After Charlie Adelson verdict, a sense of relief for Markel family
Charlie Adelson, the wealthy and wily Fort Lauderdale dentist who managed to elude justice for years in the 2014 killing of Florida State law professor Dan Markel, was convicted Monday on all counts in his murder.
The 12-person jury deliberated only about three hours before announcing it had reached a unanimous decision. The quick verdict was a bad sign for the defense, which was hoping to walk away with a mistrial at least.
Adelson, 47, mouthed the word “no” and slowly put his head down on the defense table after the first verdict was read: guilty on first-degree murder. He stared ahead and showed little reaction as guilty verdicts were read on the remaining counts, conspiracy and solicitation to commit murder.
Leon Circuit Judge Stephen Everett ordered a pre-sentence investigation at the defense’s behest, something that could take a month to complete. He set a conference hearing for Dec. 12 at the courthouse.
The verdict marked the fourth conviction since Markel’s death and the first involving a member of the Adelson family, long suspected as the planners of the plot. Wendi Adelson, Markel’s exwife who testified in her brother’s trial, and her parents, Donna and Harvey
Adelson, have denied any involvement.
Assistant State Attorney Georgia Cappleman, who took questions from the media after the verdicts were announced, acknowledged that the Dan Markel murder remains under ongoing investigation. She declined to say whether anyone else will ever be charged.
“I don’t know the answer to that,” she said, “so stay tuned.”
Dan Markel’s parents:
‘A real sense of relief today’
Markel’s parents, Ruth and Phil Markel, along with his sister, Shelly, expressed relief in the hallway outside Courtroom 3G, where the trial began with jury selection on Oct. 23.
The three of them were in the courtroom for most of the trial. They declined to give a victim statement to the court after Adelson was found guilty. However, Everett said he will take their statements via Zoom at his sentencing hearing.
Ruth Markel thanked State Attorney Jack Campbell, who was in the courtroom when the verdicts were read, Cappleman and Assistant State Attorney Sarah Kathryn Dugan, who was at her side during the trial, and other prosecutors and investigators. The Markels did not want to comment on the possibility of future prosecutions.
“This has been a really long and terrible ordeal for all of us,” Shelly Markel said. “It’s taken a long toll on our lives. And there’s a real sense of relief today.”
No close member of Adelson’s family was in the courtroom. His parents, who had been listed as possible witnesses, were scratched from the stand in a pretrial agreement between the prosecution and defense.
Cappleman said she was thrilled with the verdict. She said prosecutors expected Adelson to perhaps put on some kind of blackmail defense but didn’t know about his “double extortion” story until Adelson’s lawyer, Dan Rashbaum, brought it up during his opening statement.
She told jurors before they went out
for deliberations that she wasn’t sure whether any of them thought the story was ridiculous or they were perhaps confused by the evidence. She said afterward that she’s “extremely worried” whenever the jury goes out.
“It’s not that I don’t trust these jurors or trust my case or trust the evidence or justice,” Cappleman said. “But you never know what’s going to happen. And there was a lot of information that was thrown at them. So I had to sort of hold my breath until the verdict came back.”
Rashbaum declined to comment as he and co-counsel, Kathryn Meyers, got onto an elevator with boxes of files and went down.
A murder-for-hire case that drew a national spotlight
The sensational case involved yearslong investigations by Tallahassee police and the FBI, a gang leader who flipped on his friends, wiretaps, recorded conversations in crowded restaurants, four arrests, three trials and a COVID delay. It was the subject of a popular true crime podcast and continues to make national news, with features on Dateline and 20/20.
Markel, then 41, was killed the morning of July 18, 2014, after dropping the two sons he shared with Wendi Adelson off at daycare, going to the gym and pulling into the garage of his home on Trescott Drive. Markel, who was shot twice in the head at point-blank range, died 14 hours later.
Investigators traced the shooting to a light green Toyota Prius that had been rented by the killers, Luis Rivera, a leader of the Latin Kings gang, and his close friend, Sigfredo Garcia. In 2016, Rivera fingered Garcia for the shooting and Katherine Magbanua as the killers’ communication link to Adelson.
