end up being disrespectful to the court and I didn't want to be involved in something like that if it was if I really felt like it was going to be that kind of a relationship but when I met him I didn't

feel like it was going to be that way and so I agreed to take it and his primary concerns were he wanted to get more time with his children if at all possible but he didn't want to change the kind of the time sharing. He had a kind of an unusual request. He wanted to see if there was any way that he could see the children every night when he didn't have them to tuck them into bed and kiss them good night. And he said, look, I'll only stay five minutes. I promise I won't bother anybody and I'll leave. And I said, Dan, that's probably never going to happen. That's just probably not reasonable. And then he was really concerned about parental alienation, which at the time I wasn't really familiar with it.

I didn't do family law, but I was familiar with it from the perspective of I learned about it in law school and stuff like that. But he was really concerned that the grandmother, Donna Adelson, was really trying to drive a wedge between him and the children. And he actually told me that he heard her refer to him as stupid on a Skype call. He couldn't see her in the Skype screen, but he heard her say something to the effect of stupid's on the phone. And he was livid about it. And he was ready to basically kind of go to war over that. That sort of reference, the filing that we're familiar with where grandma says you're stupid and he was seeking to have grandma enjoined from having unsupervised contact with the kids.

Yeah, and I didn't have the opportunity to actually talk to him about that yet because he was killed. But it was my understanding that after that filing, he heard her. Actually, he heard her because that's what he told me he said i heard her call me stupid um and but she wasn't in the screen but he knew her voice and so he was very upset about that and there was some suggestion that dan markel was expected to lose all the filings that were currently pending at the time of his death and when he was expected to prevail on the filings that were currently pending at the time of his death, and Wendy was expected to prevail on everything. Do you agree with that assessment? You mean like with the contempt and all of that?

Yeah. No, I mean, I would not have got involved if I thought he was going to lose on the contempt. You know, my reputation travels with my clients, too, if they're doing things like that, right? I mean, if you're representing a client who is disrespecting the court, you know, it's hard not to feel like that's bleeding off on you and you're disrespecting the court. And in Tallahassee, Florida, if you practice in this circuit, you know, if I disrespect Judge Everett today, you know, every judge in this circuit that matters to me is going to know about it before lunch tomorrow. And it's just, no. So, no. I would not have accepted. That's why I didn't think I was going to take the case when I read all that seeking

contempt is kind of a big deal amongst lawyers right yes I mean you know contempt is you know it's an ugly is you know it's a very ugly kind of prospect and as a lawyer that was one of my main concerns is you know she was a lawyer and I did feel like she should be held in contempt she didn't disclose things on her financial affidavit and Dan convinced me of that. But that was to be determined, right? By a court. Yes. But in my mind, that was the only reason I took it. And at the end of the day, you can lose your law license for that. I mean, I guess you would have to report that to the bar. I didn't research it, but the court would refer it to the bar. If the court found you were in

contempt, the court would refer it to the bar. If the court found you were in contempt, the court would refer it to the bar and, you know, you could lose your law license. So, yeah, it's pretty serious in that regard. All right. We're going to take a quick break. We'll be right back. A court also heard from a woman named June Umchinda. This is an ex-girlfriend of Charlie's who had been dating him when the bump happened in 2016. Now, in June of that year, June had given an interview to the Daily Mail where she defended her then-boyfriend, saying that she did not believe Charlie or anyone in his family had paid for the murder of Dan Markell. June said, quote, I can understand why the police would think this, but there's no way Charlie or anyone in the family is involved. They're all so nice.

I mean, he hasn't been saying anything about this. I haven't asked him about it, but I know he's been under intense pressure over the last couple of weeks, and I assumed it was something having to do with work. I've gone to family dinners, and they never talk about what happened to Wendy's ex-husband. I did ask once, and Charlie said he was murdered. That was it, but I'm practically living with Charlie Charlie and I'm not worried. He's very nice and not violent at all. It's a very classy, well-educated family. Police must have it wrong. End quote. I don't know if Charlie put her up to this, but I think that's what the Edelson family are banking on. That people would look at them and be like, they're a classy, well-educated family.

The police must have it wrong. But that's not the times we're living in anymore, guys. And I'm not sure that June is all that bright because when June Umchenda took the stand, she told the prosecution that she still had very strong feelings for Charlie Adelson, even though they hadn't spoken since his arrest, even though he was on trial for murder, that was still her man. OK. And this becomes very clear as June and Charlie exchanged like flirtatious smiles in the courtroom. Do you know Charlie Adelson? I'm sorry. It was my alarm to come here down here. Is it silence now? Yeah. Okay. Wait, let me just check if it's, I'm so sorry. I don't want Adelson? I do. How do you know him? He's my ex-boyfriend. Do you see him here in the courtroom? I do. Could you please point him out and describe

what he's wearing? He's the middle one there with the navy blue suit on. Do you still have feelings for Mr. Adelson as we sit here today? So he's my last serious boyfriend. So I would say yes, that it's, there's something still there. I care about him, but obviously I haven't seen him in God knows how long. Question. Do you think Charlie did her teeth as well? Yeah, absolutely. Her teeth are beautiful, right?

She got some beautiful teeth on her. Charlie's like, I did some good work on those ones. Those money. So I know some people are listening on audio and you couldn't see that clip, but you should go to YouTube and watch it because you can't miss it. I mean, the sexual tension between these two is palpable and she gets all flustered over her alarm going off on her phone and Charlie just looks at her and he's like smiling and he's kind of like covering his mouth with his hand. Yeah. And he's like, that's my girl right there. That's silly. That's silly little girl. Just such a mess. Oh God, I miss her. Silly little June. Silly little June. I miss her so much. I should have stuck with her over Katie. Right. I mean, he can't help himself, man. He's in a courtroom facing life in prison, and he still loves the ladies.

He loves them. So June, she was approached by a reporter in Charlie's driveway before his arrest because the reporter had thought she was Katie McBanua. And that's when June found out that Charlie and his ex-girlfriend had been implicated in a murder plot. But before that, she claimed she didn't know. He never talked about it. June said that Charlie had been acting weird since Dan Markell's death, like since the bump, basically. Since that 2016 bump, he was acting weird. He started having to run off all the time.

He would be on the phone during odd hours. He started talking to Katie McBanua a lot more. And Charlie's old friend and business partner, Ryan Fritzpatrick, also took the stand. Did he ever make a statement to you about murder? Charlie, as you heard in testimony and depos, he made a lot of tasteless jokes. And he said something along the lines of, get away with anything you get away with murder to keep your mouth shut when was that statement made years ago before or after this murder it would be after was his behavior after are you familiar with the arrests that occurred in May May of 2016 May of 2016 I should have clarified Katie Katie's arrest?

