Hidden True Crime - Wendi Accused, Donna Exposed.... The Adelson Plot Thickens | Trial Day 3 Recap

Episode Date: August 27, 2025

Day 3 of the Donna Adelson trial brought explosive testimony. Wendi’s ex-boyfriend, Jeff LaCasse, told jurors she once said the only way she could move to Miami was “if something happened to Dan.��� Katherine Magbanua—already serving life—took the stand, admitting she lied in earlier trials and detailing how Charlie and Donna pulled her into the plot. Prosecutors also rolled out the money trail and digital blueprint tying the Adelsons to Dan Markel’s murder. FULL BACKSTORY- Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/hidden-true-crime/id1521619380?i=1000670853208 Spotify:https://open.spotify.com/episode/2VGAg7V4owkukkAG8SgNFZ?si=8oxZ2529QP28a_gHMTrpvA About Hidden True Crime: What started as a simple conversation at their dinner table became a captivating podcast. Join the dynamic duo of Dr. John Matthias, a criminal psychologist, and Lauren Matthias, an investigative journalist, as they delve into the psychological facets of unthinkable crimes every week. Their unique perspectives and in-depth analysis offer a fresh take on true crime storytelling. Thank you for your support through sponsorships, subscribing, listening, and becoming a Patreon member at Patreon.com/HiddenTrueCrime Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Hello, everyone. A lot happened today because day three is, what's today and what a day it was. Today marked. So, you know what, let's just get to it. Day three of the Donna Adelson trial. And to remind all of you that, you know, some of you are joining and this is the first trial you've watched. but this is actually the fourth trial connected to the conspiracy and murder of Donna Adelson's former son-in-law Dan Markell. The case has already seen several convictions. Driver Luis Rivera, pleaded guilty back in 2016, while shooter, Siegfredo Garcia, middle man, Catherine Meg Banwa, and Donna's son, Charlie Adelson, have each faced trial and are now serving time. in prison. And now it is Donna's turn, the matriarch of the Adelson family. And prosecutors argue that she and

Charlie helped mastermind and bankroll the entire murder plot, all to give her daughter, Wendy, who testified yesterday, the freedom to move with her two sons to South Florida, Florida. So the mode of a custody battle, the ability to move with her grandsons. And a family court judge had denied Wendy's request to relocate to South Florida and in the state's telling, Dan was the final obstacle to the life Donna envisioned for her daughter once her daughter Wendy divorced Dan Markell. And with that backdrop, let's get into what unfolded on day three. First on the stand was Jeffrey Lacasse, Wendy Adelson's ex-boyfriend, who had been dating her up until about a week before Dan McCraill's Markell's murder. And Jeff testified, I mean,

this is fascinating, right? The ex-boyfriend coming to testify. Jeff testified that he has worked as a professor at Florida State University for the past 12 years. He began seeing Wendy in late September 2013, and what started as a casual relationship eventually became serious and exclusive. relationship ended around July 14th, 2014. Can you imagine that too? Your ex testifying at a trial of yours, excuse, I mean, your mother's, I guess you said your ex testifying at your mother's murder trial 10 years after you broke up. But during their time together, Jeff and Wendy's time together, Jeff said that Wendy often confided in him about the intimate details of her divorce from Dan and the ongoing litigation, which he described as an almost constant topic of conversation. He understood that it was a bitter divorce and that Wendy was deeply upset after her relocation motion was denied.

And Jeff explained that he only met Dan briefly a few times, usually at child exchanges or events and never spoke with him one-on-one. Through Wendy and her family, however, he adopted the Adelson's narrative that Dan was controlling and difficult. That's what happens when a family sets a narrative or a group of people sets a narrative. And since he didn't know Dan personally, Jeff said he had no reason to question what they were saying. He also testified that Wendy frequently expressed how much she wanted to move to South Florida to be closer to her family and how much she despised living in Tallahassee. In fact, Jeff recalled. that on their second date, she broke down crying about the relocation denial, describing it as something that remained raw and, quote, very visceral for her.

Prosecutor Georgia Cabellman asked Jeff if he was aware of Dan Markell's motion to limit Donna's contact with the children due to allegations of parental alienation. And Jeff said he was explaining that Wendy and Donna discussed it often and that Wendy even showed him various court filings from the hearing. According to Jeff, every new motion or court development created turmoil in their relationship. Whenever something came up, Wendy and her family would unravel. Plans were canceled. Wendy's mood soured and the stress of the litigation seemed to consume her. Jeff described the Adelson's as a family with no boundaries, yeah, I think, and nothing, noting how deeply Donna involved herself in Wendy's personal life and divorce. He met Donna and Harvey several times, what he maybe once thought were his going to be his in-laws as he dated Wendy.

He met them several times and once stayed in Charlie, her brother's home when he and Wendy visited South Florida. And Jeff also testified that Donna, the matriarch, often traveled to Tallahassee for extended stays, sometimes lasting weeks, to help Wendy with the children and the divorce. Jeff described his interactions with Donna as limited, mostly just getting acquainted, noting that she rarely spoke. directly to him. An interesting thing to know. He recalled one notable outing in March 2014 when he and Wendy went on a double date with Charlie and Catherine Magbanwa at a restaurant, and during dinner, Catherine brought up her ex, saying that the father of her children was frequently in trouble with the police and had a violent criminal record. And after the group went back to Charlie's house, which Jeff described as very nice, complete with the pool,

and a hot tub. And once in the hot tub, Jeff said the conversation turned to Dan. And to say that Charlie disliked Dan, he testified would be an understatement. Charlie seemed fired up with what Jeff interpreted at the time as an overly protective brotherly anger. Jeff recalled Charlie also saying that he, quote, knew people on both sides of the tracks and spent time with criminals. A remark Jeff said came across as almost bragging. Jeff also testified about a conversation he had with Wendy regarding her efforts to get her oldest son tested for the gifted program. He recalled it because during that discussion, Wendy asked him at what age children begin forming autobiographical memories. And Jeff said that while he was not an expert, the subject comes up in textbooks he teaches from

and he gave her a general explanation that children experience amnesia around age two beginning to develop memory around ages three to four and by ages five or six can typically remember events. At that point, the defense objected arguing that Jeff was testifying in an expert capacity without foundation. And I, you know, I kind of agree with that objection. The jury was then instructed to disregard his explanation. Prosecutor Georgia Kaplanman then narrowed her question. asking what Wendy had specifically asked Jeff. He reiterated that she wanted to know at what age children remember events that happened to them. He answered five or six. But the defense again objected. Judge Everett ruled that the jury could consider Jeff's answer only for the purpose of

showing what he told Wendy and how that information might have influenced Wendy and Donna's state of mind, not as scientific fact. The defense continued to object. And at one point, Judge Everett even ordered them to sit down before excusing the jury so the issue could be argued further. The defense claimed a discovery violation saying they had never been given prior notice of this testimony and had not had the chance to depose Jeff on the subject. The state searched through its files to find prior references to the conversation, but ultimately they cannot. So Judge Everett agreed that the omission constituted a discovery violation noting there has been a multitude of discovery but as to Donna being able to depose

that didn't take place end quote however he also ruled that the issue was minor and had not substantially impaired the defense's ability to prepare his solution was to strike the testimony the jury would not be allowed to consider any evidence about children's memory development the state apologized for the oversight emphasized that it was unintentional and moved on from the line of questioning. After the jury returned, Prosecutor Kaplanman shifted to a meeting Jeff and Wendy had at a coffee shop on June 4th, 2014. Jeff explained that the two originally had plans to travel together around the time of Dan Markell's murder. On the evening of June 4th, he was supposed to go to Wendy's house to spend time with her and the children. Instead, Wendy asked him to meet her at a coffee shop to talk.

Take a listen. On June 4th, I planned to see Wendy and the kids at her house that night. The middle of the day, she called me to sort of an impromptu meeting at Red Eye over on Thomasville, and she abruptly canceled our trip for reasons that didn't make much sense. When was the trip scheduled to happen? The 11th to the 17th. All right, so you would have returned home actually the day before the murder. Correct.

