Hidden True Crime - Wendi Adelson Testifies AGAINST Her Mother Donna in Trial | Day 2 Recap

Episode Date: August 26, 2025

Day 2 in the Donna Adelson trial was a big one... Wendi Adelson, the ex-wife of Dan Markel, and the daughter of Donna took the stand. Followed by Rob Markel, Donna's oldest son. 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

Lately, I've been trying to be more intentional about what I wear, intentional about everything, just choosing pieces that feel effortless, still put together, timeless, but also not overthinking it every morning. It's why I keep going back to quince. Their pieces just make getting dressed easier and I feel so classy. I feel elevated. The fits are flattering. The fabric is really high quality. Everything is wearable day to day. I actually got this really, really, beautiful yellow V-neck midi dress from them, and I paired it with some Italian leather sandals. It's one of those outfits that just works. It feels polished but still comfortable. It's exactly what I've been looking for. What surprises me, though, is the quality for the price.

Quince uses premium materials like European linen, organic cotton, but they cut out the middleman. So everything is priced way lower than you'd expect. Refresh. your every day with luxury you can actually use. Head to quince.com slash hidden true crime for free shipping on your order and 365 day returns. That's quince, quince, q-u-in-c-com slash hidden true crime for free shipping and 365 day returns. Quince.com slash hidden true crime. We gather here tonight to bring women back to their rightful place. The Testaments, a new Hulu original series from the executive producers of The Handmaid's Tale. It's easier to accept a story than believe that the people around you are monsters.

The battle isn't over. There comes a time when you have to take action when you have to choose your own destiny. Watch the new Hulu original series, The Testaments. Streaming on Hulu and Hulu on Disney Plus for bundle subscribers. Terms apply. Hello, Hidden Gems. Day two in the Donna Adelson trial. For those that are new to our channel, we cover not everything, but a lot of different crimes that are occurring.

We process them together. We do investigative journalism together here at Hidden True Crime. My name is Lauren Matthias. I was a television reporter and a broadcast journalist for 10 years before becoming a independent journalist with Hidden True Crime. I do this channel with my husband, a criminal psychologist. He will be talking soon to all of us about the Donna Adelson trial. so stick with me there. And then we cover particular trials,

those that we feel like we can bring value to. In the Adelson family has certainly got our attention here at Hidden True Crime. We have an entire backstory. We have covered day one, and now it is time for day two. And day two of testimony in the trial against Donna Adelson. She is a family matriarch, accused of master mining the plot to kill her former son-in-law, Dan Markell. It picked up where Friday's dramatic start left off. Last week, the jury heard

lengthy opening statements for the state and the defense. Prosecutors laid out the tangled web of family tension and alleged conspiracies at the heart of this case. So for those needing a refresher, again, we have also put together a full backstory video, an episode that covers how we got here. So if you also don't know about this case, you can know everything. there is to know. Just a quick refresher on one of Friday's most striking moments before we get to today, it came when Luis Rivera, a convicted gang member who drove the car during the murder testified about who he thought wanted Dan Markell Dad. Luis insisted it was Wendy Adelson, Dan's ex-wife, who orchestrated the hit. He didn't implicate Donna, Harvey, or even Charlie Adelson

directly. Instead, he claimed Wendy was the one calling the shots. However, Donna's attorney, Jackie Fulford, basically threw Charlie under the bus during her opening statement, saying that prosecutors, quote, can and have proven that Donna Adelson's son paid Catherine to get the hitman to kill Markell, end quote. So also given the communication chain, prosecutors have laid out, Donna to Charlie, Charlie to Catherine, Catherine to Sikfredo, and then Sikfredo to Louise Rivera himself never had direct contact with Wendy or the Adelson family. And if that's the case, how could he really know who originated the plan? That will be for the jury to weigh as they compare his testimony against the state's broader evidence. Meanwhile, spectators at the

courthouse reported seeing Wendy herself on Friday a sign she'd likely be taking the stand this week. And well, yes, we'll get to that in just a little bit. And as in prior trials, Wendy was expected to testify under an immunity deal, though with limitations, she's shielded only for what she says on the stand if law enforcement uncovers independent evidence against her outside of her testimony. That deal doesn't protect her. It doesn't mean she will be charged, but it does leave the door open still. And so the question of Wendy's involvement has loomed over this case from the very beginning, the ex-wife of Dan Markell, Many struggle to believe the Aedelson family would go to such lengths without her knowledge. Again, the ex-wife, the mother of Dan Markell's children. Would they go to this great length without her knowledge or influence? And in past trials, the prosecutor, Georgia Kaplanman seemed to treat Wendy with skepticism. Fueling speculation, she might eventually face charges.

But in this case, assistant state attorney Sierra Catherine Dugan struck a very different tone. In her opening, Dugan described Wendy less as a co-conspirator and more of someone manipulated and dominated by her mother, Donna Adelson, who is on trial. And that framing leaves her again in this sort of gray area, possible victim, possible accomplice, and still under scrutiny. And with that context in mind, let's turn to what unfolded today inside the courtroom on day two. We are on day two officially. And before the jury was brought into the courtroom, attorneys on both sides. spired over whether certain emails tied to Donna could be introduced as evidence. Prosecutor George Kaplanman, question state investigator Jason Newellin about the series of messages

from 2013 that outlined Donna's whereabouts at the time and touched on her daughter, Wendy's divorce from Dan Markell. Newland testified that the emails followed a consistent pattern. Donna was the one replying on the joint account she shared with her husband Harvey. Defense attorney Josh Zellman pushed back telling the court that the prosecution's interpretation was nothing more than speculation. Kavelman countered that the messages clearly demonstrated Donna's active involvement in her daughter's divorce proceedings, and then Judge Everett cited with the state ruling the emails admissible

while noting the defense could challenge them on cross-examination. Once the jury was seated, Kauffleman had Newellyn walk through a series of emails exchanged between Donna and her son Charlie. Many of these messages originated from Wendy, who frequently forwarded her divorce filings to her mother. Neuland pointed out that Donna didn't just read them. She responded with edits, suggestions, and questions. Asked how investigators could be certain the replies came from Donna rather than Harvey. Newland noted the messages were signed, love you, mom. The filings revealed that Dan had sought full custody of the children and accused Wendy of misrepresenting his plans to relocate.

Other emails showed Donna weighing in with sharp criticism of Dan, calling him a narsely. and accusing him of always putting his own needs first. This testimony is part of the state's broader strategy to show Donna wasn't just a bystander. She was deeply, deeply engaged in her daughter, Wendy's divorce and relocation battle with Dan Markell, the victim. The jury next saw some of the most striking emails in the state's evidence. In one, Donna referred to Dan by the Adelson family's nickname for him. What was that? Jibbers.

writing that he had turned the divorce into a full-time job just to get his way. And another, she stressed to Wendy, that, quote, the most important part of your divorce is your relocation, end quote, calling it non-negotiable. Other emails revealed Donna's meticulous notes on everywhere Dan had traveled since his children were born when prosecutor George DeKapplement asked investigator Jason Newellin how Donna had this level of detail. he explained simply, quote, she kept track of a lot of things. Well, the state also presented a court order denying Wendy's request to relocate with the children. That ruling stated bluntly, if there's no physical abuse, there's no relocation, end quote.