Yes. Yes, ma'am. And did his behavior change at that point? Yes, ma'am. And did he seem relieved and less stressed out after she got arrested? No, ma'am, he did not. What was his demeanor after her arrest? Nervousness, agitation, stress. So he seemed to get more stressed out after she was

Yes, ma'am. Was he weird like that before, like during the between the time of the murder and the time of Catherine Magdalena's arrest? To say he was weird. Like that, like the behaviors you just described. No, not that weird. It's funny because Ryan Fitzpatrick's like, what do you mean weird? Dude's always weird. No, he was weirder after Katie's arrest, but dude's always been weird. He's like, what do you mean weird? You know, so, and it's just little things here. Like he said, you could get away with murder.

Anybody could get away with murder if you keep your mouth shut. And then he acts more stressed out after Katie gets arrested. Now, if your extortionist was just placed in prison, you'd be less stressed out, right? You'd be like, okay, finally, it's not my fault. I didn't go to the police. She was just arrested because of this, this, and this. But at least she's off the streets and can't come to my house and get money anymore. So then they bring Katie Magbanua into the courtroom. And once

again, I'm so sad for her. I know what she did was wrong, but to get the same sentence as Sigfrido Garcia and Charlie Adelson, and she had so many opportunities to avoid that. She had so many opportunities to go home and be a mother to avoid that. She had so many opportunities to go home and be a mother to her children. And that I cannot respect. I do not respect protecting anybody above your children. I do not respect even if it was the father of your children. I don't care. The dude was a degenerate, OK? He was a gang member. He killed people. He killed Dan Markell. He was a drug addict. He couldn't stop. That's why you guys were on and off all the time. But the one consistent thing that you had in your life and the one consistent thing

that they had in their lives was your children. And you abandoned them forever to protect some mid-level, medium, ugly fuckboy, basically, like who did nothing for you your whole life. So it's unfortunate. It is unfortunate. But I also will say, I think that can sometimes be that gang culture. And you probably could speak to that better than I could.

But the whole like stand by your man thing, like, I don't know, like the Bonnie and Clyde, we're going to go down together kind of thing. It sounds fine in like a romance novel or like an action movie. But in real life, when you got kids depending on you

and they've already lost their father to this, for you to die on that hill, I just, I don't understand it. But she's finally ready. She's finally ready to tell about what actually took place between herself and Charlie, which led to them concocting a plan to have Dan Markell taken out of the picture permanently. Before, I know you're about to go to a clip before we do. A couple of things. Yeah. There's that code of silence and i think a lot of attorneys were telling her that if she stuck to the plan they were all going to go away they were all going to walk off free on this one obviously she was because they thought she was

innocent yeah obviously she was misled was she misled or did she mislead her lawyers into believing she was genuinely innocent so that they were giving her legal advice based on the fact that she was confident that she was innocent and they actually believed her legal advice based on the fact that she was confident that she was innocent and they actually believed her. I hope that's the case. Although my personal belief is that sometimes even though the defense attorneys know the truth, they still look for the out. I told you and I've said multiple times because Tara Quass, her lawyer, was stunned when she found out she was actually involved. Stunned. She truly believed she was innocent. I think she felt a little betrayed, honestly. So as far as the co-conspiracy thing

is, because I go back and forth on this on other cases, not necessarily this one. And just to be clear on how I stand on these, you have a scenario where you have a person who's the getaway driver and the intent is to rob a store and the shooter goes into the store. And instead of just robbing the store, he shoots and kills the clerk behind the counter. That, you know, getaway driver who wasn't necessarily in on that goes down for murder one. I have a hard time with those. I have a hard time with those. With this one, and I don't think you're disputing this, but in this one,

Katie was fully aware, although she didn't pull the trigger, she might as well have, because without her, Dan Markell potentially is still alive to this day. Yeah, you can make the argument, Charlie would have found someone else, but this scenario- But you don't know if that argument's valid because she never gave him that opportunity. Never gave him that opportunity. And she, as you have laid out over multiple episodes with the phone calls, she was the main person on those calls coordinating with Sigfredo and coordinating with Charlie. It doesn't happen without her. She knew what she was doing and what the result of her actions would be, which would be the death of Dan Markell.

Murder one. It's murder one. It's simple as that. Now, as far as her decision not to take a plea deal after the fact, yeah, I'm with you there, but it's just stupidity. At least she's staying consistent because she's been stupid through this entire ordeal. Yeah. I mean, obviously I think that she's clearly very, very responsible. We see her part in this. She benefited financially. She got new boobs, driving around in a car, paid for by Charlie. Obviously, she financially benefited from this. So I'm not saying she's like an innocent bystander pulled into this, but you had an opportunity.

And I would rather see somebody like Katie go home to her kids and provide them a mother than spend her life in prison when the person who pulled the trigger and the person who paid for it is behind bars. You know what I mean? I'm with you. I'm with you. And you know, I will say on a side note, I'm looking it up right now because you could probably go on, but a funny side note with Katie, it's not really funny, but a couple of our fans were quick to point it out. I think it was even posted by Meredith, the person who runs the Crime Weekly Facebook page. Shout out to Meredith.

Meredith. If you're on Facebook, go over and join the Crime Weekly discussion. She has like 7,000 people on there. Yeah, it's growing. It's growing. It's pretty good. But there was someone in that forum or on Twitter who tagged me where Katie's on this like website now for prisoners who, who want to date people outside of prison.

Did you see this? Did you see this tag at all? No. I'm not, I'm not going to go look it up or whatever, but it's, it's on there where Katie has like some, some photos of her. Like a prison dating profile page? Yeah. Where you can meet the prisoner, maybe a prisoner or maybe interact with them like romantically.

How is this allowed to happen? It actually was from Meredith. She needed to know Special K is feeling optimistic for love. It's something else you need to know. Catherine Magmanua looking for love in prison. So basically, yeah, it's like this website you can go to. Is she looking for love? And she's got some photos on there.

Is that what she's looking for? I don't know got some, she's got some photos on there where. I don't know. But anyways, that's the side note about Katie. She's, she's moved on from Charlie. Yeah. A girl's and Siegfried. Oh,

apparently. Yes. A girl's got needs. I don't, I don't fault her for that. I will say maybe your priorities are a little skewed and you haven't even been in prison for that long. And maybe, you know,

focus on yourself and, and, and finding some self-worth so that you don't have to question why you keep having the same pattern of dating toxic, emotionally unavailable, abusive men who get you into trouble and steal you away from your children. But you do you, Katie. She's out there. You do you. All right. Let's hear what she has to say.