Okay. And did she express concern about not. being home in time to pick up the children. Yeah, the reason she canceled the trip was I'm worried we're going to get strict. The reason for not going to get stuck. It goes to motive, Judge. Overall. I don't care if they go on a trip or not. All right, sir, so the reason for not going on the trip? The reason for not going on the trip was, well, it was tied up on a couple of things. First of all, all the stuff going on with Danny was a constant refrain. But given the stuff going on with Danny,

she was concerned that she might not be back in time, even though our flight was to land the day before. And it wasn't so odd to me. It wasn't winter. We're going through it. It's like L.A. to Atlanta to Tallahassee. He leaving in the morning. I didn't see any real reason why that would be a problem.

She would have needed to pick up the kids on July 18th. Yes. Yeah, she knew that then. Their schedules were planned out. for like months. Okay. So you would have returned on the 17th, and she would have been picking up her children

from preschool on the 18th. Yeah, I think 5 p.m. on the 18th, which is why, I mean, I didn't object. I just said, okay, I didn't make a thing out of it, but it didn't make any sense. Kaplanman pressed Jeff about why Wendy seems so uneasy in the weeks leading up to Dan's murder. Jeff recalled that around June 4th,

Wendy was unusually worried about needing to be home in time to pick up her children after their plan trip. He testified that it struck him as odd, almost as if she anticipated that something bad was going to happen. That same evening, Jeff was supposed to visit Wendy and the kids. She called and asked him to come over earlier than planned saying she wasn't feeling well. And when Jeff arrived, he could tell she wasn't sick. She was just extremely anxious, her nerves affecting her stomach. She wouldn't tell him what was bothering her.

Kaplan then shifted to questions about Wendy's television. Jeff testified that he had looked at it after she asked him to figure out why it wasn't working, expecting a simple setting issue. He turned it on and saw the screen was partially shattered. In his opinion, the damage looked deliberate. It didn't resemble something that children could have done, but rather as if someone around five foot five to six feet tall had stood and struck it. Jeff also recounted another incident from April 20th, the night before Wendy's birthday. They had planned a special evening together, but she never answered his calls or text. And growing concerned, he eventually went to her house and knocked until she came to the door.

Jeff testified that she appeared intoxicated, but not just from alcohol, but possibly from other substances as well. Her eyes looked leery and her behavior seemed to hot. Wendy asked him to stay the night, but Jeff annoyed that she had blown off their day, declined, and left. State clarified that this testimony was offered to show that Wendy was displaying erratic behavior at times during their relationship. Kaplanckleman next showed Jeff a set of text messages from June 28, 2014, between Wendy and her brother, Robert, about her relationship with him.

Jeff noted that in the exchange, Wendy told Robert not to mention him to their parents because they didn't know. And Jeff testified that that was simply not true. By that point, he had been dating Wendy for over six months, had met Donna and Harvey multiple times, and the children frequently talked about him with their grandparents. He said it struck him as bizarre that Wendy portrayed him as some kind of secret boyfriend. Kauffelman then turned to June 29, 2014. Jeff testified that he and Wendy were driving from Gainesville back to Tallahassee when he confronted her because he suspected she might be seen other men.

He told her it felt as though for months she had been just stringing him along. The conversation grew tense and he described the rest of the drive as very awkward. When they parted ways, Wendy told him it wasn't over between them, but that they needed a little time apart. Over the following weeks, they continued to text and Jeff had video calls with the kids. He believed things were likely on the mend. The next time Jeff saw Wendy in person was July 13th, the Sunday before Dan's murder. They went to dinner at a movie, then returned to their house where they discussed both their relationship and Wendy's ongoing frustration about not being able to relocate. Jeff testified that every time Wendy returned from visiting Miami, she was distraught about being stuck in Tallahassee.

And even though her relocation motion had been denied in court, and even though she had testified under oath that she accepted it, Jeff said her unhappiness over the issue was constant. It worried him since his career was at Florida State. And he questioned how the relationship could work if she was miserable where he lived and worked. Right. Solid question. According to Jeff, Wendy reassured him, but also made a striking comment. She said, quote, the only way I could ever relocate is if something happened to Dan, end quote. The defense immediately objected on hearsay grounds, but the objection was overruled.

Jeff was then permitted to continue with what Wendy said next. Take a listen. I was getting a little tired of this whole drama around the relocation. And so I pushed back on Wendy a little bit. and said like you're gonna have to kind of make your peace with this you're gonna take some have to take some responsibility for this you're linked to dan markell for life kind of challenged her a little bit and she said well can i tell you something confidentially and i said sure and she said last summer

same rule and remand the objection is over the rule that continue with your answer She said, Can I tell you something in confidence? Yeah, can I tell you something? I challenge her. Can I tell you, well, can I tell you something in confidence? Sure. Well, last summer, my brother looked into all options possible to take care of the Danny Markell problem,

including hiring a hitman and what cost about $15,000. Okay. And when she referred to her brother, she's got two of those, right? She said Charlie. Okay. And when she said Charlie looked into hiring a hitman, are you familiar with Charlie's joke? I looked into hiring a hitman but got you a TV as a divorce present because it was cheaper. Yeah, Wendy told me that joke a couple of times.

This was not that joke. Okay, so this was something different. Yeah, the joke was said with levity. It's a dark joke, but this I found chilling. I found disturbing. It made my stomach flip. It kind of took me aback. She was dead serious when she said this. And she'd asked to tell me in confidence, what she don't do before you tell a joke. Jeff testified that the day after their July 13th meeting, Wendy seemed unusually enthusiastic about seeing him. She asked him to go to yoga, which Jeff found odd. Just the day before, she had been unsure about their relationship and hadn't been feeling well. Jeff admitted he didn't even like yoga. So her request struck him as unusual. After the class, they stood awkwardly in the parking lot. Jeff said he could sense that the relationship was essentially over. He tried to discuss it with Wendy, but the conversation did not go well.

Wendy told him she didn't want to spend time together for the rest of the week. Frustrated, Jeff said he just threw up his hands, turned, and walked away. About 10 feet away, Wendy called after him, Jeff said. She then began asking a series of detailed questions about what he planned to do on Friday. Take a listen. The parking lot of Journey's Yoga over by Wind Dixie. Okay, so you have your two respective vehicles there and your parting ways? Yes.

Okay, what happens as you walk away? Get about 10, 15 feet away from her and she calls after me. I turn around and she had a series of detailed questions about what I would be doing on Friday. I had a trip to Tennessee planned and she wanted to know if I was going on that trip. And she wanted to know what route I would be taking. And if I didn't go on the trip, why wouldn't I go on the trip? And I answer the question as best I could, but I was confused why at that moment she wanted to know the details of what I was doing on Friday when she expressed please didn't want to spend time with me on Friday. Okay.

And we now know that Dan Markell was murdered on Friday. Yes. If you had taken the trip as planned, which is as you reported to Wendy that day, what would your route have been? I would have left my house at about 11 a.m., which Wendy knew I'd related my plan to her earlier in the relationship. I needed to get to Atlanta for dinner and was worried about traffic and stuff like that. So I would have left at 11, and I would have driven down, I would have got to Capital Circle in Thomasville, which is close enough to Danny's house that it kind of gave me the creeps. It was kind of weird.

Yeah. Okay. So physically, you're saying you might have been sort of consistent with where the killers, how the killers fled home. Yeah. Jeff suggested that Wendy's questions earlier that day were unusually specific. He testified that she seemed to know he would be taking the same route near Dan's home at the same time as a killer's, raising the possibility that she might have been trying

to position him to take the blame for the murder. As noted, Wendy testified under. immunity yesterday, but only about topics she addressed herself. The state never asked her about these conversations with Jeff, potentially preserving the option to use the information against her later. And later that day, Jeff received an email from Wendy, knowing that Wendy generally avoids confrontation, which is kind of surprising for an attorney. Jeff had previously told her that if she wanted to end the relationship, she could simply text or email him. The email he received seemed to partially follow that guidance, but in Jeff's view, it was also in attempt to extend the relationship

for another week before officially breaking up. Wendy wrote that she needed until the 21st, July 21st, to figure things out and requested no contact until then. Jeff said the email left him wondering what was supposed to happen on July 21st, but he respected her request and did not reply. Kaplanman then displayed a photo of Wendy's sons in her living room, showing their artwork taped up on the walls. Jeff testified that while new pieces were constantly added, he never saw Wendy remove any artwork until July 13th. And on that day, he observed Wendy taking art down from the wall, which he found unusual. Jeff went on to explain that he and Wendy reestablished phone contact about 10 days after Dan's murder.