So Donna's reaction, as shown in yet another email, was fury. She wrote that she was, quote, beyond angry with the outcome and immediately began strategizing. ways to push relocation through anyway. One particularly chilling message told Wendy that her performance in court would affect not only her own life, but her parents and Charlie's as well. Donna urged her daughter to play the part, reminding her, quote, you can be a good actress when you want to. I've seen you in action, end quote.

She even went so far as to suggest staging the children in front of a church and telling Dan, they were about to be baptized into the Catholic faith. It's a pointed tactic given Dan's devout Orthodox Jewish beliefs. Donna closed that message with a directive, quote, you cannot tell anyone this is an act, take control from him, get to him psychologically, end quote. When it was the defense's turn, attorney Josh Zellman began poking holes in the state's email evidence. He walked Investigator Newland through several of the messages pointing out that not every reply

could be directly tied to Donna. One wasn't signed at all and another contained only a single word. Newland admitted that Donna's usual replies were much longer and more detailed leaving open the possibility that those shorter responses may have come from her husband Harvey

instead. The prosecution's next witness was none other then, yes, you know it. If you've been following this trial, you know. none other than Wendy Adelson, the ex-wife to Dan Markell, a daughter of Donna Adelson who's on trial. And before jurors re-entered the courtroom, her attorney clarified that Wendy was compelled to appear under subpoena, though she would reserve the right to plead the fifth when she felt necessary. And as her daughter took the stand, Donna Adelson appeared emotional, dabbing at her eyes while watching.

Judge Everett again reminded Donna, just like he did on Friday, to keep her reactions under control in front of the jury. And once questioning began, prosecutor Kaplanman focused on Wendy's relationship with Dan. Wendy explained that the two married in February of 2006 and settled in Tallahassee the following year. She testified that she was the one who initiated their separation in 2012 and said Dan was deeply upset when it became official. And although separation had been a recurring conversation between them, Wendy admitted, Dan didn't expect her to act when she did. She moved out of the home while he was away on a work trip. That's how the separation started. Just no conversation, just moving away while Dan was away for work.

And on the stand, Wendy testified that religion was one of the pressure points in her marriage. She told the jury that Dan leaned on his Jewish faith as a way to control her. saying he was stricter about her keeping kosher than she ever was. It was less important to me, Wendy explained on the stand. Wendy clarified that she didn't necessarily see Dan as more devout in his relationship with God, but said that after marriage, he began imposing more orthodox practices on her and their sons, rules that he had not enforced before their wedding. And when it came to parenting, Wendy explained there was no formal custody arrangement

during their initial separation and said they shared time with the children roughly 50-50, often working it out week by week. Kaplanman then asked if Donna had ever helped draft or edit her divorce paperwork, and Wendy's answer was no. Kaplan followed up asking if the divorce itself was contentious. It was, Wendy admitted. She went on to describe her own struggles in Tallahassee, telling jurors she faced very unstable employment because her academic work

relied on temporary grant funding. Relocating, Wendy explained, was vital to her ability to give the children stability. Wendy also noted that Dan had long planned to climb the academic ladder with dreams of landing at a top law school like Yale or Harvard to be a professor. And for that reason, she wanted the children to have a consistent home base while he pursued those career ambitions, which would likely take him from city to city. Cabellman-Nex brought up an email in which Wendy had written that she felt stuck, stuck in Tallahassee. Wendy's response was cautious saying, quote, it's possible I sent that email saying that she felt stuck.

At my bank, I was literally getting pennies using Wellfront. Cheching, there's this much that I'm getting an interest and I didn't have to do anything. Clients like Angela earn up to 4.2% APY on their cash with the Wealthfront cash account. Get started at Wealthfront.com. Client was paid $1,000 for their testimonial, creating a contest. of interest outcomes vary. 3.3%. Base API as of January 30th, 20206, as representative variable and earned on funds swept to program banks.

0.65% new client boost for three months on up to $150,000. Direct deposit $1,000 a month and fund an investing account for a 0.25% increase. Cash account offered by Wealthfront Brokerage LLC, member FINRA SIPC, not a bank. Before I switched to Wealthfront, my APY was probably 0.1. Once I switched to chitching. With the Wealthfront cash account, earn up to 4.2% APY on your cash. I can trust. Wellfront is taking care of me.

Make your money earn more. Get started at Wealthfront.com. Clients were paid $1,000 for their testimonials. creating a conflict of interest. Howcomes vary. 3.3% base API as of January 30th, 2026 is representative variable and earned on funds swept to program banks. 0.65% new client boost for three months on up to $150,000. Direct deposit $1,000 a month and fund an investing account for a 0.25% increase. Cash account offered by Wealthfront Brogeridge LLC, member FINRA, SIPC, not a bank.

She went on to explain that her mother often described her as being a quote, prisoner in Tallahassee. And when asked who took more interest in the day-to-day details of her divorce and custody issues, Wendy admitted, probably my mom. Kauffman pressed further asking if Wendy ever felt like Donna was walking all over her. Wendy shook her head and said, quote, I don't remember feeling that way. She testified that Donna's attitude toward Dan shifted over the years, emphasizing that her mother didn't always hate him. The prosecutor then turned to a statement Wendy made during her police interview in the hours after Dan's murder. And at that time, she had told investigators that her parents had more reason than anyone to, dislike Dan. On the stand, Wendy explained the context. She said, quote, I was sitting with law enforcement

for six hours and had just been told Danny had been shot. I was just in shock, end quote. So, Cabellman asked Wendy about the different nicknames that she had used for Dan, focusing again on that name, gibbers. Wendy explained, quote, jibbers was just a silly name that a friend helped me come up with to make him feel less scary, end quote. Well, the prosecutor pressed. It wasn't a friendly name, right? And Wendy repeated, it was a silly name. Well, Kaplanman then asked whether Jib, J-I-B stood for Jew in Boots. But Wendy said she didn't remember, and that would be a very derogatory term. Kaplanman noted that Donna also used the nickname in one email. She wrote, quote,

Jibbers hasn't beaten the Edelson family yet, end quote. And even after the court ruled against Wendy, relocating the children to South Florida, Kaplanman highlighted how Donna kept pressuring her to push the issue. Donna floated a plan for her, Harvey and Wendy, to each contribute a third of a million dollars to essentially buy Dan's agreement to the move, saying things like,

everyone has their price. She also sent Wendy email, suggesting ways to get under Dan's skin. Around the same time, Wendy confided two friends that she felt her mother wasn't allowing her any real autonomy over her own life. And Wendy agreed that during this period, Donna's hostility toward Dan escalated. She often referred to him with insults, calling him things like an asshole and, quote, a piece of shit, as well as, quote, narcissist. Donna also spent a great deal of time researching and drafting arguments for Wendy to pass

along to her divorce attorney, even suggesting that Wendy used potential job opportunities as leverage. Wendy frequently forwarded Donna's emails to her attorney and sometimes shared her attorney's responses back with Donna. So Cabellman then walked through some of the sticking points that made the divorce even more contentious. And at one point, Wendy was in the process of buying a new home in Tallahassee. Under the divorce agreement, she was supposed to remove her name from the title of the marital home, and in return, Dan was required to buy out her share. But when the time came, Dan refused to pay her. He argued that Wendy wasn't honoring her own obligations, including their agreement about Skyping with the boys when they were with the other parent. Wendy

testified that Dan would even file complaints with the parenting coordinator if she was a single minute late for those calls. Both sides ended up filing contempt motions against each other. And because Dan withheld her settlement money, Wendy was ultimately unable to purchase the new house. So around that same time, Charlie sent Wendy a picture of himself with his then girlfriend, Catherine. Yes, Catherine. Along with it, he messaged her not to worry, suggesting she wouldn't be stuck in Tallahassee for much longer. Catherine, well, Wendy, however, said she didn't remember receiving this message about Catherine. Dan would sometimes email Wendy, urging her to play nice for the sake of their sons, though. As Wendy admitted, it didn't always work out that way.

