October 27, 2023 • 9 mins
Former prosecutor, criminal defense attorney Carl Steinbeck talks over the jury selection as the trial of Charlie Adelson begins in the murder of former FSU law professor Dan Markel in July 2014.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
It's the Morning Show with Preston Scott. Big story in the press box,
brought to you by Custom Care DryCleaning. And that's Grant Allen running the
radio program on Preston. Good debYou with us Thursday, and this will
be the day that the trial officiallybegins of Charlie Adelson. Charlie is accused
(00:23):
of being involved in the plot tokill former FSU law professor Dan Markel about
five minutes from where our studio isright now. He is charged with first
degree murder, conspiracy to commit firstdegree murder, and solicitation. We followed
this trial, and so has CarlSteinbeck, our guest, retired lieutenant colonel
(00:45):
with the US Army Judge Advocate General'sCorps. He's now in private practice.
He's been a prosecutor, a publicdefender, and he joins us this morning
following the trial of Charlie Adelson.Good morning, Carl, How are you,
Carl, Yes, good morning Preston. Oops, there you are all
(01:06):
right? Hey? Tell me nowwe understand that the jury has been picked.
There's fifteen, so that's twelve withthree alternates. Take me to both
sides of this. As a defenseattorney, what kinds of questions are you
asking what are you trying to findout about a perspective juror Well, the
main thing of what they're trying tofind out is how much they have learned
(01:27):
about the case beforehand? Have theyform any opinions? Do they have an
inflexible attitude about the guilt or innocenceof the accused? And they're also trying
to find out do they have somethingagainst in Charlie's particular case, or I
want to know whether they have someadversity to folks that are being wealthy and
things of that nature. So they'rereally trying to see if they have any
(01:49):
biases or prejudices against the accused.You're going as deep as okay, have
you been divorced? Where their custodyissues? I mean, all of that
becomes fair game in the questioning,right right, because if they maybe have
animosity towards their ex spouse or somethingand they had a custy battle as well,
and if they're may be bitter aboutthat, they may hold resentment against
the Aedelsons for that. Now,that's what the defense jorneys are trying to
(02:13):
flush out. You and I havea little bit of an intersection and that's
the YouTube channel Surviving the Survivor.I've been on a few of those episodes.
I know you have as well.Let's turn this around. I know
you've been following this case. I'vebeen following it since it happened. I'm
curious as a prosecutor, knowing whatyou know, and some of the evidence
(02:35):
is certainly well known to the public. What are you looking for in a
jur Well, I think as aprosecutor, the main thing I'm looking for
is to make sure someone's going tofollow the law. You don't have as
much of an issue with like biasesand prejudices and things of that nature of
the prosecutor. But you can,for zacple as you have somebody that's against
law enforcement, or somebody's against aparticular type of and they maybe they don't
(03:00):
want to listen to it because maybethey've been a victim themselves. There's a
lot of different dynamics you got tosort of flesh out as well. So
but mainly you don't have as muchof a difficult job of trying to weed
out jurors as much as you asa defense council. So I think,
I think what I've heard about thefifteen, I've been selective. I think
it's a fair, fair assembly forboth sides. When you're now looking at
(03:21):
opening statements being made today, Charlie'sbeen held for a good while now,
and I understand that even Katie mcbanuais back in town and is at the
Leon County Jail, which suggests she'sgoing to be testifying at some point early
on. But in your opening statement, taking take me to both sides of
this from a defense perspective first,and then we'll take a quick break.
(03:46):
Well, I think for the defenseperspective that it's going to be something that
they're not going to not to lookforward to. And think about how much
Katie has insider knowledge of what wasgoing on with this murder scheme of Dan
Mark Hill. She was very closewith Charlie Edelson and the murder scheme itself.
And we know this because the adultJa Vita videotape after there was an
(04:09):
FBI bump in Miami towards Charlie's mother, Donna, it was really you really
set the scene and and a floryof activity for who was involved in this.
And so Katie when she got broughtinto the restaurant to talk about what
to do next with this bump becausethere was an outsider coming in thing.