During one call, Wendy told him about going to dinner with Charlie, which Charlie referred to as a, quote, celebration dinner. That's important because Jeff said this contradicted Wendy's testimony from the previous day in which she claimed she had never heard Charlie call it a celebration. Well, now Jeff is saying she did. Wendy also told Jeff that Charlie had said something to her at dinner that made her spontaneously vomit, though she did not clarify what he had said. Kaplanman asked Jeff if he was aware that he had been suggested as a potential suspect in Dan's

murder, and with a heavy sigh, Jeff said yes. He explained, however, that at the exact time Dan was shot, he was already in Tennessee having changed his plans and left for the trip a day early. Jeff provided law enforcement with proof, including footage from a store out of state during the time of the murders, confirming that it was impossible for him to have been involved. Jeff testified that at some point he became aware that the killers had actually come to Tallahassee once before in June, a month prior to the actual murder. He pieced together that his travel plans on that day could have made him look like a potential suspect if the hitman had carried out the murder then.

He explained that he was scheduled to take a business trip to Gainesville and leave at 11 a.m., meaning that twice in 2014, the exact days he left town coincided with the days the hit men came to try to kill Dan. The first attempt was unsuccessful because they didn't want to carry out the murderer in front of Dan's sons, which is why they returned for the second attempt. Jeff also learned that the first time the killers came, they drove a gray Nissan. At the time, he also owned a gray Nissan, which meant the killers may have purposely rented a car that looks similar to his. I think that might be true. And after that, the state had no further questions.

Well, on cross-examination, defense attorney Josh Zellman questioned Jeff about his testimony. Jeff said that Donna knew about the motion referred to as the grandmother motion. Wendy had testified the previous day that she never showed Donna the motion, but Jeff recalled differently. Zalman asked how Donna reacted and Jeff said Wendy told him that her mother was upset. He clarified that besides Charlie, he only learned about the family's family's feelings through Wendy. Selman asked if Jeff believed Wendy was a deeply deceitful person. And Jeff, like a great ex-boyfriend, he has answered yes, depending on the topic, but noted

that much of what she said later came out in evidence. Zellman moved to strike that comment. Jeff clarified that he had no personal knowledge other than what Wendy had told him about how Donna felt regarding the grandmother motion, and he agreed. Zellman also questioned Jeff about the damage to Wendy's TV that he observed in June of 2014. Jeff described it as a spiderweb shatter pattern radiating outward, which pixelated the picture. He testified that Wendy insisted they watched an entire movie on that TV, even though there was a perfectly good one in another room,

which Jeff found odd and indicative of her unusual behavior at the time. When asked about the size of the main damage area, Jeff said it was roughly this-sized and reiterated that it looked as if an adult had actually just hit the TV rather than a child throwing something that struck it. Zellman then revisited the July 13th conversation between Jeff and Wendy during what she told him in confidence that Charlie had explored all avenues to, quote, solve the day and problem, end quote, including hiring a hitman. Jeff agreed that's what she said. And after this line of questioning, Zellman had no further questions for Jeff. Wow. So up next on the stand was June. And June dated Charlie Adelson after Dan's murder.

June was in a relationship with Charlie from October 2015 to June 2017. She testified that in the beginning, Charlie and his family were not under investigation for anything. so their relationship felt normal. She described it like a fairy tale, like a fairy tale, in quotes. June said she met Donna about five or six times and described her as the matriarchal leader of the family. She also said she eventually met Wendy and her children. June explained that during the early fairy tale phase of her relationship with Charlie, he appeared to have a normal level of stress and anxiety related to work and did not display anger toward anyone. Prosecutor Georgia Kaplanman asked June what, if anything, she knew about Dan's

murder during her relationship with Charlie. June said she had no knowledge beyond Charlie mentioning that his brother-in-law had been murdered by an unknown person. She testified that the family never discussed potential suspects or the circumstances of the murder until law enforcement began investigating them. Capleman then asked June if she had participated in a police interview and she said she had not, though she wasn't aware at the time that it was being recorded. Kaplaneman reminded her that during that interview, June stated the family never seemed curious about who killed Dan and did not appear upset about it. June agreed saying, quote, it's in the transcript. Then, yes, I said that. So, Kaplanman asked if June was aware of the bump.

when an undercover officer approached Donna. June said that after the bump, everything in her relationship with Charlie changed. At the time, however, Charlie had not told her about the incident and she didn't know what was causing the changes until later. She noticed that Charlie wasn't sleeping, was up in the middle of the night and appeared stressed, anxious, and depressed. Eventually she learned, though, through a reporter

who mistakenly thought she was Catherine Magbanwa that Charlie was under investigation, Kaplan man asked June if she knew whether Catherine ever worked for the Adelson's dental practice, and she said no. June testified that after Luis Rivera, Sycfretto Garcia and Catherine Magbanwa were arrested, Charlie's behavior became increasingly erratic. The routine of their relationship was disrupted, and she sensed that something was wrong. Charlie became angry and short-tempered, particularly when Dan's case came up. June said he would get red in the face, start yelling, and take away. random long walks.

And during that time, Charlie obtained at least two new cell phones and began communicating with June via WhatsApp. He also kept a packed bag of clothes near his bed and had men stationed around his home. June testified that there appeared to be a strain in Charlie's relationship with Wendy. And he told her that they were arguing about Dan's case, which left the periods of no communication between them. June also said that after the arrest, Donna behavior changed, significantly. She seemed upset much of the time and June described her as a mess, mentally and

physically drained. Charlie told June that Donna was taking painkillers to cope with the stress. At one point, Donna remarked to June that the life of her family was crumbling down and that Dan seemed to be haunting them from the grave. Cabellman asked June if Charlie ever made a comment to her about Catherine Meg Bannawa undergoing a breast augmentation. Catherine breast documentation has now come into play in the courtroom. And June said once again, and June said he made a joke saying, quote, everyone thinks I paid for the whole thing, but I only paid for one. End the quote. On cross-examination, attorney Jackie Fullford focused on June's testimony regarding what she had told law enforcement during her police interview. June explained that she had

originally been told the interview was not being recorded and that her statements would not be used. At the time, she and Charlie were going through a difficult breakup. Fulford referenced a past statement June had made saying that Charlie is a skilled liar who can make his story sound believable. She also noted that June had observed a large amount of cash that Charlie kept in his home. When June later saw in the news that Luis Rivera reported receiving stacks of stapled $100 bills, she testified in other trials that a light bulb went off in her head. As she recalled seeing Charlie store his money.

money in that same manner in his safe. Bulford then questioned June about her earlier comment that the Edelson's didn't seem curious about who killed Dan. She asked June to clarify and June admitted that her statement was speculative. Bulford revisited June's remark about Donna. Fing Dan was, quote, haunting the family from the grave. She reminded June that during Catherine Meg Banaw's trial, she had walked back that statement. The defense's goal was to impeach June by highlighting inconsistencies between her current

testimony and her prior testimony in the four other trials. After that line of questioning, Fulford, had no further questions. And up next was Ryan Fitzpatrick, a former close friend of Charlie Adelson from 2013 to 2019. Ryan knew Donna through Charlie and was also familiar with Wendy. Prosecutor Kaplanman asked Ryan how Donna felt about Dan Markell, and he said that she did not like him. Ryan explained that throughout their friendship, Charlie had made. mini girlfriends. One of these was Catherine, but she did not stand out to him because Charlie often dated women who looked and acted very similarly. Ryan also testified that he was aware of how Charlie stored

his cash. $100 bill stapled in $1,000 stacks and said he had even been paid by Charlie in that manner before so he was familiar with the Charlie system. Ryan said that Dan's murder occurred before he and Charlie became especially close and when Kaplanman asked if Charlie ever discussed Dan or the murder, Ryan said no, it was actually surprising how little it was discussed. Ryan also testified that he was aware of the undercover operation known as the bump and that Charlie talked to him about it. Prior to the bump, Charlie had never mentioned being harassed or extorted. But afterward, Ryan said Charlie became visibly agitated, nervous, paranoid, and in hindsight appeared guilty. Ryan said that on one occasion, Charlie made a statement to the effect that, quote,

you could get away with anything if you keep your mouth shut. And Ryan interpreted that as implying murder. He testified that after the arrest of Sycfredo Garcia, Luis Rivera, and Catherine Meg Banwa, Charlie's behavior became increasingly erratic. And he would talk almost constantly about the arrest. Ryan noted that prior to the bomb and the arrest, Charlie had not been anxious or nervous about anything in life, but that completely changed. afterward. On cross-examination, Attorney Jackie Fulford referenced Ryan's recent deposition in which

he had said he barely knew Donna. Ryan clarified that while he did not know Donna as well as he knew Charlie, he had been around her many times and found her to always be very nice. Fulford also asked about the end of Ryan's friendship with Charlie, which Ryan described as, quote, a very ugly ending. Fulford then revisited the topic of how Charlie kept his money and Ryan confirmed he was aware that Charlie stored it stapled. Finally, Fulford referenced Ryan's deposition in which he said that while he could not give specific examples of Donna speaking negatively about Dan or explicitly saying she didn't like him, it was implied.