The tensions escalated further when Dan filed a claim accusing Wendy and her attorney of committing fraud on the court. And in his filing, he even suggested that the judge should send a message. Yeah, that's in quote, send a message by awarding him any assets Wendy had failed to disclose during the divorce. According to Wendy, when Donna saw the filing, she told her daughter they needed a, quote, plan of attack, end quote, and encouraged her to aggravate Dan the way he was aggravating her. In other words, get back at him. The fallout from those accusations was significant. Wendy's attorney ended up recusing herself from the case, since she was. she was now a potential witness in the fraud matter, forcing Wendy to start over with new counsel.

Wendy then testified about the condo her parents had rented at the continuum in South Beach, Miami, where they sometimes spent weekends. They signed the lease roughly three months before the murder. Kaplaneman asked if she knew why they chose that particular location, and Wendy explained that Charlie's girlfriend lived there at the time, and Charlie liked the building so much that he thought their parents might want to retire there. Kaplan-Missed further asking if Donna had added Wendy as a resident on May 16, 2014, and Wendy said she didn't remember but acknowledged the property strict security measures.

She suggested she may have been added as a resident simply to make it easier for her to come and go without being treated as a guest. Well, that same month, Dan filed a motion seeking to ban Donna from having unsupervised visits with the boys. Wendy testified that she didn't recall that motion, though she admitted that if the records exist, it must have happened. Still, the prosecution noted how unlikely it was for Wendy not to remember something as serious as her mother, potentially being restricted from time with her children, particularly since she had spoken in detail about many of the other motions in the case. Kaplan had reminded her that Dan's concern stemmed from Donna telling the boys she hated their father and that he was stupid. That's unquote stupid.

raising fears of parental alienation. It's a big deal. That motion, however, was never heard in court. It was filed when? Well, just days before Dan was killed. After the lunch break, Kauffleman shifted her focus to Wendy's brother, Charlie Adelson. Kauffleman asked Wendy to describe Charlie's lifestyle.

And she said he was essentially living the life of a bachelor, dating frequently, working long hours, six or seven days a week, and enjoying luxury items like nice. cars and expensive food. In her words, he, quote, worked hard and played hard, end quote. Yeah, good old Charlie Adelson. Wendy explained that as the youngest sibling, she and Charlie, who Charlie is the middle child, spoke regularly. She couldn't recall whether she had shared details of her marital struggles with him, but acknowledged it was fair to say that Charlie did not like Dan during

the divorce. Cowellman then asked Wendy directly, did your brother, ever joke about hiring a hitman to kill Dan Markell, end quote. And this is what Wendy said. He did make that joke. She admitted it. And she explained that Charlie, once again, told her he'd get her a television as a divorce gift because it would be cheaper than hiring a hitman. Wendy added that she may have mentioned the joke to her then-boyfriend Jeff.

The television came up again in testimony. about the day of Dan's murder. Wendy said she had scheduled an appointment that morning to have the TV repaired. And after it developed lines across the screen, damage she thought may have been caused by one of the children, the geek squad was set to arrive between 8 a.m. and noon. And this was the very same TV Charlie had joked about. While that morning, Donna texted Wendy to remind her the repairman were coming. The repairmen. And because Charlie had originally purchased the television, the insurance policy was under his name, and in the end, the damage was not covered under the warranty. So, Kaplanman pressed Wendy on how long the visit lasted.

I thought this was interesting. Wendy said that it was about an hour. And then she was asked why in the world it would take an hour just to determine the TV wasn't covered. And Wendy did admit she didn't know why. So a few weeks after Dan's murder, Charlie and Wendy met for dinner in South Florida. a dinner Charlie has since referred to as a celebratory dinner. Wendy testified that she only became aware of that label through prior trials. Charlie never used those words with her. Kauffleman asked why Wendy had vomited during the dinner,

and Wendy explained that in the aftermath of Dan's killing, she was living in constant fear. Kauffleman then shifted her questioning to Charlie's relationship, focusing particularly on Catherine Magbanawa, the woman later identified as the link to the hired hitman. Yes, Catherine, Catherine, that's connected to Charlie, the girlfriend, Catherine Megbanawa. Again, later identified as the link to the hired hitman. Wendy testified that she had met Catherine on two occasions, but again insisted she never

developed a personal friendship with her outside of Charlie. Well, Cabellman presented a photo of Wendy and Catherine together at the beach near her parents condo taken before the murder. She pressed Wendy on whether there were ever conversations between her, Catherine, Charlie, or Donna about a murder plot. Wendy answered firmly no. Kaplanman returned to the timeline of the Geek Squad visit on the morning of the murder. Wendy testified that the repairman was scheduled to come between 8 a.m. and noon, and she recalled he arrived on the earlier side of that Wendy. Well, Kaplanman pointed out that Dan was killed during the same time frame. When asked who paid for the service, Wendy said she believed the work was under contract

and that she may have paid the technician, but she couldn't remember for certain. Kaufferman then pressed her. Did you ever use the word TV as code for the murder in any context or hear anyone else refer to a TV that way? Well, Wendy answered no. The questioning then shifted to Wendy's and boyfriend Jeff. She testified that the couple broke up about a week before Dan was murdered. Cabellman asked if she recalled a conversation where she told Jeff in confidence that if something happened to Dan, she could move back to Miami. Wendy said no. Capulman followed up asking if Wendy ever told Jeff that Charlie had explored all options to facilitate her relocation, including hiring a hitman. Again, Wendy said that conversation never happened.

Cabellman next asked Wendy what she did after the TV repairman left her home. Wendy said she stayed in for a while, did some work, had breakfast, spoke with friends, and then left around noon to meet two friends for lunch, stopping to run a few errands first. Kaplanman pressed her on her route that day, specifically whether she had gone near Trescott Drive, where Dan lived. This is such an important piece of evidence in this situation, so many questions about this Trescott Drive moment, the day that Dan was murdered. And this is where Dan lived. And Wendy admitted, that she did attempt to turn down Trescott,

explaining that it was the route she was accustomed to taking. But when she approached, she said there was a police car and yellow tape blocking the road, so she turned around and continued on the main road instead. Kaplanman asked her to clarify this detail, noting that it has long been a point of contention in each of the trials, whether Wendy truly tried to drive down Trescott and if it would have been possible to see police activity from the road's entrance. So take a listen to this.

Well, Kaplanman then asked Wendy about Dan's plans to leave town the day after the murder. Wendy acknowledged she knew about that trip, but testified she had no idea. All the killers might have learned of it. She said, she didn't know whether Charlie was aware of Dan's travel plans, but suggested her mother might have known since Donna usually kept up with Wendy and the boy's schedule. Kaplanman pressed on that point asking of Donna kept meticulous records of every time Dan traveled as investigator Jason Newland had testified earlier. Wendy allowed that Donna may have tracked his schedule, but only in the sense that if Dan was out of town, she would know Wendy might need extra help with the children.