Wendi Adelson, meanwhile, turned suspicions to her family when she told police in her interview the day of the murder that Adelson had joked about paying for a hit man but bought her a TV instead. The TV became her alibi when she set up a Best Buy appointment to have it fixed at the same time as the murder. Adelson was arrested last year after an FBI consultant was able to better clarify audio from an secretly recorded conversation in April 2016 between Charlie Adelson and Magbanua at the Dolce Vita restaurant. On the audio, he can be heard saying they would be at the airport already if police had any evidence and threatened to kill someone as he discussed a blackmailer who was actually an undercover FBI agent.
Risky ‘extortion’ defense gambit, putting Charlie Adelson on the stand fails to convince jury
During the eight-day testimony portion of the trial, prosecutors painted Adelson as a wealthy and arrogant “playboy” who thought he was smart enough to get away with murder. Cappleman called him a “mama’s boy” at one point who wanted to make his mother happy by putting an end to a bitter child custody battle between his little sister and Markel.
In her closing arguments, Cappleman said Adelson walled himself off from the conspirators and thought he was “untouchable.”
“Because if push ever really came to shove, who are you going to believe — an oral surgeon or a gang member,” Cappleman asked. “He’s banking on that.”
Charlie Adelson, who took the stand in his own defense, told jurors that on the night of the murder, Magbanua came to him in a panic and said people she knew killed Markel and that they wanted a third of a million dollars within 48 hours or the defendant would be killed. He testified that he never went to the police with that information because he was too scared. He let Magbanua leave his house the next morning with a purse filled with stapled-together cash totaling $138,000.
Cappleman noted that no one ever put a gun to his head and that Adelson agreed to make additional payments to Magbanua of $3,000 a month, something she derided as an implausible “extortion layaway.”
Rivera pleaded guilty and is spending 19 years in prison for second-degree murder. Garcia was convicted of murder at his joint trial with Maganua in 2019 and sentenced to life. Magbanua escaped her first trial with a hung jury but was convicted on all three counts last year in her second trial.
Jansen’s take: Charlie Adelson’s ‘magic show’ defense failed
Tim Jansen, partner in Jansen & Davis,
P.A., is a prominent criminal defense attorney in Tallahassee and former assistant U.S. attorney who worked major white collar crime cases as senior fraud prosecutor. He has represented numerous high-profile clients for years and is offering daily analysis on the Charlie Adelson trial to readers of the Tallahassee Democrat.
Closing Arguments is where the “rubber meets the road”. This is the opportunity for litigants to argue their case to the jury. It’s supposedly the only time a lawyer is allowed to make arguments to the jury. Judges routinely remind litigants of this prohibition throughout the trial. Much too often lawyers forget their rule and must be reminded!
In criminal cases, the state and federal government prosecutors carry the burden of proving a defendant’s guilt. As such, the prosecution is afforded the luxury of giving its initial closing argument first and is allowed a rebuttal argument after the defense gives its closing. This creates a major advantage for the prosecution. However, it is justified by the courts because they carry the burden of proof in criminal trials.
Prosecutor Georgia Cappleman delivered the closeting for the state in the State Of Florida v. Charles Adelson. In her Closing, the Prosecutor acknowledged her task is to prove his guilt of first-degree murder, conspiracy and solicitation beyond a reasonable doubt!
She did a chronological approach to her closing while at the same time attacking the magical extortion theory offered by the defense.
In undermining the defense theory, she noted that Rivera and Garcia were incapable of committing the murder for hire plot on their own. Even suggesting that they didn’t have the brains and it resources to travel to Tallahassee to commit this murder on their own without finances for traveling expenses. Cappleman says that within an hour of the shooting, the defendant’s sister, Wendi Adelson implicated him to the police about his joke of hiring a hitman. Cappleman then weaved in the motive to the murder by alluding to a book written by Wendi Adelson, wherein the main character was stuck in a certain geographical area because of child custody issues. In doing so the prosecution incorporated Wendi’s situation with the fictional character in analogizing the Adelson’s situation with Professor Markel.