And up next on the stand was Clarissa Bolthor, who worked at the Adelson's dental practice for over 40 years as Harvey Adelson's dental assistant, 40 years. She testified that Donna served as the office manager handling front desk duties, payroll, and the books. Other staff included Erica Johnson, who was Charlie's assistant and dental hygienist, Amy. And Charlie worked as the periodontist and traveled to other offices for that work, so he was only in the office about once a month. Clarissa considered Harvey the boss at the office. Prosecutor Sarah Dugan asked who had access to patients' medical. records and she said only Donna and Harvey did. Dugan then asked how she knew Catherine and Clarissa said

she only knew her as the patient. Catherine received dental work there but did not work at the office and she never saw Catherine perform any work-related tasks. Dugan asked how Clarissa was paid and she said she received a check every two weeks. Occasionally if Donna and Harvey were out of town she would receive two checks at once as advanced payment but that happened only once or twice a year. When asked if she ever received four or five checks at the time, Clearyza said no. She was also said she was unaware of any employee working remotely from the office. And from 2013 to 2016, the office hired a cleaning service, which was a husband and wife team. It was not Catherine Magbanawa.

And Clarissa went on to testify that. In 2016, two officers came to the office to ask questions about Catherine. Since she didn't know anything about the matter, she referred them to another employee, Erica Johnson. Next, Dugan asked her about the phone call she was asked to review to see if she recognized the voices. She confirmed that she did and identified the voices as Erica, Charlie's assistant, and Charlie. Dugan said she would wait to introduce that exhibit with another witness later in the trial and had no further questions. While on cross-examination, defense attorney Josh Zellman asked her about the office's old style answering machine, which she confirmed they used. Selman also asked if in the 40 years that she had known Donna,

she ever heard her speak badly about Dan Markell? And Clarissa, she said no. He then asked if she would consider Harvey and Donna a hardworking family and she agreed, yes. There was a brief redirect, Ian Dugan asked Clarissa about the answering machine Zellman had referred to. She explained that if someone called the office while it was closed, the call would be routed to voicemail. The messages could only be accessed once the office was open. but she wasn't sure who all had access to the answering machine. Clarissa also testified that during her time working for the Edelson's,

she and Donna had a friendly relationship at work. They rarely spent time together outside the office, though, only on a few occasions. The first witness after lunch was Mary Hull, who works at the executive office of the governor and the chief inspector general's office. However, when she first became involved in the case, She worked at the Department of Financial Services in the Office of Fiscal Integrity as a financial

investigator. And she went over her education, which was lengthy. We'll get to that in just a second. She went over her education, again, lengthy. Let's get to it. Here's the gist. She is someone who investigates financial crime. Back in 2016, when she became involved in the case, she looked at all of the bank records to analyze everything that happened there. She also analyzed a other records, such as some ICloud records and email records. They went through a list of records Mary had reviewed, which included the following. The Adelson Institute's subpoena response in regards to Catherine's employment. Those records were dated September 2014 to May 2016.

Dr. Rudner's records for the breast augmentation for Catherine, McBanwa. Possible employment records for Catherine from Broward Dermatology during the dates of July 2015 to March 2016. Records for the Lexus acquired by Catherine, vehicle and motorcycle records for Sigfredo and Louise, bank accounts for the Adelson family, which included checking, savings, personal, professional, and 24 investment accounts. Credit cards for the Aedelson family, including Capital One and Amex records for Charlie Aedelson, Institute Bank records from Regents Bank, A checking and savings account from Luis Rivera at Chase Bank from 2014 to 2015. Bank of America from Sycfretto's accounts from 2015-2016.

Employment records from coastal masonry for Siegfriedo from 2009 to 2014. Bank of America and Chase accounts for Catherine from 2013 to 2017. 44 checks from Adelson Institute deposited into Catherine's account. She also reviewed iCloud, which included emails and text messages to determine relationships, and whether or not there were money and gift transfers between people and to determine how the Edelson's received or kept their cash. Dugan announced they would be showing graphs on a PowerPoint and there would be portions of records, not on screen, that are in notebooks that show Mary's work. However, they would be in the jury room should the jury wish to look at them later. First up, Dugan introduced records tied to Luis Rivera.

After Dan's murder, Rivera suddenly started making some big purchases. On July 28, 2014, he bought a 2003 Suzuki motorcycle. And just three days later, he picked up a 1996 Toyota Camry. Then came to look at his bank records. Between May 2014 and November 2015, Rivera's account showed weekly deposits, usually around $500 to $600 coming in from coastal masonry. Now, before the murder, his pattern was pretty clear. As soon as the money hit his account, he'd pull it all out. He had auto draft set up, but they often bounced because his balance would be back to zero almost instantly. But right after the

murder, that pattern completely flipped. Instead of draining the account, he left the money sitting there and suddenly nothing bounced. For about four straight months, his finances looked a whole lot healthier than before. This is a visual depiction of his bank account showing the overdrafts, the red bars or the overdraft amounts that happens, the number on the specific days. And then you can see that big wide span in the middle where there's no red bars,

and then it picks back up in the first part of November. I will add that even though it's not on this chart, that the car and the motorcycle was purchased in that section where there were no overdrafts. So in the same section where there's no overdraft, he's also acquiring those vehicles, and he doesn't have any overdrafts from the time of the murder until about four months later.

That's correct. And could that be indicative of him having another source of cash during that time? Yes. Then came the records for Sigfredo Garcia. On July 26, 2014, just days after Dan's murder, he bought a 1997 Honda racer motorcycle. Let that a month of,

later, on August 22nd, he picked up a 1984 Monte Carlo. And by October 17th, he added a 2000 Nissan Maxima to the list. And when it came to his finances, though, things looked very different from Rivera's. Investigators say there wasn't a bank account tied to Sicfredo Rivera during the time of the murder or shortly after. He eventually opened one, though, on June 2015. And for about a year, deposits came in from a job at rapid capital funding. But before that, his work history was spotty at best. Between 2009 and 2014, Siegfredo only worked here and there a few months at a time, mostly with coastal masonry. And the next up was Catherine. Unlike Rivera and Garcia, she already had a car before the murder. But what stood out were the text messages shown in court.

In November 2014, Catherine texted Charlie that she needed a loan to fix her car. his response, he told her not to worry. He just sent his mechanic solely his credit card number. Fast forward to May 2015 when Catherine needed the belt replaced on her Mazda. Once again, Charlie told her to take it straight to the dealership. He'd cover it. And by November 2015, history repeated itself. Catherine's car needed more repairs, this time costing $1,620. And again, Charlie picked up the bill putting the charge on his American Express. And at the end, of 2015, Catherine got a new car. At the end of 2015, after all these repairs and Charlie Adelson offering to help her financially

with these repairs, at the end of 2015, does it appear that Catherine Evinema got a different car? She did. And what's the first indication of that? There was the title, we looked up for the GH, from VE Records, and we looked at the, and and saw where it was purchased. Okay. Well, there are also messages where they discuss, basically her having the Lexus now,

Charlie Adelson needs to cancel his insurance on the Lexus. Yes, that's correct. Okay, can you go through what we see here? This is where he's discussing on December 14, 2015, that she needs, he's canceling the Lexus insurance. And she said she would get to it. She has a kid, she would do it later. and then he says i just paid for it okay and in these messages when he says he's going to cancel

the lexas insurance today on december 14th of 2015 does he say just spoke to my mom she's paying the insurance now just please go this saturday smiley face yes and that's when she's saying i'll do it i just i've got my kids and then just charlie adelson then say just paid it they'll pro-rate it back to us just go Saturday don't rush today and she's saying I'll take care of it don't worry yes does he say already paid it five minutes ago just chill you are still the best that's correct you mentioned the DHS and Vue records in this case what do we see here this is showing that the title transfer between Harvey and Catherine and what date did this take place this says let me see if I can

Can you zoom in a little? January 23rd, 2016. On the right hand side. Right here? Yes, January 23rd, 2016. Okay. And what type of vehicle was that? That was Lexus.