Kaplanman reminded Wendy that during the divorce, when Dan's travel became a contested issue, Donna was able to produce a detailed record of every single trip Dan had taken going back to 2010. Wendy explained this by saying her mother was old school and never switched to digital tools like Google calendars instead keeping meticulous handwritten notes about all sorts of things. She insisted that Donna's habit of documenting dance travel wasn't about interfering, but about being prepared in case her help was needed. Cabell encountered that Donna was clearly detail-oriented even about things that weren't directly for concern like Dan's travel schedule. Wendy responded that her mother only cared about it because his absences directly affected her and her boys.

Wendy testified that she spoke with her brother Charlie the morning of the murder. The call lasted about 18 minutes around 9.30 a.m. and they discussed whether it was worth repairing the TV or simply buying a new one. Kaplanman then asked Wendy about her use of WhatsApp. Wendy said she originally downloaded the app to communicate. with people overseas, but she didn't recall using it to message family members. She also didn't remember ever texting Catherine on any platform, including WhatsApp. When she asked if, when asked if she had any other encrypted messaging apps at the time, Wendy said she didn't believe so.

Kaplan men then returned to Wendy's activities after she tried to turn on to Triscott Drive, but was stopped by police tape. Wendy testified that she went to a liquor store to buy bourbon for a stock the bar party and the brand ironically was called bullet bourbon hard to ignore a receipt confirmed the purchase at 1249 p.m. She then went to lunch where officers approached her to inform her that Dan had been shot. Her ex-husband. Kaplanman then asked whether Wendy eventually moved to South Florida after Dan's death. Wendy said she left Tallahassee after the funeral, bringing only weekend her bags for herself and the boys did she plan to return home relatively soon. But in the end, however, they never went back to Tallahassee for good.

They returned only briefly to collect their belongings before permanently relocating. Wendy testified that about 48 hours after the shooting of her boy's father, her ex-husband, she received a call from Detective Craig Isam regarding collecting DNA samples from the children. And by that time, she and the boys were already halfway to South Florida. The call eventually dropped and I assume never followed up. Kavelman's approach in past trials, I'll point this out because there have been plenty of trials for those that have been following the Edelson case. And her approach, I've noticed, has often been sharp, occasionally even snarky.

Yet in this trial, at least now we're into day two, she appears to have softened her tone with Wendy. perhaps again reflecting over a decade of experience working on the case. Some of that assertiveness did resurface, however, toward the end of Wendy's direct examination. Take a listen. Do you recall on the trip to South Florida, just within 48 hours of the shooting, getting a call from Craig Isam?

Yes. Okay. And what happened with that call? I talked to him for a while. He mentioned that he might want to have DM. any samples of the kids. We were already halfway down. We'd been in the car for about four hours with the boys. And we in that sentence. I was with my parents. Okay. And the kids. Yep. We talked. The call broke up. And he never followed up. Was it like a you're breaking up? I told him I was

having a hard time hearing. But were you faking that or was it really breaking up? I was not faking that. And did you send your lawyer to him after that shortly after that? I told him he could talk to my lawyer. He never followed up. Were you happy to be out of Tallahassee when you were able to return to South Florida? No, I was not happy. After a brief sidebar, Cowbleman asked Wendy if she had changed her son's names following Dan's murder and Wendy said she legally changed their last names from Markell to Adelson about a year later, as well as their older son's middle name. Cabellman then displayed an invitation Donna had sent to Wendy for her father Harvey's birthday party dated July 3rd, 2014, before the murder. And in that email and another regarding their grandson Lincoln, Wendy's family was already referring to the boys with the last name Adelson, not Markell.

Wendy explained that after the murder, she had been fearful of the boys' names being associated with Markell, so she had been using Adelson socially, even. before the legal change. Wendy also testified that Dan was buried in Toronto, Canada, and that she and her children did not attend the funeral. Kaplanman then asked when Wendy last spoke with her mother, and Wendy said it was in November of 2023. She testified that Donna had not given her advice or direction about testifying in this case, though she had in other related cases. Wendy added that Donna had hoped she would be supportive of her brother, Charlie, but afterwards was devastated, believing Wendy had not been supportive. Kaplan next asked Wendy directly, and this is, quote, were you in any way involved in the plot to kill your ex-husband? And quote, Wendy replied,

no. Kaplan asked, did you maybe know it was going to happen? No, Wendy said. What information do you have regarding your mother's plot to kill your ex-husband? Wendy responded, I don't have any information. I was not involved in any plot to kill Danny, and quote. Wendy testified that she was never treated like a suspect, even though she acknowledged in court and had told law enforcement on the very day of the murder that ex-wives are often considered suspects in such cases. she said she offered police full access to search her phone, computer, house, and car wanting to be as helpful as possible following the murder.

She admitted that she had suggested several people who might have been angry enough to harm Dan. And when Kaplaneman asked if some of those people were her parents, Wendy said yes. However, Kaufferman noted that Wendy had also told law enforcement she did not believe her parents were capable of such an act. Kaplan then read a statement Wendy gave to police on the day of the murder. Quote, if someone did try to kill my ex-husband, they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. I mean, it would be different if it were my brother, end quote.

Wendy testified that at the time. She sincerely hoped it was not someone in her family. During her interview with police, Wendy was able to call her mother to update her on the situation. and she asked Donna to call Charlie and explain what was happening since Wendy didn't want to make any more calls herself. Afterward, Wendy told police that her mother handled that pretty well and added that her parents sounded genuinely surprised, which she said was a relief. After that, Kaplanman had no further questions. Well, cross-examination kicked off. And this time, it was Jackie Fulford taking the lead with Wendon.

Wendy, Fulford let the jury know right away that she'd be jumping around a bit. There were just too many topics to keep it in strict order. So she decided to start with something specific. Catherine. Yes, Catherine. And that picture of them together at the beach over Father's Day weekend in 2014. Now, Wendy admitted that she really only knew Catherine through Charlie. But here's the interesting part.