I see that you're in jail clothes. Are you currently in custody? Yes, ma'am. What are you in custody for? A murder. Are you doing a sentence for murder? Yes, ma'am. You were convicted of murder? Yes, ma'am. And is that the murder of Dan Markell? Yes, ma'am. Did you have a trial in your case? Yes, ma'am. Did you testify? Yes, ma'am. You testified on your own behalf? Yes, ma'am. Did you testify? Yes, ma'am. You testified on your own behalf? Yes, ma'am. All right. And when you testified, were you truthful with the jury? No, ma'am. I was not. Did you take the same oath that you just took today in your own trial? Yes, ma'am. What was your defense when you were tried? That I had nothing to do with it. That we got it right

in reference to Charlie Adelson and we got it right in reference to Charlie Adelson and we got it right in reference to the killers, but you weren't in the middle. Yes, ma'am. Was that true? No, ma'am, it was not. Were you in the middle? Yes, ma'am, I was.

And didn't you also testify in the trial in which Sigfredo Garcia was convicted of murder? Yes, ma'am, I was. And what was his defense? That he had nothing to do with it. That we got it right in reference to Charlie Adelson and we got it right in reference to the killers, but he had nothing to do with it, right? Yes, ma'am. And was that defense truthful? No, ma'am, it was not. So Sigfredo Garcia was involved?

Yes, ma'am, he was. So why tell the truth now? I believe that the truth needed to come out now so that the family can get some type of closure. Why didn't the truth need to come out last year or the year before or the year before that? I was trying to defend myself. You were trying to get off? Yes ma'am. Did you think you'd be successful in your trial with that defense? I thought so. Has anyone promised you and anything promised you anything for your testimony here today? No ma'am.

Weren't you originally offered immunity for cooperation in this case? Yes, ma'am, I was. But you didn't take us up on that? No, ma'am, I didn't. Because you thought you could get off completely? Yes, ma'am. And now you're doing a life sentence? Yes, ma'am, I am.

Absolutely brutal. Unfortunate. Well, Derek sent me Katie's prison dating profile. And yeah, she says that her name's Catherine, but everyone calls her special K or K for short in here. She means prison. Originally from the Philippines, but grew up in the beautiful city of Miami. I love the beach, a big foodie, and watching movies. Gotta love those action-packed and chick flick comedies.

What do you think of the photos? I mean, they're like two different people. One is pre-prison Katie and one is current prison Katie. She's looking for some kind of entertainment because it gets hard in prison physically and mentally. So she's wanting some entertainment and most of all laughter. She says, hit me up if you have something interesting to talk about. Until then, live it up like it's your last. Stay blessed. I don't think that living it up like it was your last really served you well, Katie. It's kind of a, I'm not going to

take advice from you. I'm not. Here's the sad part. There's going to be some dudes hitting her up. Oh, a lot. She's an attractive woman. 100 part there's going to be some dudes hitting her up oh a lot she's an attractive woman 100 there's going to be some dudes hitting her up for sure for sure her uh email or whatever that goes by she's getting tons of entertainment right now especially with those photos jesus laughter entertainment and i'm sure they're not talking about action-packed chick flicks i could say something right there but i'm not gonna anyways yeah back to the story all right so we heard from katie she's pissed obviously rightfully so but you really only have yourself to blame and finally we have charlie charlie's going to testify in his own defense and this is a very unique opportunity to see how he takes everything he knows that the

state has from discovery, and he finds a way to make it fit into the bizarre claim that he had nothing to do with the hit on Dan Markell's life. And he was basically only dragged into it afterwards, an unwilling participant, a victim, if you will. He also tries to explain why he continued to have a romantic relationship and then just a regular relationship with Katie McBanua after, you know, the murder, even though he claims that during this time, she was part of the plan to extort money from him. She was the one taking the money from him. She was in cahoots with the very same people

who were threatening his life and the lives of his family members. Before we play these clips of Charlie testifying on his own behalf during his trial, I want to take our last break because there's going to be a lot of information coming your way. Yeah, then we can just buzz right through it.

Yeah, get this break out of the way. So let's take that and we'll be right back. So we're back from break. We are going to play this clip really quick of Charlie, and we'll be right back to discuss it. Charlie, let's start with the most important question. Did you cause the death of Professor Dan Markell? Absolutely no.

Did you hire anyone to kill him? No. Did you put any letters in any diaper bags of Katie McBanawa to have Professor Markell killed? No. How did you first meet Catherine McBanawa? I met Katie in the summer of 2013. She started working the front desk of a dental office that I worked at.

During the time that you dated her, how often would you communicate with her? We talked every day. When would you talk to her? I'd call her when I was in the car driving to work. We'd text throughout the day, and then I'd always talk to her at night time. Did Catherine McBanawa ever work for your dad or for you at the Adelson Institute? No, never. At the time that you met her, to your knowledge, she was single, right? Yes. And I think you testified that initially you didn't learn anything about her ex.

Nothing other than she was completely single. She was done with him. Was there an incident with Katie and her ex that you recall? Yeah. I remember her coming over to my house, and she was pretty upset. She had a mark on her neck. They'd gotten into an altercation, and he ripped a necklace that he'd given her off her neck. And she was crying, and she was all upset.

How did you react? She could tell I was upset. I mean, someone just roughed her up. And she could tell I was upset, and she said, don't do anything. She goes, he will kill you. He will kick your ass. You don't stand a chance. Now, why did you continue to date her after this?

I didn't take that as a threat to me. I just took it as she's got a crazy ex-boyfriend that wants her back, and she's got two kids with him. It wasn't a threat. I didn't feel like he was threatening me. She just was like, you know, it's a part of her life that I wasn't going to hold against her. July 1, I was going to take Katie jet skiing, and we started driving out of her complex, and we got about 100, 200 feet, and this blue car comes flying out of nowhere,

flies in front of us, and slams on the brakes. And I've got a car, and I'm towing a 1,200-pound jet ski behind it. And she started screaming, that's T, that's T, that's T. And I'm like, I'm almost rear-ended this car. And this guy gets out of the car, and he comes over, and he's screaming every kind of four-letter word at me, threatening me. I mean, his face was real red. My windows were up. And the guy was going crazy. And, you know, I'm kind of a little bit boxed in because the front of my car was almost against the rear of his car, so I couldn't drive past it.

And I had a big jet ski and a trailer behind my car, so I ended up putting the car in reverse, doing like a little bit of a three-point turn a little bit, swinging the car around. He then got in his car, chased alongside of us. And if you're towing a jet ski with a car, you can't go real fast. You don't have much acceleration. He was right alongside of us, rolled his window down, was screaming all this stuff at us.