2001 Lexus? Black Fordor, that's correct. And the previous owner is listed as Harvey Jerome Edelson? Yes. How much did the D.8, this D. HSMV title indicate that it was sold to Magbanwa for $1,700. And that's there on the right side of the screen? Yes.

Were you able to find any record of payment from Catherine Magbanois to any of the Aedelson's for this vehicle? No. Did you search all her accounts? Yes. Was there any check or Maybe she just withdrew that amount of cash. Was there any cash withdrawal for that amount?

Nothing that correlated. Were you able to find any deposit into, let's say she already had that cash at home? Any deposit into the Ailsons account for that amount? No. Was there, in a little while we'll see that she was receiving money from Aedelson Institute, correct? That's correct.

Was there any drop in the money she was receiving from Adeltson Institute in that time to account for maybe this was just taken out of her salary? No. Can you insure a vehicle without transferring title? No. Dugan then moved on to other kinds of financial help. The gifts and support Charlie was giving Catherine. On March 6, 2015, Charlie bought her a plane ticket to Santo Dominga, price tag $970.

Then in October of that same year, text, show Catherine talking with Charlie about wanting to take her mom on a special trip for her 60th birthday over Thanksgiving to even toss around the idea of a cruise. And the money trail didn't stop there. Dukein highlighted messages from May of 2015 when Catherine told Charlie she had to quit her weekend job but still had plenty of expenses, including tuition for her kids. Charlie's response, he told her ever so graciously that he'd lend her whatever she needed. Not long after, $1,400 dollars showed up in Catherine's account. But Charlie's support for Catherine wasn't just about handing her money. He also showered her with extras, things like teeth whining, paying for her

meal plans, and even letting her borrow luxury cars. Then Dugan brought up something bigger, Catherine's breast augmentation surgery. It happened on October 18, 2014, with a price tag of $4,6008. Almost all of it, $4,400 of that was paid in Cass. That's 96% of the breast augmentation price. And here's the kicker. Catherine's bank records don't show any withdraws anywhere near that amount. Duke and also pointed out deposits into Catherine's account that traced back to the Adelson Institute. Those payments spanned from October 7, 2014, all the way through May 17, 2016.

Take a listen to how that all played out in quote. What do we have here? So this shows the horizontal bars show her employment timeframe and then the murder and the bumper also showed on as a time frame. When was her last check from Sophie Dental Care, the place, the dental company she was working at before the murder? The first part of July 2014. Okay. and then she didn't have any more checks or didn't receive any more checks from them after that point. That's correct.

Was she, is there any record of her being employed anywhere at the time of the murder? No. And you said she began receiving checks from Adelson Institute about a little less than three months after the murder? That's correct. And she received checks from them until the last check was dated in May of 2016. That's correct. After that, Dugan shifted over to the Aedelson Institute and how the operations ran. And here we go.

We have another clip right here. Grab that for you, just a second. No. And is Aidelson Institute the Aedelson family's dental practice? It is. Was it a financially successful dental practice? Yes. In 2012, did Charlie Aidlinson become

the listed manager of Adelson Institute. Yes. And then in 2015 did the articles of organization change from both Charlie and Harvey being listed managers? Yes. And what date was that in 2015? October 2nd, 2015. Okay. Now even though Charlie was the manager beginning in 2012 to October of 2015 was Harvey Adelson still employed as a dentist at Adelson Institute? He was. And received checks from there. Yes.

In 2016, in July of 2016, did it change to only Harvey being the listed manager and Charlie being a registered agent? That's correct. Okay. Now throughout all those years, 2012 to 2016, did Donna Adelson have signing authority for the Adelson Institute? She did. What does that mean? She had the ability to move money without having someone else approved it. Was there evidence from Charlie Adelson's ICloud in reference to how or why

Magdanawa began receiving income from Adelson Institute? Yes, she was saying that she needed to show employment to get not only health insurance for a kid but an apartment that she wanted to write. Okay, so looking at this text, is this a text from June 24th of 24th of 24th? of 2014. It is. So this is about maybe three to four weeks before the murder of Dan Markell. That's correct.

And in this text, does she say, baby, I'm going to need help on the employment info. I have to send to DCF for my kids ins. Could that be short for insurance? Insurance. Also, if I have to end up moving later on, I need to show I'm working for you or else I won't be able to get an apartment. Does she say that at 12.33 p.m.? She did.

And what does he say back at 1236? No problem. No prob short for no problem. Okay. And is this a time when his mother is signing authority there? That's correct. During the time that Catherine was supposedly working at the Aedlson Institute, she was issued 44 checks. And every single one of those checks was signed by Donna Aedelson herself.

Donna handled payroll for the entire office, so her signature was on everyone's checks. The whole pointed out something important. Aside from Donna, the only people who had authority to sign those checks were Charlie or Harvey. Each of Catherine's checks, they were written for the exact same amount. $407.58. The only exception was her very first one, which came out to $203.79, exacting, exactly half of what that two-week pay period would be. But Hull didn't stop there.

She told the jury that Donna's role went well beyond payroll. She wasn't just cutting checks. She was in many ways running Charlie's life. She booked his travel, reminded him to pay his bills, made bank transfers, and acted almost like his personal assistant keeping up with his day-to-day needs. Some of the checks given to Catherine were advanced paid checks, meaning she received them before the pay period was over. And this part is interesting.

So let's take a listen to another clip here. And were any of these checks sequential? They were. And what does that mean? It means they were all the next in line check numbers, 25, 26, 27. So going back to our picture of the checks, excuse me. So are these three checks sequential here? They are.

Okay, so 24, 25, 26. Yes. Let me go back to where we were. Since they were sequential, were they dated all at the same time, showing that they were written at all the same time? No, they just have the sequential check numbers. How many sequential checks did she receive in a row? There was a total of 18 sequential checks. There's one set of three, another set of six, and another.

long set there. Okay, so are these three checks sequential here that I'm pointing to? Yes. Okay. And then are these six checks sequential? That's correct. And then these first six check marks were these sequential? They were. And then the final three here checks that she received are they sequential? They are. So this isn't nine sequential checks. It's a set of six sequential checks and then another set of three sequential. That's correct okay we talked about the ones that were sequential are there also a lot of the checks that are not sequential yes and if they are not sequential does that mean that those checks appear to have been written in the normal course of payroll that would appear so so when you're looking at the records it she may be check 1,000 and then another employee a hygienist

might be checked 1001 Harvey Aedelson might be check 1,0002 and a front desk employee might be checked 1003. That's correct. Hull also testified about what happened when investigators subpoenaed employment records for Catherine. They asked for any and all records tied to her job at the Edelson Institute. But what came back? Just a quick books summary.

No employee application, no timesheets, no WTOs, no job description, no performance reviews, nothing that would normally document someone as a real employee. Just a bare-bone summary. Bull told the jury that in her experience, when she requests employment records in cases like this, she usually gets a full stack of documents. The fact that the only thing produced was a simple QuickBooks printout stood out as highly unusual. But here's the thing. There was a big discrepancy between the QuickBooks records and Catherine's actual bank statements. According to QuickBooks, the last paycheck Catherine received from the

Edelson Institute was on March 31st, 2016, but her bank records told a different story. Of course they They showed three more checks after that with the final one posted on May 17, 2016, and Dugan really drilled into that point because just days later, on May 25th, Hedgfredo was arrested. After that, not a single check ever went to Catherine again. All told, between September 2014 and May 2016, Catherine had received just under $18,000, $17,729. cents to be exact from the Aeelson Institute.