Wendy also acknowledged that Charlie wasn't even at the beach that day. Neither was her mom. When Fullford pressed her about when she first met Catherine, Wendy said she thought it was back in March or April. She remembered it happening at a dinner, her, Jeff, and Catherine and Charlie. But Fulford was quick to point out who was not there. And that was Donna. Fulford then shifted gears. She wanted to zero in on the years between 2010 and 2014. But before digging into that, she stepped back to paint a picture. of the Edelson family structure. Rob, she reminded everyone, is the oldest, Charlie's, the middle child, and Wendy's, the baby of the family. And when the kids were little, Donna stayed home. But once they were all in school, she went back to teaching. Each of the three children went on to not just go to college, but they all attended

graduate school. Rob became a doctor. Charlie trained as a parent dentist and Wendy pursued law and became an attorney. Very successful family. Fulford emphasized one key. point. Their parents supported all of them along the way, and she made sure to underline Donna's role, describing her as a kind, loving mother who made those opportunities possible for her children. It really seemed like Fulford was working hard to paint a very specific

picture of Donna, not as the woman sitting at the defense table, but as a kind, selfless, empathic mother and grandmother. Wendy backed that up on the stand. She told the jury, that when her children were born, Donna came to help. She didn't just stop by during the day for some quick baby snuggle. She stayed through the night, taking shifts with the baby so Wendy could rest. Fulford leaned into those details, highlighting Donna as a type of mom who would go above and beyond for her family. Wendy told the jury that after she and Dan separated in September of 2012, her mom, Donna, really stepped in. Between that point, March of 2013, Donna spent a lot of time in Tallahassee, helping Wendy care for the kids. According to Wendy, Donna wasn't just

visiting. She was hands-on. She got groceries. He cooked meals, cleaned the house and helped with the everyday chaos of life with young children. Most of the time, Donna made the eight-hour drive to Tallahassee herself, though sometimes she'd fly, and she wasn't always alone. Harvey, Wendy's father, and Donna's husband would occasionally come along to help as well. And from there, Fulford shifted to focus on Dan. She confirmed with Wendy that the two had first met online before eventually getting married. And in the early years before the divorce, Wendy admitted they had a happy marriage. They spent time together as a family, not just with their kids, but also with Donna and Harvey, the in-laws or Wendy's parents. They even had gone on a trip to Costa Rica together where Wendy

told her parents after she wrote a zip line that she was expecting her first baby. Wendy also acknowledged Dan's accomplishments. She described him as very intelligent, someone with not one, but two Harvard degrees. He was a prolific writer, and by the time of his murder, he had secured tenure as a professor at Florida State's College of Law. And Wendy agreed with Fulford that tenure is no small achievement. It isn't. It takes years of work and dedication, and Dan had earned the respect of his colleagues along the way. Once Dan became a father, Wendy admitted his kids became the center of his world. Even after the separation, Dan made every effort to stay present in his children's lives. He'd drop by their preschool just to see them. He'd call them on the phone.

And he even Skyped with them regularly, making sure distance and divorce didn't cut into his role as a father. That's when Fulford pivoted to Donna's relationship with Dan. She asked Wendy, point blank. Was Donna always kind to him? Wendy said yes, before the marriage, but during the marriage, and even after it ended, her mother was kind to Dan. Defense attorney Jackie Fulford pressed the point that, despite all the turmoil during the divorce, Wendy never heard her mother suggest or imply that anything bad should happen to Dan or that he should be harmed. Wendy agreed, testifying that she had never heard her mom say anything like that. Take a listen. And during the time that you were with Danny, your mother was always kind to him, wasn't she? She was. Before you got married to him?

Yes. While you were married to him? Yes. While you were separated? Yes. And after the divorce. Yes. And there's been a lot of testimony and a lot of pictures put up, lots of things highlighted about the ugly things that your mother said about Danny during the course of the separation, divorce, and the follow-up litigation, right? Yes. And you shared, as you've testified, some of the pleadings that were filed in your case. Yes. And some of the pleadings weren't very attractive towards you, were they?

No. They described things that were derogatory towards you. Is that fair? Yes. And the communications that you had with Danny during the separation leading up to the divorce and some thereafter were pretty critical of you, weren't they? The communication on paper, which was very different than the communication in person. Right. But the paperwork was critical.

Yes. And you shared that with your mom. Yes. And some of the things that he said to you in writing, whether they were communications or in the pleadings, upset you. Yes. Some of it was very upsetting to you. Yes. And you shared it with your mother and then she became upset.

Yes. And she said bad words. Yes. She caught him a lot of bad names. Yes. She said ugly things about him. Yes. But not one single time did she ever suggest in writing or to you personally that Danny deserved to be harmed, did you?

Never. Never. Fulford then addressed the frequently referenced divorce filing, sometimes called the grandmother motion, which discusses Donna not having unsupervised visits with the children. She had Wendy clarified that the filing was not solely about Donna. Most of Dan's complaints were directed at Wendy and focused on parenting issues. When Donna was mentioned, it related to Dan's concern that Wendy was not following the right of first refusal rule, meaning she hadn't asked Dan first if he wanted to care for the children before

asking the grandparents, before asking Donna. And Fulford emphasized that the document did not actually state that Donna could only have supervised visits, but rather that Dan should be given the first opportunity. And Wendy agreed, adding that Donna never even saw the actual document. Fulford then turned to the topic of the million dollar bribe. Wendy testified that the money was not intended to completely take the children away from Dan. Rather, she had hoped it would encourage him to move to Miami as well so they could live separate lives while still raising their children together. Fulford noted that Miami offered more opportunities for Dan to practice his Jewish faith, including access to kosher foods and places of worship. She emphasized that

the payment was not an illegal bribe, but an incentive and resource to make relocating easier for him. Wendy agreed, saying that was her understanding and that she knew Dan had enjoyed living in Miami before. Fulford later explained that at the time, Dan was seeking a professorship at the University of Miami School of Law. He had secured the position. The plan was for him and Wendy to remain in Miami. Since he did not get the job, he had continued working at FSU in Tallahassee. The million dollar payment, Fulford noted, would have also helped cover Dan's travel costs as he only taught two days a week. In theory, the funds would allow him to live in Miami while still commuting to Tallahassee. Fulford then noted that by the time Dan was

murdered, nearly two years had passed since he and Wendy had fully separated. She asked Wendy about a job interview she had in October 2012 with the Grossman and Roth law firm in Miami. Wendy confirmed that she received an offer from the firm in December, which offered substantially more money than her position in Tallahassee and provided more job security since her FSU role was grant funded and not guaranteed to be permanent. Wendy testified that she discussed the job offer with Dan and asked if he would consider moving to Miami so they could continue co-parenting. He said he would consider it, but ultimately decided against relocating. Wendy, however, chose to pursue the move and filed the motion for temporary relocation,

amending her petition for dissolution to include relocation. She said she wasn't sure how the court would rule but hoped she had a chance of being approved to move. In June 2013, the court held a hearing and denied the relocation request. And following that decision, Wendy and Dan were able to move forward with a custody agreement and finalize their divorce. Wendy emphasized that it was never her intention to completely remove Dan from the children's lives. She always wanted him to remain a part of their lives. Wilford then presented Wendy with a document dated July 11th, 2014, an email from her father, Harvey regarding an appointment to have her TV serviced. Harvey had forwarded the email to Wendy, noting that the appointment was scheduled for Friday, July 18th, between 8 a.m. and 12 p.m. and signed it Love Dad.