And when we got to the light, it was just turning yellow, and I gunned it. I remember making a left-hand turn. And I said to Katie, I go, that guy's fucking nuts. And she goes, he goes, nuts? She goes, he's really calmed down. I go, what do you mean he's calmed down? And she goes, the old T.I. know would have broken your window and dragged you out into the street and beaten your ass. So we have Sigfredo Garcia trying or thinking about killing you in March before the first attempt, right?

Yeah. And now we have him threatening you and trying to run you off the road just 17 days before the actual murder occurred, right? Yes. You're aware that the state's theory is that you are co-conspirators with Secreto Garcia? Yeah, that's their theory. What happened when you had lunch with Catherine McBanawa on the 17th? She started all over again with, like, questioning me about the night before.

And then she wanted to make plans with me to do dinner on Friday night. And she got very upset at me. And she was just, like, weirdly adamant. Like, this is Friday night. I want to do dinner with you. Like, why are you saying you don't know? Like, you don't know you're fine to go do dinner with Erica and not call me until 1230? It just didn't stop.

And we got into a fight at lunch. So let's take that a little bit slower. So you meet with her on the 17th. And on the 17th, your testimony is that she was adamant that she wanted to have dinner with you on the 18th. Is that right? Yeah. And where did she want to have dinner with you? She wanted to make dinner plans and go down to Miami. Was that odd? I mean, it was Friday night. She was my girlfriend. So from that perspective, it wasn't odd.

What was odd is that she was so adamant. And when I pushed back on it, there was no push. She was like, started questioning me even more. So basically what you hear in this clip is they're setting it up like Sigfredo wanted to kill Charlie. He had confronted him multiple times. And this is not necessarily not true. Both of the things can be true at once. That Sigfredo was the gunman and Charlie was the one who paid for it.

And Katie was the go-between. And Charlie and Sigfredo never talked and didn't like each other, right? Now, what Katie's going to essentially admit to is, yes, Sigfredo helped because he wanted her back. Because he felt like when they had money and they were more stable and they would be happier and she wouldn't be as stressed out and she wouldn't need Charlie as much because of the money thing. So, Sigfredo hoped that in doing this and helping Katie, even if it was helping Katie's boyfriend, that it would warm Katie's heart towards him. So, that's where that whole theory goes, by the wayside. And also, I think it's a combination of things here. I think what was happening is Katie's telling Charlie on one hand, she's over Sigfredo, doesn't want to be with him. He's crazy. She wants to be with Charlie. But when she's with Sigfredo, she's saying, listen, babe,

I want to be with you, but Charlie has all this money and it allows me the freedom and it's going to take care of our children and I need this money. So I have to keep placating and flirting with this guy, but trust me, I don't actually like him. I'm just doing this for us. So I really do think she was speaking differently to both men and convincing them that they were both the priority in her life. And maybe that's why Sigfredo said, you know what, if this is the variable that's keeping you from cutting him off and it's money, we're going to solve this problem real quick. As much as I don't like this guy, as much as I don't want to do any favors for him, Katie, if you're telling me by doing this, it's going to give us the financial freedom for us to be together and to get Charlie Adelson out of your life, then I'm going to do it.

Yeah. And so I totally believe Katie was playing both sides because I believe she wanted to stay with Charlie. I think not because- Oh, you think so? You think she wanted to stay with Charlie, huh? Not because she loved him, but because she saw a financially stable future. Like who cares if my husband, the dentist, is working from 9 a.m. till 10 p.m.? I'm going to be sitting in his nice house with my kids and not having to work and having my life taken care of for me. And then I can have Sigfredo on the side once in a while if I want, you know, whatever. I can have the best of both worlds. But she's telling Sigfredo, I hate him so much, but if we just have this money

so she can get him to do what Charlie wants so that Charlie will be happy with her and keep her around, right? So she's playing both sides in a matter of kind of survival at this point, although, you know, you could just make your own money, but whatever. So yeah, that kind of goes by the wayside. So then we're going to, you know, talk about what Charlie claims happened on the night of July 18th. So he gets word that his brother-in-law, Dan Markell, has been shot. He, you know, calls Katie. They were supposed to have dinner that night. And he's like, my brother-in-law was shot. I'm not in the mood to do anything this evening. But she insisted she's going to come over to his place anyways to comfort him, to take care of him. So Charlie and his lawyer go through this whole process

of explaining all the calls between himself and his mother that night as just like saying, oh, we're just communicating about what happened to Dan. We weren't like talking about the crime. We weren't, you know, being like, yay, we did it. We were just communicating about Dan. And then when Katie arrived at his house, Charlie claims he was blindsided by what

she had to say. When she arrived to my house, she came in through the garage, entered into the kitchen from the side door like she always does. And she just looked panicked and upset. I mean, she walked straight in and gives me this big tight hug and asked me like, are you okay? And I said, yeah, just a horrible day. But she looked more upset than I've ever seen her. I'm like, are you okay? She's like, no, I'm not. I'm like, what's wrong?

She's like, just come sit down. I need to talk to you. Where did you go? We walked into the living room. And what happened when you got to the living room? We sat down on the couch, and she started to talk to me. And she said, listen, this is all my fault. I had no idea anything was going to happen, but this is totally my fault. I spoke in too much detail about your family's personal problems, about your sister, Dan Markell, and the million-dollar offer.

What did you say? I'm like, what are you talking about? And she's like, she's like, my friend killed Dan and he wants to be paid a third of a million dollars. How did you react? I was like, what did you just say? And she's like, my friend killed Dan and he wants you to pay a third of a million dollars. What happened next? I stood up, and I started cursing. I'm like, what the fuck? Are you kidding me? And she's like, no. I'm like, who did this? Who's your friend that did this?

And she's like, I don't want to say. I can't say. And I said, who was it? And she just kept saying, I'm not going to tell you. And I was like, was it Sigfredo? And she's like no I'm not I'm not telling you and I just walked in my bedroom and sat down on the edge of my bed what happened when you got in the bedroom she she came into the

bedroom followed after me she sat down next to me she started telling me like I'm so sorry this is this is all my fault. I didn't know any of this was going to happen. And I'm like, Katie, I'm not going to be part of this shit. Like, I'm not going to be part of paying for a murder. This is insane. And she's like, look, if you don't pay in 48 hours, they will kill you. And I said, Katie, I feel like I'm getting extorted now. How did she respond to that? She got really mad at me. She got angry.

She's like, look, I'm not extorting you. She's like, I got dragged into this the same way you got dragged into this. She's like, it's my fault for running my mouth the way I did, but I'm not extorting you. Like, I'm trying to help you. So she's like, you got to, she goes, what are you going to do? Are you going to go to the police? She goes, you go to the police, they'll kill you. Did she tell you that they would just kill you or they would also kill other people?