In any murder case, the prosecution may prove motive, especially in a firstdegree murder case which requires premeditation. This simply means the murder was done intentionally and not because of heat of passion, negligence and or felony murder application. In proving the why, the defendant wanted
to commit the crime the prosecution alluded to the contentious divorce and child custody proceedings which prevented Wendi and her two boys from relocating to south Florida. Cappleman showed the jury numerous contentious emails between Donna Adelson and Wendi Adelson which demonstrated their vitriol and frustration with Professor Markel. This frustration was shared with the defendant on many occasions. Donna, the meddling matriarch of the family and Charlie the doting son decided to fix this problem in North Florida, Professor Dan Markel.
Next, the prosecution presented the How this crime was perpetrated. Charlie utilized Magbanua and her baby’s’ father, Garcia and Luis Rivera to commit the murder. Magbanua was the conduit between the killers and Charlie. She described the “seeds of the conspiracy” started on Oct. 31, 2013, and they took “root” in the Summer of 2014. Cappleman then described the murder and the subsequent criminal investigation. The criminal investigation, cameras, phone dumps, tower dumps, emails, wires and recordings all led to the same persons involved in the conspiracy and murder. The independent “breadcrumbs” led straight to the defendant, Charlie Adelson.
The prosecution identified piece by piece the evidence directly implicating the defendant. Cappleman scoffed at the extortion defense theory and highlighted numerous recordings and texts between Magbanua and the defendant which contradicted an extortion/victim relationship. She ended with recording between Donna and Charlie after “the FBI bump” and Donna responds to Charlie: “this probably involves both of us”. A very damning statement recorded by the FBI and wiretaps and consistent with the state’s theory that they are coconspirators to the murder.
The defense countered that the state doesn’t understand their own evidence they claim it’s a double extortion rather than a murder for hire. They claim Charlie and the Adelson family are victims of an elaborate extortion plot by mastermind, Magbanua, Garcia and Rivera. The highlight of the defense is that the State has failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the guilt of Charlie Adelson
Much of the defense rests on the credibility of the defendant, Charlie Adelson and the impeachment of Magbanua. Rashbaum mentioned his “pieces of the puzzle” analogy to the jury. In a long and confusing presentation, Rashbaum reiterated a highly suspect double extortion plot.
He provided explanations and suggestions as to why the jury should disregard, or otherwise infer that the conversations of Charlie on the recordings should be interpreted differently than as heard. He rambled for two hours how Charlie was feeling at the time of the events. He argued that it’s not what it appears to be on the recordings. He acknowledged that coded language was utilized by Donna, Charlie and Magbanua. At one point, Rashbaum claimed coded language was merely semantics without offering a more concrete explanation.
Rashbaum then went through the state’s witnesses and offered his analysis of their credibility and testimony. To prove his defense, Rashbaum must impeach all the witnesses for his theory to gain traction with the jury. Besides attacking Magbanua, Rashbaum attacked Jeff Lacasse’s credibility. This is a difficult task since he was one of the more believable witnesses in the case. In fact, self-deprecating humor added credibility to his testimony. This attack seriously unraveled his theory of defense. This defense required the jury to disbelieve all the recordings, wiretap recordings and text messages.
The defense’s biggest hurdle was explaining the testimony of Wendi Adelson. She testified that she just found out about the extortion theory when she walked into the courtroom. More problematic, during the cross examination by Cappleman, Wendi stated she didn’t know if she believed this extortion. His own sister didn’t believe his double extortion theory. Rashbaum continued to attack Magbanua for not reason. Her testimony was limited, and Prosecutor Cappleman acknowledged her issues. However, Charlie chose her as a witness when he solicited her to hire her ex boyfriend to commit the murder. In his final comments he argued the state hadn’t proved his client’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
In her rebuttal, Cappleman made short work of the defense’s extortion theory. She asked the jury to use your common sense and consider the Charlie Adelson on the tapes and Recording in reaching a verdict.
In finality she asked the jury to determine who put on a “magic show.” In three hours, the jury found that the defendant presented a “magic show,” which they rebuffed.
And they found him guilty on a three counts, murder, conspiracy and solicitation.
Contact Jeff Burlew at jburlew@tallahassee.com or follow 850-599-2180.