The order form included several questions, including one asking, would you be willing to accept a sooner appointment if one becomes available? Harvey had indicated yes. Fulford appeared to be highlighting a point regarding the state's theory that the TV service appointment was arranged to provide Wendy with an alibi on the day of Dan's murder. She questioned why Harvey would indicate on the order form that the sooner appointment would be acceptable. And since a change in timing could have been disrupted, any alleged plan coordinated around Wendy's schedule. Wilford then shifted to Wendy's earlier testimony about changing her son's last name to Edelson. Wendy explained that she did not legally change it for about a year, and when it came time to enroll

her children in school, she still listed their last name as Markell, but asked the school to refer to them as Adelson, knowing that she intended to make the change. She added that at the time she believed this would make the children safer. Fulford then turned to the topic of the home Wendy had considered purchasing in Tallahassee. The state had suggested that Charlie had persuaded her not to buy the house because she would be in Miami soon. Wendy clarified that the real reason she didn't move forward with the purchase was that she had not yet received her settlement from Dan and simply did not have the funds to buy the property. Next, Fulford addressed Wendy's earlier testimony that Donna hated Dan at the time of his death. She pointed out that just a week

before Dan was killed, Donna had been babysitting for him and their interaction had been entirely cordial. Wendy even noted that Donna had made a loaf of banana bread for him, the way he liked it. Wendy agreed with that, and Fulford pressed. But she hated him. Wendy responded, well, she was mad at him. Fulford followed up. There's a difference between mad and hate, isn't there? Wendy acknowledged there is. Fulford also asked Wendy about the summers she, Dan, and the children spent with Donna and Harvey. She testified that on one occasion she mentioned considering a divorce and Donna actually tried to talk her out of it, encouraging her to attend counseling. Bulford then moved to question the states had raised regarding Wendy's interview with police. Wendy noted that before she ever mentioned families' feelings towards Dan, she expressed fear that Dan's parents would suspect her of harming him.

And next, Bulford asked about a trip Wendy took an age. April 2013 with a man she was dating at the time named Miguel shortly before her divorce was finalized. Following the trip, Wendy sent an email to her parents detailing some personal revelations she had experienced. Make a listen. And on the first page down towards the bottom, you have some bullet points about what you would like to do to resolve your divorce, correct? Well, I think it was not just about my divorce. It was kind of about how I wanted to be living my life overall. Yeah, I was trying not to get into the personal information, but that's right.

This entire email is really about changes you want to make in your life, correct? Yes. Okay. And the last bullet point down at the bottom, it says, I've been coming to a place in the last few months where I have realized that I want to keep my job. It allows me the maximum amount of flexibility to spend with my kids while allowing the freedom for intellectual exploration, one-on-one mentoring with students, and meaningful work in the community. I don't care that gibbers told my colleagues that I stole from him

and that I am mentally ill. Nasty things are said in divorce and people know that, right? Yes. Tallahassee isn't ever where I wanted to live, but it's where the job is. And it's where my boy's father is, which means they don't have to constantly be flying on planes or driving in cars to accomplish our custody situation, right? Yes. So you have the pending petition. in a motion for relocation, but as of April the 28, you're starting to think maybe staying in Tallahassee is the right thing to do, correct? Yeah. Fulford noted that Wendy's motion to relocate had been denied, effectively ending the fight

to move. Wendy agreed. The questioning then turned to a heated exchange regarding Donna's awareness of the court's final decision. Wendy testified that her mother was not fully aware that the relocation request had been denied and that she would not be allowed to move. Listen to this. Your mother doesn't know when you get out of the hearing on June the 20th that you've stipulated that this is a forever decision.

So she writes these ugly emails, right? She may not have understood that it was a final decision of the court. It was a decision of the court because you stipulated to it, Ms. Adelson, didn't you? I did stipulate to it. And she didn't know it. She thought you had up until the final hearing. So she's marching along, trying to come up with more suggestions of how you can pressure Danny and get him to agree for you to relocate, even though you know it's dead, right?

I knew that it was a final decision. And after July the 31st, when she thought it was a final decision, she wrote no more email suggesting you do these crazy things to still try and get relocation, did she? I don't remember the dates of the email, but. And you testified when you got up, when the state was asking you questions, after you said your mother hated Danny at the time that he was killed,

which you've clarified now that she was mad at him, not that she hated him. You testified. You hated him at the time he was killed, right? I don't remember testifying to that. Well, then we'll need to take a break, Judge. After another quick afternoon break, Wendy was back on the stand to finish up cross-examination and the defense made their points known in the end. Take a lesson. Saitelson, isn't it true that before getting married to Mr. Markell in is it 2006? 2006 we got married.

Isn't it true that you've stated that you knew on your fancy wedding day when you were all dolled up and feeling like you were an actor in someone else's show, you knew it on your honeymoon when you were enjoying the vacation but not thrilled to be there with him. You said, I'm not sure I liked him, let alone loved him, but I was eager to start a life with someone and he wanted to do it with me. Recall saying that? I don't recall saying that, no. I have a place in front of you what's been previously marked as the Fendance Exhibit 1B for identification

purposes. I see that I said that in 2013. So, Edelson, you would agree that when Danny Markell was murdered on June the 18th of 2014, your little boys lost their father for the rest of their life. the day that he was murdered was July 18th and yes my boys lost their father they are growing up as 11 years have passed without his influence in their life in any way isn't that correct i wouldn't say without his influence in any way but yes they've grown up without their father he's not here to give them advice he is not he can't come to any other functions sports anything

else correct they're not eating kosher like they would have with their father they are not they don't have him at all. They don't have him in their lives day to day, no. Because on July the 18th of 2014, he was brutally murdered in his driveway. Isn't that true? That is true. And you testified on direct that anybody in your family that had anything to do with it should be held responsible.

Isn't that correct? Yes. And that includes you, doesn't it? Anyone who's responsible. Wow. You know, not only no influence, but she didn't even. keep his last name, changed the names of her children. The redirect of Wendy was pretty short.

The state just wanted to hone in on a few important things. And, you know, let's take a listen to the first part of that as well. You said you were an actor in someone else's show. Whose show wasn't? I think I felt like I just wasn't. fully present in my own life that I had always been a real people pleaser. And so there was an aspect of not always being true to myself and wanting to make other people happy. And one of those people is your mom, right?

Yes. And that's part of why you kept going with relocation, even when you kind of had some doubts about it, right? I would say it's part of the reason. You were asked on cross-examination about the final order on relocation issues. June 20th, 2013, and didn't you stipulate to making it with prejudice, I guess? Do you remember doing that? I don't actually remember stipulating. I mean, I see it in the order, but I don't remember actively saying anything or participating in a stipulation. In fact, when you've testified about this previously, didn't you indicate you didn't know what would prejudice meant?

I think I, it's not something that comes up in my daily practice. And so at the time I had forgotten that it meant that it was a final order. Right. And it was suggested or said on cross that you didn't tell your mom it was final and she was misled and she thought there was still room for it, right? That is what was said to me on cross. The prosecution then showed an email from Donna to her friend Vicki and in the email, Donna explains there is no chance of a pill for the relocation. The email was dated five days after the relocation order was made,

and then the prosecution shifted for their last few moments with Wendy on the stand. Take a listen. You were asked questions about, you know, your mom never suggested any harm to Dan Markell to you, but she did want to bribe him, yes? Yes. Take control from him. Weren't those her words?

Yes. Aggravate him? Yes. Scare him. I don't remember scare him, but I believe that was part of it. Give him some grief. Yes. Take something from him.

Yes. Show that fucker what would make him absolutely miserable. Yes. But definitely not kill him, right? I don't know what the question is. Donna was caring and devoted to your boys. You were asked about that. That's true, right?

Yes. In fact, she maybe cared a little too much about your life and you and what was going on with you sometimes, right? I don't know that you can care too much. Even the Nazi uniform craziness came from her version of some kind of place of love. Would you agree with that? Yes. because although her lawyers tried to downplay this, she was suggesting a baptism for these kids, right? Yes.

