August 22, 2025 • 32 mins
Welcome to Like Mother Like Murder's Day 1 Trial updates providing daily coverage in the ongoing trial of Donna Adelson for the murder of Dan Markel. We’ve been covering this case for years now and so far 4 people have been found guilty in the plot to murder this father of two young boys.
Now Donna Adelson, Dan Markle's former mother-in-law, is the latest conspirator to stand trial for this crime. Rachel and Heather will continue to provide coverage and will be joined by special guests throughout this series.
Day 1 Trial
Guests:
@twistedanduncorked
@itstrulytwisted
@blackcoffeecrimecrochet
@crimetoburn
Get ad free episodes, bonus content, and support our show!
Join our Patreon!
Become an Apple subscriber!
(all options are less than $5)
Other LMLM Markel-Adelson Episodes:
Apple Podcasts
Dan Markel & Wendi Adelson
Charlie Adelson on Trial
Charlie Adelson Guilty
Donna Adelson Arrested
Markel & Adelson - Part 2 (recaps Leading up to Donna's Trial)
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/like-mother-like-murder--6210055/support.
Now Donna Adelson, Dan Markle's former mother-in-law, is the latest conspirator to stand trial for this crime. Rachel and Heather will continue to provide coverage and will be joined by special guests throughout this series.
Day 1 Trial
Guests:
@twistedanduncorked
@itstrulytwisted
@blackcoffeecrimecrochet
@crimetoburn
Get ad free episodes, bonus content, and support our show!
Join our Patreon!
Become an Apple subscriber!
(all options are less than $5)
Other LMLM Markel-Adelson Episodes:
Apple Podcasts
Dan Markel & Wendi Adelson
Charlie Adelson on Trial
Charlie Adelson Guilty
Donna Adelson Arrested
Markel & Adelson - Part 2 (recaps Leading up to Donna's Trial)
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/like-mother-like-murder--6210055/support.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:12):
Welcome to Like Mother Like Murder. I am Rachel and
I'm Heather.
Speaker 2 (00:18):
We bring you the good, the badass, and the crime.
Speaker 1 (00:23):
This is Like Mother, Like Murder, and.
Speaker 2 (00:34):
Right now is Like Mother Like Murders Trial updates, where
we will be providing daily coverage in the ongoing trial
of Donna Adelson for the murder of Dan Markel. We've
been covering this case for years now, and so far
four people have been found guilty in the plot to
murder this father of two young.
Speaker 3 (00:52):
Boys, and Donna Adelson, dan Markel's former mother in law,
is the latest conspirator to stand trial for this crime.
Rachel and I will be continuing to provide coverage every
day and will be joined by special guests throughout this
special series. We will be bringing you this every day
that there is trial coverage.
Speaker 1 (01:12):
So let's do this. Today is technically day.
Speaker 3 (01:16):
Three if you want to count jury selection, but really
it's the first day because they started with the opening
statements today for the Donna Adelson trial for the murder
of Dan Markel. Now she stands with the same things
that everybody else pretty much in this trial has been
accused of, so murder, conspiracy to commit murder, and then
(01:41):
the third charge, which is some other kind of conspiracy
murder charge. But basically she is now the fifth person
so already who's been charged with this. We've got the
two men who were the hired hitmen right for this crime,
who actually traveled all the way from Miami to Tallahassee.
(02:04):
We've got the trigger man and the driver who were
hired to commit this. We've got the trigger man's baby
mama who stood trial already and was found guilty. We
also have Charlie Adelson, who was the trigger man's baby
mama's boyfriend, who also was found guilty.
Speaker 1 (02:26):
And he is the brother.
Speaker 3 (02:31):
Of Wendy Adelson, who was the ex wife of the victim.
Speaker 1 (02:35):
So if you're following here, it just like I should.
Speaker 3 (02:39):
I should have like a whiteboard behind me. The victim
in all of this is Dan Markel. His ex wife
is Wendy Adelson. Her brother was Charlie Adelson. Charlie Adelson
was dating Katie Macbanawa, whose baby daddy was the trick man,
(03:01):
and baby daddy's best friend was the driver.
Speaker 1 (03:05):
Now driver triggerman.
Speaker 2 (03:07):
Uh, you gotta say, you gotta add the name though.
So we have Lewis Rivera, and we have.
Speaker 1 (03:14):
Garcia.
Speaker 3 (03:15):
These were the driver and the trigger, Van Matt, Catherine Macbanawa,
and Charlie Adelson. These four have already been found guilty
and then so we have all of them now. Donna Adelson,
this is the matriarch of the Aidelson family. She is
now on trial, and the prosecution is using a lot
(03:39):
of the same evidence that has already been brought forth,
specifically in Katie's trial and in Charlie's trial, and they're
they're basically saying that all of this trickled down basically
from from Donna, that it was Donna's whole. Like in
the in their opening statements, they really the prosecution relied
(04:00):
heavily on saying that like Donna Adelson as the maintriarch,
she persuaded, she manipulated, and she basically was telling Wendy like,
we need to do any and everything we possibly can
to get you and the boys down here. There's the
other than the things we've heard before, which is, let's
(04:22):
basically bribe Dan Markel with a million dollars to let
you just like come down here. The other thing that
I actually hadn't heard before, or even if I had,
I forgot get this.
Speaker 1 (04:32):
So A big part.