They wanted five thousand dollars for oneof the other hitmen, and so the
(04:30):
conversation that occurred between Charlie and Katiewas very insightful to show that Charlie was
definitely in on it, in themajor planner for this thing. So Katie
of course denied that in her twotrials. But now she's, you know,
facing life without paroles, so she'sgot nothing but now the opportunity to
tell the truth. And I understandlast week she'd been brought to the courthouse
(04:53):
for like twelve hours for interviewing amonglawyers, whereas prosecution offense, I'm not
sure. But in any event,despite the fact she's lied two different times
for many hours on the witness standin front of two differently on county juris,
I think that if she comes cleanand she has a credible story on
why she lied and maybe how herdefense attorneys were paid and those kinds of
(05:15):
things you follow the money, Ithink a jury's going to really buy into
this, and it's also going totake away the fact that the defense attorneys
are going to say that she's theone that made this scheme behind Charlie's back.
So I think if you have herthere, they can assess her own
credibility and she can take this thingout from that. Oh, the fun
doesn't stop here. Find more onhis blog WFLA FM dot com. Keyword
(05:40):
preston. We're going to be talkingabout it each morning for the duration of
the trial. Carl Steinbeck joins usthis morning and former prosecutor and defence counsel,
not just in the military, butin the state Public Defender's office.
He's from McKinney, Texas. Followingthe trial of Charlie Aedelson. I have
(06:02):
mentioned Carl that I have served forsix months years ago as a grand juror
on capital cases here in Leon County. My summary of what I have seen
and what I have heard in termsof the circumstantial evidence. Were I a
(06:23):
juror involved from a grand jury perspective, I would absolutely say there was probable
cause to move ahead with an indictment. That's my perspective. What's yours.
Oh, I think there's not onlyrock solid evidence to go forward with indictment,
but I think there's an overwhelming evidenceof Charlie Aedelson's guilt I think the
jury's going to come back really quickon this, and I think it is.
(06:46):
If you look at the body languagefor Charlie, anybody who looks at
that, you're going to see thatthis guy looks like he's pretty much doesn't
have much of a defense. He'she can't even look the jury in the
eye. As defense tourneys asma standup and look at the jury. He
couldn't even look him in the eye, and he just sort of looks such
like he's checked out. So it'sprobably the worst I've ever seen of all
the years I've seen defendants there facingserious crimes like this, He's probably has
(07:11):
the worst body language I've ever seen. Before we get too far down the
road, I want you to explainto our listeners the term bump. Uh.
I know what it means, butI want you to break down from
your experience when you say that therewas a bump? What what was that?
What is that? Well, they'retrying to get some activity. They
had a wiretap authorized and to initiateconversation among the folks that committed the crime,
(07:39):
the co conspirators. What they wantedto do was create in an event
to get them to start scurring anddiscuss this this event among themselves. So
the event was an FBI agent wentundercover, went outside the high rise complex
of the the ap pearents of Charlie, Donna, and Harvey, and Donna
was happening to walk back or walkedto the school of the grandkids that they
(08:03):
were watching over. And what happenedwas they came up to her and gave
her a letter that said we wantfive thousand dollars call this number. And
also wrapped around that note was thefront headlines of the Tallahousee Democrat, which
indicated that it was a front pagefrom when Dan Markel was murdered in his
garage, So right away they knewwhat this was about. He mentioned that,
(08:26):
you know, you took care ofthe We helped take care of the
issue up north. You now oweus some more. So that got this
automatically. Charlie trying to talk withhis mom and they had wire taps going
on. It was a brilliant moveby law enforcement, and so he got
a lot of incriminating information between Harveyand his mom Donna, and he also
then hurry up and met with Katiemcbanlaw and from there we have really additional
(08:50):
incriminating evidence against Charlie. In fact, he said to Katie and has picked
up on the tape that he wantedto make sure that they killed this agent.
They didn't know it was an agent, obviously, they thought it was
a relative of one they hit men. So what happened was that that's really
the main thing that kept Charlie behindbars. He probably would have been out
on bond if he wasn't talking aboutthat. He also was talking about fleeing
(09:13):
the country if they had evidence againstthem that they knew about. So those
two things are really the main thingsthat are the reason why a Dennis with
no prior Johnny record has still beenbehind bars for over a year and a
half now. Carl, I can'twait to continue the coverage of this because
I believe justice never ever gets old. And I appreciate your time this morning,
(09:35):
your expertise, and I'm sure we'lltalk again. Thank you, sir,
Yes, sir, thank you.Carl Steinbeck with us and we're talking
about the trial of Charlie Aedelson.It will begin today with opening statements.