She said she looked into it and could get it done in two weeks, right? I believe that's what it said. And didn't she justify the means or claim that this would be harmless to your children because it was just like playing dress up to them, right? Yes. Just like Jake the Pirates. Yes. She thought the end's relocation would justify the means, didn't she?

Yes. And she thought a move to South Florida was what was best for you? Yes. And what was best for your children? Yes. Who she cared about more than anyone in the world. I mean, I don't know who she cared about most in the world, but she loves me. Is there anyone that she cares about more than those two boys?

My dad. Okay. She thought relocation was best for those boys. They were going to have better opportunities, right? Yes. Better family support. Yes. A happier mother.

Yes. With a more lucrative profession. Yes. And your lives all depended on it. Isn't that what she said? Yes. And Dan Markell could have agreed, couldn't he? He was amenable, but then he didn't want to ultimately.

want to ultimately he could have moved to south florida right isn't that what you were asked on cross yes he could have could have moved to south florida and enjoyed all that delicious kosher food down there right yes and if he had relented you and he could have had separate lives in miami and happily co-parented the boys right in theory yes it could have happened except he wouldn't relent Would he? I mean, he said no, and so we had a hearing and the judge said no. Right. He wouldn't relent.

He wouldn't give your mom what she wanted, would he? I mean, we only had one conversation about it, so it wasn't like an ongoing thing. It wasn't an ongoing thing? What wasn't? I mean, between Danny and I, we talked about Reloitte, location. He said he would think about it. And then he said he didn't want to. And then we had the hearing. And then that was the end of it for me. Yes. But you were asked on cross, wouldn't things have been potentially great for Danny down there too? Yes, I think they would have. Couldn't we all have lived happily ever after if he would have agreed to move down there too?

Possibly, right? Possibly. But he wouldn't agree. He didn't agree. No. Nothing further. Next to take the stand was Robert Adelson, Donna and Harvey's oldest son. Many of you've already mentioned his testimony that watched earlier today. Robert told the jury he had been living in New York since 2012 where he worked as an ear, nose, and throat doctor. He grew up in Coral Springs just north of Miami before leaving home at 18 years old to attend Tulane University and later medical school, although he spoke with his family often

during those years, he only visited them a few times a year, usually in the summers. Robert described his mother as the one who runs the show. That was the exact words he used, runs the show in the Adelson household. When prosecutor Sarah Dugan asked if Donna was more controlling or laid back, Robert didn't hesitate, quote, controlling. He explained that while his father, Harvey was generally passive and easygoing, Donna was assertive and very involved in her children's lives. She had firm expectations about what her kids should do, and if they followed her wishes, things went smoothly. And if not, things were not fine.

According to Robert, Donna's opinions extended to careers, marriages, and other major life decisions. He admitted that one of the reasons he chose to become a doctor was because it was a profession that she deemed acceptable. His mother accepted the profession of the profession. doctor. Prosecutor Sarah Dugan asked Robert how involved Donna remained in her children's lives after they were grown. Robert explained that she stayed very involved, especially with Wendy, and to a lesser extent with Charlie. He said that she was the least involved with him, partly because he was the oldest and lived farther away. And when asked if he considered his mother's involvement to be healthy or more like micromanaging, Robert answered that it leaned toward being overly involved

and controlling. So he just went beyond micromanaging. No, overly involved and controlling, particularly when it came to personal matters like relationships. Robert added that Charlie had always required more attention than the other children. But when Wendy's marriage began to unravel, Donna's focus shifted more toward her. At one point, Duke can ask whether Robert viewed his mother as mentally sharp and calculating or more gullible. And the defense objected, prompting both sides to approach the bench. And after the judge sustained the objection, Dugan shifted her questioning, asking whether Robert thought Donna and Charlie were dependent on each other. Robert responded that it was Charlie who leaned more heavily on Donna, relying on her to help organize his life, including

setting up the dental practice. Robert also testified that throughout his life, Donna handled the payroll for the family's dental practice. And when asked whether Donna was the type of person to simply do something without hesitation or to ask questions first, Robert said she always asked questions. Duke and then turned to Donna's feelings about Dan Markell. Robert explained that when Wendy first began dating Dan, Donna was supportive and positive about the relationship. But that changed once the marriage began to deteriorate. Robert said he never heard anything negative about Dan until after Wendy had already decided to move out. And by 2014, however, he described his mother as hating Dan. Robert also characterized Wendy during the divorce as playing the role of a damsel

in distress. He recalled Donna telling him that Dan was killing Wendy. That's in quotes, killing Wendy through depositions and court motions and describing her daughter as going through a very difficult time. Dugan next asked Robert how he learned that Wendy planned to leave her marriage. And Robert said his mother was the one who told him, explaining that she had gone to Tallahassee, rented Wendy a new apartment, helped set it up, and moved money around so everything would be ready when Dan was out of town. Afterward, Donna told him almost gleefully that they had timed the phone call to Dan so he would find out Wendy had left just before giving a speech on stage. Robert also recalled a visit when Donna was in New York with him. And while there,

he said, she spent time on her computer working on Wendy. court filings trying to assist as much as possible with the divorce. She told him Wendy was seeking permission to relocate to Miami and also mentioned the proposal of a $1 million bribe. Robert testified that after Wendy left Dan, Donna spent a great deal of time in Tallahassee with her. And when asked whether it seemed like Donna or Charlie cared more about Wendy's divorce, Robert said it was definitely Donna. He explained that Charlie was more focused on himself and superficial things and

didn't seem particularly concerned about whether Wendy and the boys moved to South Florida. But Donna, on the other hand, was fixated on Wendy, relocating and landing a specific job in Miami with attorney Gary Cowan. Robert described it as an obsession, explaining that Donna believed becoming a partner at Cowan's law firm would allow Wendy to earn significantly more money for her children. Tension eventually arose because the firm couldn't hire Wendy until she secured permission to relocate. Robert also recalled that in the summer of 2014 before Dan's murder, Wendy sent him a text saying she had a new boyfriend.

He found this unusual since Wendy rarely shared details of her love life with him. The text included a request not to tell their parents, which true in objection and the judge instructed the jury to disregard it before calling counsel to a sidebar. Well, when questioning resumed, Dugan asked why Robert remembered the exchange so clearly. He explained that because the conversation was so out of character for his sister, after Dan was murdered, he felt compelled to tell police about the boyfriend, a man named Jeff, who others might not have known about. Dugan then shifted the questioning to Harvey Adelson's 70th birthday party in July 2014, just weeks before Dan was killed. Robert testified that Donna told him all Harvey wanted for his birthday was to have his children and grandchildren together rather than receive gifts. Celebration was held at the continuum condominium, which Robert described as a very secure building with armed guards and celebrity residents.

And when asked if he ever heard in the weeks leading up to the event that the party might be canceled, Robert said no. Dugan next asked Robert how he first learned that Dan Markell had been shot. He recalled that the day after the shooting, he was in a meeting when he received a text from his mother that read, quote, tragedy here, please call, end quote. Robert stepped out to return the call, and Dugan asked him to describe the conversation. Take a listen to this. Okay. And tell us about that conversation with her. So, you know, it's one of those moments that, you know, you'll just remember forever.

So I remember being, you know, in the lobby of the Weston. And I assumed something terrible had happened. And I wasn't ready for it. She said, you know, so we just want to let you know that Danny's been shot. And they took him to the hospital, but he didn't make it. And it just didn't make any sense. And, you know, I probably asked like a few medical questions. And they said they're driving up to go help Wendy.