She said he'd come after you, he'd come after the family. Like, Charlie, you don't have a choice. Just pay the money. You said you had the cash. You said you were going to pay a third. Like, just do it. Like, I'm trying to help you out. What did you do then?

I said, Katie, I don't have a third of a million in cash. And she's like, you said you did. And I was like, no, cash isn't I can write a check for a third of a million. I don't need to take out a loan. And she's like, well, you have a ton of money in your safe. And I said, Katie, I don't have that much in my safe. I do have a lot. And I said, come, take a look.

And I walked over to my safe. I opened it up, and I'm like, here, take a look. And I took it out in piles and put it on the dresser next to us. And I said, go ahead and count. That's not a third of a million. And did she count it? Yes, she did. How much money did she count it? Yes, she did. How much money did she count?

$138,000. So it wasn't $100,000. It was $138,000. Correct. What did she do with $138,000? She had a big purse. She put it in her purse. And she asked me, she goes, how can you get the rest? And I'm like, hey, that's all the cash I've saved up from forever. And she said, can you go to your parents and get it?

And I was like, if I go to my parents, my dad will go to the cops in a second. There's no way I'm going to be able to stop my dad from going to the police. I could never say anything to him. What happened next? She asked me, she said, well, can you pay like, can you pay like $3,000 a month? And, uh, and I said, yeah, I can, I can do that. Now at this point in time, did you have any idea that she was part of the extortion? No, no. She kept saying it was all her fault

and that she didn't know any of this was going to happen. I mean, she was upset. What did she do next? She took her purse, her keys and her phone, and she's like, I'm going to go call my friend and see if this works for him. And I'm going to try to help you out. And she walked out of the house and my bedroom was right next to the front door. She walked out of my bedroom outside of the front door and closed the door behind her. When she went out of the house, what did you do? I just paced around my house, and I remember sitting in the living room. I got a wood coffee table, and I was just sitting on the coffee table just in shock,

thinking, what the fuck just happened? What happened when she came back in the house? She came in the house, and she was being the good guy and telling me that she's going to look out after me, and she's so sorry this happened. It's the same thing she was saying beforehand, and that she was going to make sure that nobody pays me a visit. And she's like, I spoke to him. You can pay $3,000 a month or you can pay the rest off. She goes, but the $3,000 a month you're paying doesn't go towards the balance. What did you do after she told you that? I just said, fine. and I walked downstairs into the kitchen, and I was shaking, and I took a bar of Xanax.

Where did you go? I walked outside from the kitchen through the sliders into the backyard. I closed the sliding glass door behind me. I actually got the picture. I wanted to be alone. I just sat outside behind my house for a while. Now, when you came back into the house, what was she like? She was just apologizing and just telling me that her friend's crazy and she's so sorry and she ran her mouth too much about everything and about the million-dollar offer,

and she was telling me that she was going to protect me. Did she take a Xanax as well? I don't know if she did. She may have, but I didn't give her one. Did she spend the night that night? She did sleep over that night. Now, why didn't you kick her out? I was in a state of shock, and I didn't think she had anything to do with it.

I didn't even want to believe that she had anything to do with it. When you came back in the house, what happened to you next? Xanax was really starting to set in. It was probably about a half hour I was outside. I remember going into the bedroom and sitting down. I sent a text to my parents to see if they were up in Rolando yet or where they were. And then I just laid down in bed, and I passed out pretty soon after that. The next morning, when did she leave?

She left about 8.30 in the morning. And how was she in the morning and how was she in the morning how was she acting she was apologizing and telling me how sorry she is and she was blaming herself and saying it's all my fault for running my mouth and telling my friend about this all right so what you heard uh so far is charlie being talked to by his own lawyer, Daniel Rashbaum, right? So it's pretty friendly. He's leading him down the right path. But then Charlie gets torn apart during cross examination by Georgia Kappelman, illustrating to the jury and everyone in the courtroom and everyone watching how unbelievable his version of events actually was. And he also, it's going to be so frustrating to you, Derek, because I know it's frustrating to me. And Georgia Kappelman looked

like she was going to explode at some point. Charlie can't figure out whether or not Katie was actually guilty of doing anything because he keeps saying like, well, in 2014, I didn't think she was. But now I realize she is. But like she's not the extortionist. She keeps saying stuff like this. Don't know if he's actually believing that or if he was just answering in an intentionally confusing way, like his sister, Wendy, to make this cross-examination more difficult and less clear for the jury. Who we'll come to find in prison conversations between Charlie and his mother after he goes to prison, after he's found guilty. He doesn't have a lot of respect for the jury to begin with. So he probably didn't think they were that smart and he probably thought the more confusing his answers were, the less they would be able to keep up with it.

Have you ever heard the saying that the simplest explanation is always the most likely? Have you heard that? I've heard that theory before, yeah. Was your explanation to the jury over the last little over a day the simplest explanation it was the truth do you i mean you have a thorough explanation would you agree with that i told you what happened do you agree that the only problem with having an explanation for everything is that there's just so many explanations there's no explanation I explained what happened I want to go through some of that you claim that you were extorted on July 18th 2014 by Catherine Magdano and also in the background some Latin Kings probably

Garcia and Rivera right is that accurate no I wasn't extorted by Catherine Magdano you weren't that's not what I believed in 2014. Okay, I'm sorry. I understood you to say you believe that today. Today I do, yes. All right, so who extorted you? I believe that it was Catherine Magbanya's friend that she ran her mouth to. Okay. And that's 2014.

Right, but as you sit here today, you think it's Magbanya, Garcia, and Rivera. Is that accurate? No, that's not accurate. Okay. Who extorted you? As I sit here today, I believe that it was Catherine Maguena, and I believe Sigfredo Garcia, but I don't know for sure. I was never there when she was ever talking to him,

so I don't know if he was in on it with her or not. All right. At the time, though, you did not think she was guilty. You got that right. The time of the extortion. In 2014? Yes. Correct.

Okay. And then so exactly when you found out would be, I think you said, her trial. That I suspected that she was not telling me the truth and she was a part of it was in 2019. At her trial? Yes. All right. And so she was arrested telling me the truth and she was a part of it was in 2019. At her trial? Yes. All right. And so she was arrested in 2016, right? Yes. All right. So for three years, she was in the Leon County Jail awaiting trial. Yes. She was there. And you believed she was innocent. Yes. And you had this whole explanation to assist with exonerating her, right? I have the truth of what happened, yes.

But you didn't offer the truth of what happened, did you? Nobody came to me. I thought the truth would come out. Does someone have to come to you? I was told not to talk to Katie and not to talk to anybody about this case by counsel. On day one, which is July 18, 2014, she is the only one that physically contacted you to conduct this extortion. Am I correct in that? Yes, you are. So you never actually had any contact with any Latin King? No.