Then Dugan shifted over to the bump. Let's talk about the bump. Okay. I want to ask you a little bit more about this timing. Are you familiar with what law enforcement called the bump on April 19th of 2016? I am. All right. Looking at these last three checks that were deposited into her account,

was there evidence of a check later than those in sequence that was actually posted to the bank account before the bump on April 29th on April 19th of 2016? Yes. Okay. Is that the checks check here to Harvey Aylson on April 4th? That's correct. And that would have been before the bump? It would. But after in sequence of Megbanua's checks?

Yes. So is it possible given the sequence that Donna Aedelson stopped writing Megbanuan checks after she? was approached by the agent during the bump. It appears that way. Looking at the history of Catherine's bank account in 2013, the year before Dan was murdered, Catherine deposited $13,000, $35 of cash into her account. In 2014, that went up more than three times for a total of $46,820. dollars. Cash deposits were her highest source of income that year and the Adelson Institute accounted for just four percent of her total income, which was a total of $2,649 and 27 cents. In 2015, the total amount of cash deposits was $26,523.77, which was 51% of her total income that year. The Adelson Institute

accounted for 20% of her total income that year at $10,189.50. And then there's Charlie's former roommate, Dr. Jerome Obed's dermatology practice, who accounted for 10% of her total income in 2015 with a total amount of $5,437.66. Fast forward to 2016, and all of that dramatically shifted. Catherine's cash deposits went down to $11,921.33. The Adelson Institute paid her a total amount of $4,890.96 in 2016 prior to the check stopping in May. And then she made a total of $4,0.95.76 from Dr. Jerome Obed. Dugan shifted back to the cash coming in the year that Dan was murdered. Let's take a listen.

You said that 2014 was the year that Meg Vanuah had the most amount of cash deposited into her account. What does this graph depict? So this is a line graph showing the level of cash for each month, and then they're connected. The dots are connected by a line for you to have the visual representation. And was the month in 2014 that she had the most cash deposited into her account August? It was. the month after Dan Markell was murdered. Yes.

And the second and third highest month, October and July. That's right. That would be the same month that she started receiving income from Adelson Institute and the same month as her breast augmentation in October for number two. Yes. And number three being the month of the murder of Dan Markell. Yes. When you compared 2014 to the amount of cash she received,

received in all three years, were those three months still the highest amount of cash she received in all three years? Yes. August, October and July of 2014? That's correct. Okay. So this is all of the cash she received depicted by the bar graph for all three years. It is.

Well, after talking about all of Catherine's financials, Dugan wanted to bring it all home and that the Edelson's had enough money. to plot all of this, this entire murder plot. Take a listen. Let's bring it home. Did each of these members of the Adelson family, and when I say members, I mean Donna Adelson, Harvey Adelson, Charlie Adelson, and Wendy Adelson,

have the means in their respective accounts in 2013 to pay the million-dollar bribe that was discussed in the messages? Yes. Did each of the members of the Adelson family have the means in their respective accounts in 2014 to pay the 130 something's out, let's say just say 140,000 given to Garcia, Magnawa and Rivera. Yes. Did Charlie Adelson have the means of his account to pay for all of the different

benefits and gifts that he gave to or offered Catherine Magnawa over the years from 2014 to 2016? Yes. And when I say means in their account, is that money that's available for withdrawal i'm not talking about homes or properties or cars or other assets yes that's correct okay and with that amount with those means obviously not include cash that is not deposited in the new bank right that's right we wouldn't know that amount right based on your review of atelson institute's records and messages in this case did the Adelson's prefer to be paid in cash for their services at Aedelson Institute or did they prefer a credit card or check? It appeared that they preferred cash. Okay, were there lots of

messages where they discuss giving discounts for cash, certain clients being willing to pay cash and that being preferred? Yes. Are these just some of the examples? Just some of them, yes. Were there messages in the Aedelson family's records where they discuss having cash and how they store their cash? Yes. I want to turn your attention to this text message we see here on the screen. Can you read these messages to us? And these are from 2011, but what I'm looking for here is dimensions of cash and how the cash. and how the cash is kept if you could read those for us.

Okay. So the first block is from Donna. It says, good morning, Charlie. I need to take $25,000 from your office checkbook and put it in Dad's office checkbook in order to break even this month. Can we do that? Do you have enough money in your office account

for us to write that check? If you do, then Dad will move $25,000 in cash in the safe into your pile. Please let me know as soon as possible so Dad can take care of it today. you can call, I am home, or text me, whatever is best for you. I love you, honey, mom. And he says no problem?

He says no problem. Okay. So here do they discuss having large amounts of cash and keeping it in piles in a safe? Yes. Were there other messages besides this one in the records where they discuss cash being in the safe or piles in the safe? Yes. Is this just one example?

Yes. And as we talked about earlier, is it common for Donna Adelson to move money around between the Adelson family accounts? Yes. And does this safe appear to be at a place where Donna Adelson would have access to it or control of it? The rule you may answer based on your review of the records if you're capable in this call. Could you restate the question? From the messages here, does the safe appear to be in a place where Donna Adelson? and would have access to it or control of it.

Yes. After Dugan was done with her questioning, the defense came up for a short cross-exam. Jackie Fulford asked Hull what credit card accountment statements she reviewed and Donna and reviewed for Donna and Harvey. And Hull said that she reviewed Emicks in Capital One. She then asked about the car that Catherine got from Harvey

for $1,700. and she asked if asked Hull if it could have been a cash transaction and she said that yes, it could have been. Fulford asked Hull if she knew that the cash discount price at the Adelson Institute was the same as a credit card fee amount, which was 5%. Holt said she did not know that. There was nothing specific about that in any of the correspondence she reviewed. And finally, Fulford simply clarified the timeline of Harvey's involvement in the Adelson Institute. Harvey became a manager in July 2016 and he became the owner again in 2020. And that was it. Not much for a cross-exam given how much information was given during direct.

That's court for you. And on redirect, Dugan didn't have much either. But the main thing she wanted to clarify, again, was the timeline of the roles in the practice. Let's hear that timeline. I thought it was done really well. You mentioned that Harvey Adelson was taken off his manager. in 2012 he continued working there as a dentist but then on October 2nd of 2015 he became manager again is that correct yes that's correct okay and then in 26 so

in 2015 we're Harvey and Charlie both managers that's correct okay in October of 2015 yes but then in 2016 July of 2016 only Harvey's a manager then at that point, Charlie has now dropped off to a registered agent. That's right. And these are on their articles of incorporation. Yes. Okay. They could still be both working there as dentists and have their own understanding of their

role in the practice, but we're talking about what's listed on the articles of incorporation. Right. Okay. So it went from Harvey and Charlie both being managers in October of 2015, Magban was still getting checks through the spring of 2016. That's right. And then after the arrest in 2016, Harvey Adelson becomes manager in July. Charlie is now a registered agent.

That's right. Okay, thank you. Up next on the stand was someone I've been waiting for, Catherine Magbanawa. She began her testimony by stating that she is currently serving a life sentence for the murder of Denmarkal. Catherine explained that in her trial, she had testified in her own defense and lied about her involvement in the conspiracy. She later admitted to lying and said she believed the truth needed to come out and that all responsible parties, including herself, needed to be held accountable. Kauffleman asked if Catherine was hoping to gain anything from testifying truthfully now. She said she hoped to one day be able to see her children again, but emphasized that no one had promised her anything in exchange.

or her testimony. She also made clear that no one had told her what to say or required her to implicate any specific person. Catherine testified that she had originally been offered immunity to testify in the case but had declined. She explained that during her first trial, she was tied alongside Sigfredo Garcia, who was facing the death penalty, and she could not be part of him receiving that sentence. The second time, she said she had been living a lie for so long that coming forward with the truth felt too difficult. Capelman, then asked, her directly if she had been involved in Dan Markell's death and whether she had acted as the middleman between the shooter and Charlie Adelson. Catherine admitted, yes, confirming that Charlie solicited her to get involved while they were dating at the time.

Catherine explained that she first became involved with Sigfredo Garcia when she was about 18 years old, and they had a long history of being on and off and having children together. And during one of their breaks, she began seeing Charlie and later she started seeing Sigretto again, with some overlap coinciding with the period around Dan's murder. Catherine said that Charlie first pitched the idea of finding someone to kill Dan around October 2013. They were at a Halloween block party when Charlie asked her if she knew anyone who could harm someone. And at the time, Sigfredo was the first person who came to her mind.