And, you know, we'll talk to you later. We can't talk now. Okay. Was she crying in that conversation? Not in that conversation. Sir? No, she was not. Okay.

It was very matter of fact. Did she ever give you any further detail that weekend about how he'd been shot or other than just Danny was shot and he didn't make it? I think it was the next day. So the only really other time that I spoke with him that weekend, you know, I was in the airport going home like Sunday afternoon. So it was definitely the next day. And it was the first time I could actually have any kind of conversation. And, you know, one of the things that she told me is, you know, it bothered me, but I didn't have any other details about. But she said that, you know, someone went to the front door and said, are you Dan Markell?

And then shot him. And then I said, well, how could you know that? Who's telling you that? And she said, well, that's this what they're telling us. And it just. So she said someone told her that someone knocked on Danny's door, said, are you Dan Markell? He said yes, and the shooter shot him. That's the story I heard.

And, you know, later we found out that wasn't what happened. But that story bothered me a lot because there's only one way you could hear that story. Summer adventures are better with Minky Couture. From road trips to ball games, beach nights to backyard movies, Minky has you covered. Don't miss the everywhere blanket, water resistant, ultra soft and made for life on the go. Wherever summer takes you, bring comfort along. minky couture.com, the original best blanket ever.

Dugan also asked Robert about his first interactions with law enforcement after the shooting. He testified that FBI agents came to his home and he answered their questions. And shortly afterward, Donna called him and told him not to speak with police. Robert said he had to tell her that he already had. And now this is really interesting, in my opinion. I'll see what you guys think. Take a listen. After that conversation with the FBI, did Donna Adelson ever say anything to you

about having talked to law enforcement or the FBI? It was either that afternoon or the next day. But, you know, and she called me and said, you know, I just want to let you know. If the police come around, you know, don't talk to them. Okay. So she told you not to talk to law. enforcement. Correct. Did you let her know that you'd already, you already had talked to law enforcement? I said, I already did. What did you say to that? She said, oh, well, you don't know anything anyway.

You don't, you don't know anything anyway? Correct. Was that an unusual statement coming from your mother? Yeah, it just, I mean, everything that week was unusual, but I mean, I clearly didn't know anything, but I wasn't going to not talk to the FBI if they show up at my house. How did you respond? And let me ask you this. After the murder of Dan Markell, did Donna Adelson seem curious about who killed Dan Markell? No. Was there a complete lack of curiosity? Yeah, nobody seemed curious.

Did you actually ever ask her, like after the murder? Like, hey, what do you think happened? What do you? Yeah, and the conversations were kind of rerouted or that was certainly discouraged. And it was probably like maybe sometime like mid-August, you know, when I finally had a chance to ask and say, you know, what is going on? This was not a small event. This was getting a lot of notoriety. And I said, you know, what do you guys think happened?

And she had said, you know, I don't know and I don't care. It doesn't concern me. Robert noted that in the aftermath of Dan's murder, no one in the family seemed particularly curious about who was responsible, almost as if they already knew. Dugend then asked him about learning that sick Fredo, Garcia, and Luis Rivera had been arrested for the crime in May 2016. And Robert said he considered reaching out to his family, but since they really wanted to discuss Dan, he waited for them to contact him. And the next day, his mother, called to wish him and his wife a happy anniversary. Well, Robert decided to raise the subject then,

asking if she had heard about the arrest, he testified that Donna abruptly ended the call saying she had to go. Robert told the jury that was the last time he ever spoke to his mother. On cross-examination, defense attorney Jackie Fulford began by asking Robert how often he visited his family in Florida between 2012 and 2014. Robert explained that with two young children at the time, he mostly traveled down for Thanksgiving. He also attended Harvey's 70th birthday in 2014 and thought there might have been one or two additional visits in between. Typically, he stayed about three days since his medical practice required him to return to work. He added that he spoke to his parents by phone about once a week or every other week.

Bulford then shifted to the period around Dan's murder. She asked Robert when he came to Florida to be with his family after learning about Dan's death. And Robert answered simply, I didn't. Finally, Bulford addressed Robert's earlier testimony about Donna, telling him not to speak with law enforcement. She suggested that what Donna actually told him was that a family. friend and attorney Michael Weinstein had advised the family not to talk to police. Robert acknowledged

that was correct. With that, Fulford ended her questioning. And the final witness of the day was Officer Brandon with the Tallahassee Police Department. He testified that he responded to the scene at Dan Markell's home on Trescott Drive in 2014. So on the scene. Brandon said he arrived around 11, 15 a.m., which by that time, other officers and EMS were already on site. His assignment that day was to maintain the crime scene perimeter, keeping people away from the area, redirecting traffic, and ensuring no vehicles entered. Brennan explained that he placed crime scene tape a short distance north of the house and then stationed himself in his cruiser to monitor the area.

Prosecutor Sarah Dugan showed him a map, and Brandon pointed out exactly where he had been positioned on Trescott Drive. Now, if you have been following the other trials related to Dan Markell, there have been other trials we all know that have been following this case, you do know that this has been a point of debate in Wendy's account, whether she could have seen the police roadblock by slightly turning onto Trescott Drive, which is where Dan Markell live, and then quickly turning back onto Centerville Road. An officer Brandon's testimony and the map he referenced,

showed that a vehicle would have had to travel quite a distance down the road and around curves to actually see the roadblock and the crime scene tape. Dugan then asked if any vehicles approached his position and countered the roadblock and had to turn around and Brandon said several did, but he recalled one in particular. Between 12 and 1 p.m., he saw a maroon Honda Odyssey turn around. He had been informed. This was the type of vehicle of the victim's ex-wife, Wendy Markell, was set to drive. The officers noted it in case she arrived with the children so they could gently inform her of the situation.

And although Brandon did not see the driver, he testified that the vehicle's behavior stood out. Unlike other cars that slowed down to try to figure out what was happening, this van pulled up, turned around, and left without hesitation, giving the impression it wasn't curious about the scene at all. But with that, Judge Everett said that court was going to break for the day. And what a moment to break on. And that ends with day two of the Donna Adelson trial. All right, everyone. Thank you.

Have a great night. We will see you tomorrow. We'll try to start doing these recaps earlier. As many of you know that follow our daily trial recaps, I can't tell you when I'm going to go live because it depends on the news that day, how quickly we can get these done and prepared. So hit subscribe and hit notifications because as soon as we know, we will share. And like I said, we will try to get them done earlier, but only time will tell. But one thing is for certain we will cover this trial until the end.

And may justice be served for Dan Markell. We'll see everyone. Before I switched to Wealthfront, my APY was probably 0.1. Once I switched to chiching, with a wealthfront cash account, earn up to 4.2% APY on your cash. I can trust wealthfront is taking care of me. Make your money earn more. Get started at Wealthfront.com. Clients were paid $1,000 for their testimonials, creating a conflict of interest. Howcomes vary. 3.3% base API as of January 30th, 2026, is representative variable and earned on funds swept to program banks. 0.65% new client boost for three months on up to $150,000.

Direct deposit $1,000 a month and fund an investing account for a 0.25% increase. Cash account offered by Wealthfront Brokerage LLC member FINRA SIPC, Not a Bank.