We will cover all of that tomorrowmorning here in the Morning Show with Preston Scott
It's the Morning Show with Preston Scott. Big story in the press box,
brought to you by Custom Care DryCleaning. And that's Grant Allen running the
radio program on Preston. Good debYou with us Thursday, and this will
be the day that the trial officiallybegins of Charlie Adelson. Charlie is accused
(00:23):
of being involved in the plot tokill former FSU law professor Dan Markel about
five minutes from where our studio isright now. He is charged with first
degree murder, conspiracy to commit firstdegree murder, and solicitation. We followed
this trial, and so has CarlSteinbeck, our guest, retired lieutenant colonel
(00:45):
with the US Army Judge Advocate General'sCorps. He's now in private practice.
He's been a prosecutor, a publicdefender, and he joins us this morning
following the trial of Charlie Adelson.Good morning, Carl, How are you,
Carl, Yes, good morning Preston. Oops, there you are all
(01:06):
right? Hey? Tell me nowwe understand that the jury has been picked.
There's fifteen, so that's twelve withthree alternates. Take me to both
sides of this. As a defenseattorney, what kinds of questions are you
asking what are you trying to findout about a perspective juror Well, the
main thing of what they're trying tofind out is how much they have learned
(01:27):
about the case beforehand? Have theyform any opinions? Do they have an
inflexible attitude about the guilt or innocenceof the accused? And they're also trying
to find out do they have somethingagainst in Charlie's particular case, or I
want to know whether they have someadversity to folks that are being wealthy and
things of that nature. So they'rereally trying to see if they have any
(01:49):
biases or prejudices against the accused.You're going as deep as okay, have
you been divorced? Where their custodyissues? I mean, all of that
becomes fair game in the questioning,right right, because if they maybe have
animosity towards their ex spouse or somethingand they had a custy battle as well,
and if they're may be bitter aboutthat, they may hold resentment against
the Aedelsons for that. Now,that's what the defense jorneys are trying to
(02:13):
flush out. You and I havea little bit of an intersection and that's
the YouTube channel Surviving the Survivor.I've been on a few of those episodes.
I know you have as well.Let's turn this around. I know
you've been following this case. I'vebeen following it since it happened. I'm
curious as a prosecutor, knowing whatyou know, and some of the evidence
(02:35):
is certainly well known to the public. What are you looking for in a
jur Well, I think as aprosecutor, the main thing I'm looking for
is to make sure someone's going tofollow the law. You don't have as
much of an issue with like biasesand prejudices and things of that nature of
the prosecutor. But you can,for zacple as you have somebody that's against
law enforcement, or somebody's against aparticular type of and they maybe they don't
(03:00):
want to listen to it because maybethey've been a victim themselves. There's a
lot of different dynamics you got tosort of flesh out as well. So
but mainly you don't have as muchof a difficult job of trying to weed
out jurors as much as you asa defense council. So I think,
I think what I've heard about thefifteen, I've been selective. I think
it's a fair, fair assembly forboth sides. When you're now looking at
(03:21):
opening statements being made today, Charlie'sbeen held for a good while now,
and I understand that even Katie mcbanuais back in town and is at the
Leon County Jail, which suggests she'sgoing to be testifying at some point early
on. But in your opening statement, taking take me to both sides of
this from a defense perspective first,and then we'll take a quick break.
(03:46):
Well, I think for the defenseperspective that it's going to be something that
they're not going to not to lookforward to. And think about how much
Katie has insider knowledge of what wasgoing on with this murder scheme of Dan
Mark Hill. She was very closewith Charlie Edelson and the murder scheme itself.
And we know this because the adultJa Vita videotape after there was an
(04:09):
FBI bump in Miami towards Charlie's mother, Donna, it was really you really
set the scene and and a floryof activity for who was involved in this.
And so Katie when she got broughtinto the restaurant to talk about what
to do next with this bump becausethere was an outsider coming in thing.
They wanted five thousand dollars for oneof the other hitmen, and so the
(04:30):
conversation that occurred between Charlie and Katiewas very insightful to show that Charlie was
definitely in on it, in themajor planner for this thing. So Katie
of course denied that in her twotrials. But now she's, you know,
facing life without paroles, so she'sgot nothing but now the opportunity to
tell the truth. And I understandlast week she'd been brought to the courthouse
(04:53):
for like twelve hours for interviewing amonglawyers, whereas prosecution offense, I'm not
sure. But in any event,despite the fact she's lied two different times
for many hours on the witness standin front of two differently on county juris,
I think that if she comes cleanand she has a credible story on
why she lied and maybe how herdefense attorneys were paid and those kinds of
(05:15):
things you follow the money, Ithink a jury's going to really buy into
this, and it's also going totake away the fact that the defense attorneys
are going to say that she's theone that made this scheme behind Charlie's back.