Catherine testified that when Sigfredo first learned, she was dating Charlie. There was a phone call altercation in July 2014. Sigfredo saw Charlie and Catherine together and tried to prevent them from leaving Catherine's house, yelling at them, but Charlie managed to drive away. Later that day, Sigfredo tried calling Charlie accidentally dialing Harvey's number instead, and other than through Catherine, there was no connection between Sigfredo and the Edelson family. Next, Catherine testified that she knew Luis Rivera through Sigfredo Garcia, and they were close friends.

Kaplan asked why she agreed with Charlie to find someone who could hurt Dan, and Catherine said that at the time, Charlie knew she was experiencing financial difficulties and could use the money. She added that Garcia and Rivera were also motivated by money. Catherine stated that Charlie never told her why he wanted someone to harm Dan. She explained that throughout the relationship, Charlie would talk about how his sister and parents were struggling to deal with Wendy's ex-husband. He painted Dan in a negative light, knowing that Catherine was dealing with her own issues with Sycredo, which made. her sympathize with his sister. Charlie eventually conveyed that Dan was becoming a bigger problem, causing his family significant stress and illness. Catherine also testified that she first met

Donna Adelson at the dental office when she went in for cavities and teeth whining. To her recollection, that was the only time she ever met Donna Adelson. Catherine explained that after Charlie initially asked her for help at the Halloween party, he would continue bringing it up occasionally whenever they saw each other. They would meet about twice a week. And when she stayed the night, Charlie would talk more about wanting to fix the problem that was in quotes, fix the problem. Fix the problem with Dan. Eventually, Catherine agreed to help and said she had someone who could do it. Kavelman asked whether Charlie ever discussed the plan with both Catherine and Donna during these conversations. Catherine said that sometimes he would step out of the room to take a phone

call and give her a strange look, but she did not know what was said on those calls. When he returned, he would resume talking about taking care of Dan. She explained that the conversations typically involve Charlie speaking with her, then stepping aside to talk privately with Donna. However, Charlie never specifically said what, if anything, Donna contributed? Catherine said she understood that completing the job would relieve the Aedleson family's stress. Catherine described when she realized the plan was not just about.

harming Dan, but about murder. Charlie handed her an envelope and instructed her not to open it. He told her he had worn gloves to seal the envelope and asked her to pass it on to the people who would carry out the job. Catherine never told Charlie that the people she was recruiting were her ex, Siegfredo Garcia, and Luis Rivera. She explained that she was trying to insulate each co-conspirator from the others. Sikfredo did not know the job. was for Charlie Aedelson and Charlie did not know Sikfredo would be carrying it out. Catherine placed the envelope in her diaper bag and gave it to Sikfredo without opening it herself. When Sikfredo came to collect it, he grabbed the envelope and left so she never saw its contents.

In June 2014, Charlie gave Catherine money to pass on to Sikretto to cover expenses like renting a car, gas, and other costs related to the job. Catherine didn't know the exact location of the planned hit, but understood it was for scoping out the area. And since nothing happened the first time the men went to Tallahassee, Charlie grew frustrated that the plan wasn't progressing quickly. Catherine initially worried that Sikfredo had just taken the money and wouldn't follow through, and as Charlie continued to pressure her, she in turn pressured Sikfredo to complete the task. Catherine testified that she wasn't aware that Dan had planned to go out of town the day after the hit occurred. However, she assumed that Charlie provided his travel schedule to Sick Fredo in the envelope so they would know the appropriate time to carry out the plan. Next, Kaplaneman showed Catherine a text that she had sent to Charlie requesting to be put on the payroll at the dental office so she could demonstrate employment.

She wanted to at least some of the money she received to show on payroll to qualify her for insurance for her son. Catherine admitted that she was not actually performing work at the office and that the payments she was receiving were compensation for arranging Dan Markell's murder. Next, Cabellman asked Catherine if she ever met Wendy. She said she met Wendy on a double date with Charlie. Wendy and Jeff and another time at the beach. Catherine testified that she never discussed her schedule or anything related to the murder with Wendy. The only people that she ever talked to about it were Charlie and Sigfredo. After the hit was carried out, Catherine testified that she received a call from Sigfredo

confirming the job and asking for their payment. She went to Charlie's house to retrieve the money and described him as very frantic, pacing back and forth with a gun in his hand, which she found unusual. Charlie told her his parents had just left and he offered her Azeanics, which made her fall asleep. When she woke up, Charlie told her that the money was already in her trunk. She then drove to Sigfredo's house so he could collect his portion. And later that night, Sycfretto returned her share of the money placing it in her closet tied up in a plastic bag. A few days later, she noticed the money was stapled, wet, and beginning to mold.

Charlie told her that his mother had washed it. Catherine explained that from that time, up until the bump, Charlie would help her with various things. She purchased a vehicle from his family that had problems and he helped get them fixed. A few months later, she began receiving paychecks, which continued up until 2016. The paychecks sometimes came multiple at a time and stopped when Sigfredo was arrested because Charlie and Donna became spooked. Catherine also testified that out of the 44 checks she received, Donna signed all of that. after the bump Charlie asked Catherine to meet him at a restaurant. Catherine testified that while an undercover officer recorded their conversation inside,

they first talked in Charlie's car for a few minutes. She said he turned up the music and leaned in to tell her that his mom had been approached. Catherine said she could tell throughout the meeting that Charlie felt she might have been trying to set him up. He was running through various scenarios about who the bumper could be because they mentioned Louise's nickname, Tato and Tato and they were trying to get money from Luis. Catherine thought it might actually be an associate of Louise since she had never told Charlie or anyone else that Luis was involved with Sigfrido on the hit. Well, Kaplanman asked whether Charlie ever told Catherine that the murder was to benefit his mother.

He never said it was to benefit Wendy either. But Catherine understood that was the reason. Charlie did tell her that Donna had been at his house right before Catherine came to get the money after the murder, and he also confirmed that Donna had washed the money. On cross-examination, Jackie Fulford revisited Catherine's earlier admission that she had lied during her first two trials in this case. Catherine testified that on the night of the murder before arriving at Charlie's house, his parents had just left and he seemed very upset. Both she and Charlie took Azanix and went to bed. Bulford then reviewed the timeline of Catherine's relationship with Charlie probing for inconsistencies and attempting to challenge her version of events.

Take a listen to this. At this point, you still don't know those reverence involved? At that point, no, ma'am. You still did not? No, ma'am. So you said that Mr. Garcia puts the money into your closet? Yes, ma'am. Okay.

And a few days later, you actually go into the closet? I don't know if it was the same day that, you know, that he put the money there, about a couple days later when I had opened the bag, that's when I felt the moisture of the money. So you didn't touch the money in the first day. I don't recall if I did everything. So you might not talk about the first day that Charlie gives it to you. You didn't touch it. No, no, I did not. Okay. And you didn't touch it the next day. That's when you gave this a crate of. Yes, because he just grabbed it from the trunk of my car. Okay. And a couple days later, he brings you your chair and puts it in your closet or day or day

or two, it might have been the same day or day or day after. And then at some point, you open the bag. Yes, ma'am. And inside the bag, you find, I mean, it's not very thick. You find stacks of money that's stapled together. What's not very thick. 10 one dollar bills or 10 one hundred dollar bills stickled together that's not very thick is it it was just in sex of whatever amount it was I didn't count it it was it was it was so how much did you get for arranging the Ani-Marke-Pel to be killed from Charlie's request to do passing out on the cigarette Garcia how much did you get I never counted how much money wasn't even in the bag I just as you sit here today

you're telling the story you never know what your cup was you can tell them no ma'am I never counted it didn't you I believe so you and you caused it in some of it in your account yes ma'am but you don't know how much yours was no man but we do admit that Charlie gave you check a check out of that from Aelson Institute right gave you payroll checks from yes mazman yes ma'am charlie gave us to you no it was well charlie handed him handed me the checks yes exactly and he testified that you met um stanielson on one occasion right from what i recall yes from the dental office when i went to get work on she agreed you anything for your appointment basically yes man okay and you had your appointment and you paid for you

after that date sorry that charlie after that date he did you want your benefit right yes ma'am i mean you weren't together anymore correct after the homicide no we were not together but we were still friendly with each other you were still your friends but you went back to sickrido right there was a time where it was i was between sick crato and still intimate with charley as well. Besides the one time you had that dental appointment and you saw Mrs. Aylson, you met her, Don Aylson. Yes, ma'am. After that, you never talked to her again, did you? I think of her she didn't speak on the phone to each other? No, ma'am. You didn't text each other? No, ma'am. You didn't meet with her in person. There's only a time that I saw her, but I didn't meet with her.