No phone calls? No phone calls. No texts? No. No texts? No. No letters? Well, in 2016, you're talking about in 2014, right? I'm talking about the first layer of the extortion. Did you have any contact with the thugs that were getting your money for two years?

No. Did anybody put a gun to your head? I was told that I would be killed in 48 hours if I didn't pay up. I heard you say that, but my question is, did anyone put a gun to your head? I was told that I would be killed in 48 hours if I didn't pay up. I heard you say that, but my question is, did anyone put a gun to your head? You're asking me, did anyone pull a gun on me? That's what I asked you. Is that your question? No, nobody pulled a firearm on me.

All right, so when Catherine Ibanua came to you on July 18th and said, open the safe and give me all your money, she was not armed? She was not carrying a gun that day, no. Were you armed at that day no were you armed at that time did you have a weapon in your home I had weapons in my safe yes where the where you led to believe or told that the bad guys are outside right outside your apartment or your residence no but I was led to believe what they did to Dan they were gonna do to me I heard you say that but my

question is did she say like the cars I'm going to take the money out there to them right now? No, she never told me that they were waiting for me outside my house. In fact, she stayed the night with you, didn't she? Yes, she did. And didn't exit your house with your $138,000 until the next day right correct and the money the 138 000 was that stapled into thousand dollar increments each packet was a thousand dollars and they were had a staple in it and stapling money's a little unusual would you agree with that for me it wasn't unusual that's what i did right but nobody else does it that's why I'm suggesting it's unusual.

I've never questioned people into how they keep their money, whether they keep it in a staple or a paperclip or an envelope. I just know what I do. Would you agree, doctor, that it's a compelling piece of evidence that the killers were paid in stapled money and came up with that information? It's not compelling. The people who extorted me and got my money got it from my house, and it was stapled at my house. They had to have gotten it from you, right? Because it was stapled. If they got it from Katie, they got it from me. So it had to be some kind of I paid, but I did it under duress, based on that piece of evidence, right?

That had to be built into your defense. I was extorted, and I paid the money. All right. So Katie comes in, and she's in a panic, and she tells you what's happened. And I need all the money in your safe right now. Do you suspect that maybe she's working with the police at that point? Maybe she's trying to set you up? No, she didn't say, I need all the money in your safe.

That's not what she said. Did she take all the money in your safe? I cleaned out all the money in my safe and handed it to her. Right. Why did you do that? Because I was being extorted for a third of a million dollars. But why didn't you? The bump was only $5,000, and you immediately became suspicious and questioning

and had all these conversations and deliberations about what to do about it for days. When Katie comes to you, you just open the safe and give her the money, right? That's what I did, and there's a big difference between the two. Okay, well, the way that it was done to you, is that the way it's done? You have to be more specific. Well, on the wire, you say repeatedly, that's not the way it's done. You knew that the undercover agent was law enforcement, or at least strongly suspected, because that's not the way it's done.

And my question to you is, since you're an expert on extortion, because you've been extorted before and that's how you knew that's not the way it's done is this the way it's done do extortionists send a girlfriend of their victim to collect their extortion money is that the way it's done doctor i'm telling you what happened to me and i was told that if i didn't pay 48 hours I would be killed the person that came and extorted my mom that was not the same approach as what happened to me is that the only way that's the only way that's done they send the girlfriend it's the only time I've ever been extorted like that and at that point the blackmailer Catherine McBaniel negotiates some type of layaway plan for

you to complete the extortion with the Latin kings? Okay, Katie wasn't the blackmailer, and Katie wasn't the one who was extorting me. Didn't you just tell this jury that Katie was the blackmailer? You realized it in 2019. I had thought that when you were just talking, you were talking about 2014. You were talking about that night, so that night happened in 2014. Okay. We all know now, because you have revealed the puzzle piece, she's a blackmailer. Can we agree on that?

I believe, sitting here in 2023, that she was in on the extortion for sure. Yes. So is it okay if I refer to her as a blackmailer? I think there's a difference between a blackmailer and extortion, but sitting here today we can. We'll refer to her as an extortionist. So this woman, the extortionist, is going to do you a solid by negotiating with the Latin Kings for you to get on a payment plan for the extortion. Isn't that what happened? What you're doing is you're taking what we know in 2003 and trying to say, this is what I knew in 2014.

Did she put you on a payment plan? Yes. Did you hear any of the conversation where she was making these negotiations on your behalf? No. You didn't want to talk to the guy yourself? No, I didn't even think of that. The text messages that were exchanged between yourself and Catherine McVanawa

on the morning after this exchange of money were inconsistent with your extortion theory. They were inconsistent with how I was feeling. They don't appear to look like you just gave her $138,000 under duress, do they? She told me, the last thing she said to me before she left the house is, can we just pretend like this never even happened? So when I sent her that message, I was trying to show her, like, I'm trying to forget all about it.

Yeah, you were just demonstrating to her that you would agree to pretend nothing happened, right? Absolutely. That's what she asked me to do and that's what I tried to do. So the text messages aren't what they appear to be. It's a beautiful day. I'm going to the pool. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the gym. None of that is what it appears to be. It's something else. I absolutely did not go to the gym. I was trying to show her that I was, you know, pretending like nothing ever happened and looking past it. And there's nothing on the wire. All those hours of you talking.

There is nothing on the wire about the extortion, this layer one of extortion, because she told you not to talk about it, right? She told me to never talk about anything to anyone or her. She never wanted to hear about it again. Yesterday, in your testimony, between you and your attorney you mentioned the word extortion 123 times. Would you take my word for that? I'm sure it came up a lot. Okay but nowhere even in the midst of this whole second extortion it's happening again. It's an extension of the same thing. Do you mention anything about

this layer one of the extortion? Do you? Yes, actually I did. Okay. If you pull up the video from Matsuri when I was sitting with my dad and I said it, and the funny thing is, that's what I whispered in his ear. Right, but we can't hear that. Right, because that's my point. I never wanted anybody to hear what had happened. I never wanted the police to come talk to me, but if you put up that video, you'll actually see me saying that it's my dad's ear, and that's my point i never wanted anybody to hear what had happened i never wanted the police to come talk to me but if you put up that video you'll actually see me saying that it's my dad's ear and that's why i went and said it and that's what we were talking about at the time sorry the only time you mentioned the extortion it's in a whisper that is not picked up by the microphones right intentionally yes yeah all right then a couple weeks later after the initial extortion you and catherine magbanua broke up, according to your direct.

Do I have that right? That's not correct. When did you break up? Within a week. I met her. We went out to dinner. We went out to eat. And I just said, this has got to end.