So I think if you have herthere, they can assess her own
credibility and she can take this thingout from that. Oh, the fun
doesn't stop here. Find more onhis blog WFLA FM dot com. Keyword
(05:40):
preston. We're going to be talkingabout it each morning for the duration of
the trial. Carl Steinbeck joins usthis morning and former prosecutor and defence counsel,
not just in the military, butin the state Public Defender's office.
He's from McKinney, Texas. Followingthe trial of Charlie Aedelson. I have
(06:02):
mentioned Carl that I have served forsix months years ago as a grand juror
on capital cases here in Leon County. My summary of what I have seen
and what I have heard in termsof the circumstantial evidence. Were I a
(06:23):
juror involved from a grand jury perspective, I would absolutely say there was probable
cause to move ahead with an indictment. That's my perspective. What's yours.
Oh, I think there's not onlyrock solid evidence to go forward with indictment,
but I think there's an overwhelming evidenceof Charlie Aedelson's guilt I think the
jury's going to come back really quickon this, and I think it is.
(06:46):
If you look at the body languagefor Charlie, anybody who looks at
that, you're going to see thatthis guy looks like he's pretty much doesn't
have much of a defense. He'she can't even look the jury in the
eye. As defense tourneys asma standup and look at the jury. He
couldn't even look him in the eye, and he just sort of looks such
like he's checked out. So it'sprobably the worst I've ever seen of all
the years I've seen defendants there facingserious crimes like this, He's probably has
(07:11):
the worst body language I've ever seen. Before we get too far down the
road, I want you to explainto our listeners the term bump. Uh.
I know what it means, butI want you to break down from
your experience when you say that therewas a bump? What what was that?
What is that? Well, they'retrying to get some activity. They
had a wiretap authorized and to initiateconversation among the folks that committed the crime,
(07:39):
the co conspirators. What they wantedto do was create in an event
to get them to start scurring anddiscuss this this event among themselves. So
the event was an FBI agent wentundercover, went outside the high rise complex
of the the ap pearents of Charlie, Donna, and Harvey, and Donna
was happening to walk back or walkedto the school of the grandkids that they
(08:03):
were watching over. And what happenedwas they came up to her and gave
her a letter that said we wantfive thousand dollars call this number. And
also wrapped around that note was thefront headlines of the Tallahousee Democrat, which
indicated that it was a front pagefrom when Dan Markel was murdered in his
garage, So right away they knewwhat this was about. He mentioned that,
(08:26):
you know, you took care ofthe We helped take care of the
issue up north. You now oweus some more. So that got this
automatically. Charlie trying to talk withhis mom and they had wire taps going
on. It was a brilliant moveby law enforcement, and so he got
a lot of incriminating information between Harveyand his mom Donna, and he also
then hurry up and met with Katiemcbanlaw and from there we have really additional
(08:50):
incriminating evidence against Charlie. In fact, he said to Katie and has picked
up on the tape that he wantedto make sure that they killed this agent.
They didn't know it was an agent, obviously, they thought it was
a relative of one they hit men. So what happened was that that's really
the main thing that kept Charlie behindbars. He probably would have been out
on bond if he wasn't talking aboutthat. He also was talking about fleeing
(09:13):
the country if they had evidence againstthem that they knew about. So those
two things are really the main thingsthat are the reason why a Dennis with
no prior Johnny record has still beenbehind bars for over a year and a
half now. Carl, I can'twait to continue the coverage of this because
I believe justice never ever gets old. And I appreciate your time this morning,
(09:35):
your expertise, and I'm sure we'lltalk again. Thank you, sir,
Yes, sir, thank you.Carl Steinbeck with us and we're talking
about the trial of Charlie Aedelson.It will begin today with opening statements.
We will cover all of that tomorrowmorning here in the Morning Show with Preston Scott
Popular Podcasts
NFL Daily with Gregg Rosenthal
Gregg Rosenthal and a rotating crew of elite NFL Media co-hosts, including Patrick Claybon, Colleen Wolfe, Steve Wyche, Nick Shook and Jourdan Rodrigue of The Athletic get you caught up daily on all the NFL news and analysis you need to be smarter and funnier than your friends.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com