Right, exactly. And when you're having these discussions with Charlie Aylson, I'm talking about you and your knowledge. When you're having these discussions with Charlie and then having discussions with Siegredo, she's not involved in those conversations with you, is she? No, ma'am. She's not. on redirect, Georgia Kavelman reiterated the point that Donna and Catherine never had direct contact. She clarified that Catherine had contact with Charlie, who in turn had contact with Donna. And the defense objected, noting that Catherine said she wasn't involved and didn't hear the conversations between Charlie and Donna. But the objection was overruled. Catherine confirmed that the chain of contact was always Catherine to Charlie, to Donna, and back.

She explained that she was the middleman or Charlie in Siegfredo, while Charlie was the middleman. man between Catherine and Donna. The last witness to take the stand was Tallahassee police sergeant Christopher Corbett, the department's tech operations expert. Corbett is the department's tech operations expert, and Corbett had spent years analyzing phone records, GPS data, emails, rental records, tickets, and ICloud accounts. And in this case, he pieced it all together into a detailed timeline. Prosecutors call the digital blueprint. They called it the digital blueprint of Dan's murder. And he was tasked with reviewing the call detailed records for Luis Rivera and Sigfredo Garcia and Catherine Meg Banoa, Wendy, Charlie, Donna, and Harvey Aedelson, and Dan Markell. So Corbett walked the jury through Dan's final morning.

His phone and GPS data show him at his home on Trescott Drive, dropping his child off at preschool, heading to Premier Gym and then returning home where he was shot. Prosecutors say the killers tracked those same movements in Corbett's timeline, makes it clear how closely their actions followed Dan's day. And then he walked the jury through the phone records. He said, quote, Cell records show Garcia and Rivera's phones traveling in sync. Their devices ping off towers in Miami, then slowly move north. By July 18th, they're in Tallahassee, the same morning, Dan Markell's phone logs show his gym stop and return home. end quote. The state moved to admit exhibits 91 through 98 phone records for Sigfredo, Luis, Wendy, Donna, Charlie, Harvey, Catherine, and Dan. All were certified by the carriers and admitted into evidence. Investigator suspected Dan was being followed

and surveillance footage showed a Prius near Premier Jim and to confirm TPD pulled tower dumps from AT&T, T-Mobile, Sprint, and Verizon tracking, which phones pinged towers near Dan that morning. and the data returned thousands of records. No single number hit every location, but one stood out. A 37-second voicemail from Sikfredo Garcia's phone to Harvey Aedleson on July 1st, 2014. And as we know, from Catherine's testimony, that was when Sikfredo actually attempted to call Charlie. Frequency reports show the chain of contacts, Garcia's top contact was Catherine Meg Van Nuwa.

and Catherine's top contact was Charlie Adelson and Charlie's most frequent contact was Donna Adelson. Prosecutors say the records lay out the chain connecting the shooter to Catherine to Charlie and ultimately to Donna. Sergeant Corbett pulled up a network chart for the jury laying out the alleged hierarchy of the conspiracy and the bottom link was Sigfredo Garcia and Luis Rivera.

The middle link was Catherine McBanois. The top link was Charlie Adelson with Donna having oversight over it all. The chart map the call records directly into the conspiracy showing how each person fit into the operation. Tower dump data places Louise's phone in Tallahassee at the same time Dan was moving around. Corporate explained that his handset patterns aligned with Sikfredo's placing both pitmen in the city hours before the murder. And then he walked the jury through GPS data from the rental Prius used by Luis and Sikfredo. The car ping towers across Tallahassee along Dan's morning route.

lining perfectly with his phone records. Surveillance video from Premier Health and Fitness showed a silver Prius circling the lot while Dan worked out. The timeline matched the cell records, suggesting the hit men were tracking Dan. Dan's morning, this is so heartbreaking to just go through once again, but Dan's morning was mapped out step by step,

dropping his children off at preschool, stopping at the gym and then heading back home. The state says Louise and Sikredo follow him at every stop in the Silver Prius. GPS logs even place the rental car near creative preschool. His son's preschool just minutes after the kids were dropped off. The pursuit had already begun. And back at Premier Gym, GPS and Tower Records showed the Silver Prius parked outside while Markell worked out. Surveillance footage captured the car circling the lot waiting for him to leave. Corbett traced the vehicle's movements with GPS pings as it followed Dan back.

toward his home on Trescott Drive. Minutes later, he was ambushed in his own grosh. The state also highlighted a July 1st voicemail from Sikfredo. After confronting Catherine and Charlie, he left a furious message on Harvey Adelson's phone. The next morning, text between Charlie and Catherine mocked Sikfredo calling him, and I'm going to quote these. So Charlie and Catherine Mock Sikfredo calling him, quote, retarded, childish, and an effing

pussy. The prosecution then turned to Donna Edelson's emails. In March of 2013, she emailed Wendy, calling Dan Markell, and I quote, a motherfucker, and insisting the relocation issue in the divorce was non-negotiable. She framed the fight as a matter of family survival. And by May 2013, Donna's tone escalated. In emails to Wendy, she wrote, quote, how smart are you? And I I'm quoting this. This is a quote, how smart are you to get rid of this piece of shit? End quote. And she emphasized that relocation was, quote, the most important part of the divorce. And quote, and began outlining strategies. The prosecution introduced what they call the performance plan in emails to Wendy Donna and wrote, quote, the rest of our family's lives depend on your performance in the next few weeks. he hasn't beaten the Adelson family yet, end quote.

The emails outlined psychological tactics staged baptisms and other ways to manipulate and irritate Dan. Donna's messages continued to escalate. She suggested putting Wendy's children in the Hitler youth costumes as part of an act to scare Dan. She reiterated, quote, we are planning me dad charlie we are a team we cannot do this without you end quote one email proposed the one million offer to dan signed written quote written with hope and love mom and dad end quote prosecutors say these messages tie the family into a coordinated strategy against dan that they were all involved in the email chain showed dan's custody request forwarded to wendy to dana then to charlie donna called it Absolutely crazy and impossible, benting directly to her son weeks before Halloween of October 2013.

An October show continued. So text from October continued to pressure. Donna told Charlie the custody fight was horrible and that Harvey's blood pressure had spiked. Charlie responded, I bet. Let's talk this week, end quote. The family stress was constant. Over Halloween, October 30 to 31st, 2013, Donna alerted Charlie that Wendy was moving ahead with a house purchase. Charlie pressed, asking if Dan had given permission within 24 hours.

Wendy canceled the deal after a 20-minute call with Charlie, and Donna texted, quote, Wow, thank you again. You're a miracle worker, end quote, which insinuates that Charlie had actually talked Wendy out of the purchase. Custody tensions continued into 2014, and in February, Donna vented to Charlie about, deposition, stalking, and wasted court time. She wrote, quote, total waste of the court's time, judge should know she's being stocked, end quote. In March, secrecy became even more apparent. On March 4th, 2014, while driving from Tallahassee to Gainesville, Donna texted Charlie, quote, I can speak to you privately. Erase this text after you read it. Wow. And quote. And 20 minutes

later, she claimed it was about dad's birthday gift, dad's birthday gift, giving the jury a glimpse of Donna and Charlie hiding communications. On May 30th, 2014, Donna emailed Charlie saying she had had a tough conversation with Wendy. And by June, the hitman, Zickfredo, and Louise were already making a trip to Tallahassee. The prosecution highlighted how family stress and communications were directly tied to the planning phases. Texts instructing someone to erase this through attention in court. Jurors were told that even if the message seemed harmless, like referring to a birthday gift,

it could indicate the consciousness of guilt and show that they were used to deleting communications, writing communications. And with that, Judge Everett ended court for the day. Sergeant Corbett will resume his testimony on cell records and digital forensics, starting to mark. out. So, and so that is the day. It was a big day to say the least, a huge day. So thank you. Stick with us

as we continue to follow many heartbreaking cases and hope for justice. And we, of course, continue to hope for justice with Dan Markell. We'll see you. Bye-bye.