All right. So you broke up with her. Yes. Weren't you scared that if you broke up with her that she would sic the Latin kings on you? No, because i had every intention of paying every month when when i broke up with her and i said listen i don't want to surround myself with this i'm scared she said that she was going to come every month and pick up the money and protect me and she she understood i mean she our relationship was on the rocks

but you've testified that all the gifts and stuff that you gave her were to keep her happy, right? Yeah, when I realized that she's the one who's protecting me and she wasn't a part of this extortion, I had no problem keeping her happy and I looked for nice things to do for her because she was broke. But not worried about pissing her off by breaking up with her. Well, our relationship was definitely on the rocks. After July 1st, when Sigfredo cut me off and threatened me and called my dad. After you broke up with Kathy Magdanoa a week after the murder, did you continue to talk to her?

We still communicated, for sure. Talk on the phone? And texted, yeah. and did you continue to hook up with her after the breakup and by that i mean you know have sex with her there was one occasion there was one time that we hooked up okay when was that i want to say it was probably about five months after we'd broken up okay well there was one other occasion before that in October of 2014. Do you recall that October 9th of 2014? That's that's probably the occasion I'm talking about. Another one on October 15th. You remember that one? No I think I just I think we did hook up about one time. Okay well one

time on October 9th and one time on October 15th. I thought it was one time. If it was two times, it's been. Could it have been two times? But no more. Okay. And on August 25th, 14, that would have been after the breakup, right? Yeah. You text her and then she replies, I don't need help. I'm good. Don't need favors, nor will I trust anyone again. Erase my number, please. Go on with your life like you did already and have been doing. Sorry we spoke today. I don't want to stress your life more. Don't do anything for me. Do you remember receiving that text from Catherine May Banawa? Yeah, sounds familiar. That's a pretty weird text to get from the extortionist if you're meeting her to give her money why is she saying erase my number she's not the extortionist okay and then in 2000 see you're in 2014 i didn't think she was the extortionist

right but it's been revealed that she was uh in 2019 so you're taking what was known in 2019 and you're trying to say i knew what I knew in 19. I'm not trying to say you knew. I'm trying to say she knew. She knew she was the extortionist. Why is she telling you to erase her number and leave her alone? Because I broke up with her. Exactly. On 9-14, or 9-11 of 14, she sends you hashtag bestie for life. Do you remember that? Sounds familiar.

So did you all have some kind of reconciliation after the breakup? No, I was probably doing her a favor and making her happy with something. On 10-6 of 2014, I love you. It makes me feel good that you care about me. I'm lucky to have you as part of my life. Do you remember sending that to her? Yeah. On 10-9 of 14, I mentioned the sex talk.

I won't go into the details of it. Again, 10-15, more sex talk. 10-23 of 14, thank you again for everything you're doing for my mommy. She sends you that. What were you doing for her mother? I don't know. I think I did a consult for her, but I didn't do anything for her mom. 224 of 15, you agree that she always knows how to make you smile,

and you say I love you to her. Remember that? Yeah, I cared a lot about Katie, and I didn't think that she was a part of this. So I was always trying to keep her happy and make her happy, and I felt like she got caught up, dragged into something that she shouldn't have been dragged into. Okay, maybe, but she dragged you into it as well. I didn't see it like that at all. Our relationship actually got stronger.

Initially, when I got extorted, I had limited contact with her, and I was cold to her. And then over time, I realized that she's the one who's protecting me, and she's not involved with these people because the extortion never went up, and Katie was always broke. She was involved with them because she had a child with the guy, right? I didn't know for sure it was him. But you suspected always that it was him. I always suspected that Sigfredo was behind this.

So wouldn't you want to distance yourself from this woman who, I mean, were you ever really that serious about her to begin with? I mean, we spent seven, eight months together. She's the person that's taking the money from you physically. I looked at it as she's the one who's protecting me. If she wasn't, I was going to get a visit from somebody. Is she the one that was physically taking the money from you physically she's the one i looked at it she's the one who's protecting me if she wasn't i was going to get a visit she's the one that was physically taking the money yes is she the one that was connected to the person you suspected to have killed your brother -in-law i thought she was tied to that person yes and she's the one that got you into this right because she ran her mouth i looked at that I ran my mouth too. And if I never

said anything to her, this would never have happened. So I felt responsible for saying something to her in the first place. But you didn't feel responsible enough to try to do anything about her sitting in jail, an innocent woman, for three years, did you? She never contacted me. You didn't offer to testify in her trial. You let her get convicted and get life in prison, didn't you? I thought the truth was gonna come out. But not through you. I was never contacted. I thought it was gonna come out through her. On 10-27 of 15, you say you can't wait to get lunch with her. She's the best and you're lucky to have her as a friend for life. Did you say

that? Yes. 10-27-15, you can't wait to get lunch with her 10 30 15 you tell her you miss her 12 9 of 15 again you tell her she's the best yeah i said all those things do you agree that this picture does not look like a relationship between an extortionist and her victim i i agree because katie wasn't the extortionist she was the the extortionist. In 2014 and 2015, I didn't believe that. I know you didn't believe it, but we're looking back now, okay? You know, it's like if you're going to quote me, date me. Like, what I knew in 2014 and what I knew in 2015 is not what I know now in 2023. Okay, yes, I hear you.

You didn't know then, and that's why you were nice to her. Yeah, I thought she was protecting me. Got it. And none of those factors that I pointed out weighed into that consideration, that she ran her mouth, that she brought the Latin Kings on you, she was taking the money from you. None of that counterbalanced it. You were still going to be friends with her and keep her happy.

You're wrong. I didn't know about the Latin Kings in 2014 or 2015. Most people don't send kissy faces to people that are extorting money out of them. I mean, she was taking your money. Again, Ms. Kaplan, she was not extorting me at the time. Okay, so we're back. And obviously that went on for quite a while. That went on for an hour and a half.

A lot of verbal judo there. And I mean, the whole point is she's trying to point out successfully, this isn't how you treat somebody who's threatening your life. This is how you treat somebody who's taking money from you. You don't let them spend the night. You don't have sex with them still. You don't give them gifts and take them out on dates. And you certainly don't text them and tell them how important they are to you and how

happy you are to have them in your life and how much you love them and miss them. So what's going on here? And he's got an answer for everything. It's just not an answer that adds up. So now that you've kind of heard from Charlie's lawyer and now you hear from Charlie, do you still think that this is a plausible story or if the jury's listening that they're going to think it's a plausible story? No, I think at the core, you're listening to the story, but the jury is also evaluating the source, right? In order for the story to be believable, you have to be, you have to come off as someone who's credible as a witness and with his ambiguity and his vagueness and his, I guess the key word I would use here is deflection, right? It's a deflection for any time that he feels George is trying to make a point, he deflects.

And he almost tries to distract, right? Like, well, she wasn't the distortionist. Right. Like something that's already been established, he brings up just in that clip six or seven times and you can see she's getting frustrated. Here's a better way to do this, right? Here's a better way to evaluate this. Let's all step back. If you're listening to this or watching this, step back for a second. There was a lot that we just watched there. And I don't know if this was Stephanie's

intention, but you're watching that clip. And what was the emotion that you felt? Just ask yourself that. What did you feel while watching that interaction? For me, it felt like it went on forever and I was frustrated because it was redundant. It was just revolving, going around in a circle and I could tell what was transpiring even though I don't know who Charles Adelson is personally. So if I felt that way, and I'm just a human being like anybody else, and you felt that way, maybe some of you didn't, but I imagine some of you did. That's what the jury is feeling. They're watching this interaction. They're seeing the prosecutor try to get through this story, trying to affirm what Charles Adelson has told the jury for the last however many days. And in this last part, you can feel the frustration with the prosecutor who's saying, listen, this is semantics, extortionist or blackmailer, which term you want to go with, either or it doesn't matter. Whatever you want to go with, Charlie, I'm with you. But the point

I'm trying to get out here is you've been telling us all along that you're the victim and that you were extorted by kat katie and her counterparts now you're saying that you don't believe that but you do but at the same time you don't but at the same time even though in 2023 you can't refer to information you didn't know in 2014 which this whole conversation is predicated on what we know today that's what the prosecutor is saying. She's saying, that's fine. You didn't know in 2014, but now in today's current situation with all the facts that you know, is it okay for us to call Katie McManua a blackmailer? Is that okay with you? Oh yeah, sure. Yes. Okay. That's fine. So yeah, that frustration that I experienced that probably many of you did, the jury is experiencing that well as well.

And it creates fatigue. It creates fatigue with the bullshit. And so when they get their responsibility, they get their opportunity to weigh in on this. They're going to come back and eventually say, listen, we you know, we don't believe this guy. So if we don't believe him, how can we believe his story? I think a whole point of it, too, was he keeps saying, no, I didn't know in 2014 or 2015 that she was an extortionist. I thought she was trying to help me. And Georgia Kappelman's like, OK, let's say you didn't know that she was she was just a victim in this like you. She was being forced to do this. Still, what she's doing to you and the people she's

affiliated with, you're a dentist. You're a smart guy. You always tell everyone how smart you are. You weren't smart enough to realize that she wasn't just an innocent party in this. You weren't smart enough to even suspect that to the point where I was like, okay, I'll keep paying you, but I'm going to have to cut this off, this personal relationship, because I no longer trust you. But I'll do what you want. And if you want to come here and break my knees if I don't pay you, that's fine, because I'm going to keep paying. But I'm not going to be sitting here and sending hard eyes and kissy faces to Katie Magmanawa when she's the one who's taking the money. And he kept saying, well, I thought she was trying to protect me. Protect you, dude? You're getting extorted. If there was a time to protect you, it would have

been before you could be getting extorted. But he's not making any sense. He doesn't care that he doesn't make sense. He just wants to stick to that same story and try to make everything fit around that. Well, why would you have sex with her? Well, I thought she was trying to help me. And, you know, I cared about her. And Charlie had previously testified, no, I didn't want to marry her. She wanted something more serious. I didn't. So I had to break it off. And Georgia Kaplan saying that, you weren't that serious about her to begin with. Why would you hold on to this afterwards? Well, we spent seven or eight months together and somebody's extorting you now. Well, I didn't know she was the extortionist then And it's like this crazy thing.

And the jury's like, all right, so you cannot answer directly. And everything is based around this one core story that you cannot stray from. And so it doesn't matter how bizarre the supporting details are that you put around this story, as long as that story stays intact, even if none of this makes sense. And at the end of the day, the jury didn't believe Charlie Adelson's version of events. They found him guilty of one count of first-degree murder, one count of conspiracy to commit first-degree murder, and one count of solicitation to commit first-degree murder. After the verdict came in, Georgia Kappelman went outside the courthouse and she was talking to the reporters and they were like, what's happening? You know,

are there more arrests to follow? And Georgia Kappelman in a sort ofthouse and she was talking to the reporters and they were like, what's happening? You know, are there more arrests to follow? And Georgia Kappelman in a sort of wink and a nod, you know, to the cameras, she's like, stay tuned. A week after Charlie's conviction, law enforcement approached Donna Sue and Harvey Adelson at the Miami International Airport as they were about to board a one-way flight to Vietnam. And that is where we're going to pick up next time, because now Donna Sue is going to be under the spotlight. And I can't wait. I've been waiting for this through seven parts to get my hands on Donna Sue, because at the end of the day, I think she's the one at the center of this. Charlie's the one who did it, right? Donna's the one that had the idea, in my opinion. Charlie was the one who executed it. Charlie is still

Donna's child at the end of the day. There's still going to be a power dynamic, an uneven one, where as a child, even an adult child, especially if you were raised by a mother who encourages the codependency that the Adelson family takes part in, you're going to feel a certain urge to please her, to make her proud, to show her that you can handle things. And I'm not saying Charlie Adelson's a victim, but I'm saying Donna Sue is at the nexus of this. She is the one. And without, we said without Katie, this wouldn't have happened. Without Charlie, this wouldn't have. Without Donna Sue Adelson pushing to get those kids there, without Donna Sue complaining and crying about her sunshines being taken away, acting like she

couldn't eat, she couldn't sleep, none of this would have happened. And I do believe that Wendy and Dan's divorce would have been far less contentious without Donna Sue's interference. So at the end of the day, we're about to talk about the one person that I believe without them, without Donna Sue, we wouldn't be here today. That's just my opinion, though. We will get into an interesting video with that too if we can get access to it. Her being arrested at the Miami International Airport. She's with Harvey.

It's an interesting video. We'll get into it. We'll dial that down. We'll talk about it. We'll break that part of this whole case down and we will wrap this one up. So until then, if you haven't already, which a lot of you haven't, so you could do this right

now, subscribe to the channel, turn your notifications on, leave a comment down below, let us know you got until the end of this video. And we're going to use the money band, the money band emoji to let us know that you got to the end. Cause you know, Charlie, we don't have staples. So we're going to use the money band emoji. Is there a money band emoji? Yeah. It's like a money. It's like a wad of cash on the emoji. It's not the bag. We don't want the bag because he didn't use bags. He used stapled money. So we're going to get as close as we can to it. So do we have a moldy money emoji? Yeah. Let's see if we can find that. We'll talk to Apple,

see if they can add it. Guys, that's going to do it for us. We appreciate you joining us here. Everyone stay safe out there. We will see you next week. Bye.