Speaker 3 (04:33):
Of Dan Markel's identity was he was very very into
it and making sure as well that his sons understood
their Jewish faith. Okay, And so one thing that Donna
Adelson apparently told Wendy Adelson to do was to take
(04:56):
pictures of them in front of like a Catholic church
and pretend to get them like baptized in the Catholic church, to.
Speaker 1 (05:04):
Like egg him on and like everything that they were
get dirty.
Speaker 2 (05:09):
Like her part the things that you hear from her
is just dirty. I love in the news article so
bad it is. I love in the news articles though
that it says like you see the headlines saying like
normal person or matriarch, mastermind, like it's all about because
it's stemmed down, trickled down from her.
Speaker 1 (05:29):
Also, Hi, Jasmine, right, thank you for joining us. Yeah,
so we are joined today.
Speaker 3 (05:36):
Our special guests today as we as we go through
the first day of this trial is April and Jasmine.
April from Crime to Burn and Jasmine from Black Coffee,
Crime and Crochet.
Speaker 4 (05:49):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (05:50):
So they're basically painting this picture, right that Donna Adelson
is this mastermind and she put all of this together
and she's saying that, you know, Donna was manipulating, very,
very involved in Wendy's life. They provided evidence that basically
she had laid out a list of like basically match
(06:12):
dot com guys and was like, Oh, Wendy, all of
these seem really good.
Speaker 1 (06:16):
You should date all of these guys.
Speaker 3 (06:18):
And she, you know, she had been nagging at her
son Charlie, like, we really need to find a way
to get rid of Dan. We really need to find
a way to get Wendy down here. And the big
thing that I think super the the prosecution is really
going to get into is that whole thing where Dan
(06:39):
Markel had filed a motion. And what we have to
remember is Dan Markel and Wendy both went to law school,
were both lawyers. Okay, So their divorce and their child
custody it was messy, It was dirty.
Speaker 1 (06:54):
There was a lot of motions filed.
Speaker 3 (06:55):
It was it was and the the divorce had been
filed by finalized, but the custody the battle was ongoing
and it was messy. So Dan Markel and had really recently,
up to the point of him being killed, murdered in
cold blood on the street, had filed emotion saying that Donna,
(07:17):
the grandmother of his children, could not have unsupervised contact
with him and Wendy's sons because she had been saying
bad things about basically bad mouthing him to their children,
calling him stupid things like this in front of the kids.
And from what I understand, he heard about it because
(07:39):
the boys would come home and say, Grandma says you're stupid.
So he had filed emotion basically saying, look, she can't
have unsupervised contact with them, because I will not have
my sons exposed to a woman in their life calling
their father dumb. And it was not too long after
this motion was put out that he was killed.
Speaker 1 (08:00):
So that's that got brought up by the prosecution and
they're opening statement.
Speaker 3 (08:05):
And then the other thing that that they brought up,
of course, was the conversations that she has with Charlie
after the quote unquote bump, which is when the when
the authorities come in and they basically under the guise
of like a blackmail go up to Donna and they're like, hey, look,
we know that you're taking care of Louis Rivera, we
(08:27):
know you're taking care of sick Ferry to Garcia, we
know you're taking care of Katie macbanawhile basically paying them
off for this, this hired hit. You need to also
be taking care of like everybody else. And instead of
doing what a normal not guilty person would do, instead
of going to the police and say somebody's blackmailing me
for something, she immediately contacts her son and is saying
(08:50):
and starts talking in code and starts saying, we need
to pay these people off.
Speaker 1 (08:54):
No, no, no, no no, And.
Speaker 2 (08:56):
It's just so good, it was so guilty.
Speaker 1 (08:59):
How much code was there? Actually? Hi, Alisha, we are
now joined by Alicia as well.
Speaker 5 (09:06):
A thing wanted to say, yay, please.
Speaker 1 (09:11):
Jas On as well.
Speaker 2 (09:13):
Now now we've got five people here talking about this,
I wanted to really quickly talk about how you were
talking about the kids.
Speaker 1 (09:19):
So I did not watch the entire trial.
Speaker 2 (09:21):
I'm getting a lot of the updates from you, but
there were certain things that I watched, and one of
the things talking about the kids was they were talking
to I forget exactly who he was, but he might.
Speaker 1 (09:34):
Have been, I don't know.
Speaker 2 (09:36):
The The point has nothing to do with him other
than the fact that they were Like, so you're saying
that you got that statement from the emails that that
Donna called Dan Markel names or something like that, and
he goes, no, I didn't get those from the emails.
Those are not that's not the exact words in the emails.
(09:56):
I got that directly from the grandchildren. And he's like, yeah, yeah,
but the grandchildren are what three and four at this
age and kind of like trying to downplay that. And
I feel like, for me as a mother and just
in general, I feel like that age is probably one
of the most truthful ages, where they're just bloody exactly
what's on their minds.
Speaker 3 (10:16):
What grandma just said to me in the car on
the way over here, Oh for sure, Like that's how
you're like, oh for sure, that's what grandma just definitely
said to you in the car on the way over here.
Speaker 1 (10:25):
That's how I felt.
Speaker 2 (10:26):
I was, yeah, okay, but oh, let me downplay this
because they're.
Speaker 1 (10:28):
Three and four, No, sir, I know, yeah, I know,
you're stretch up.
Speaker 3 (10:32):
Play it for sure from the what do they say
from the mouths of mouths of babes, Like that's a
real thing. The other thing that I was like, this
is just such guilty information, and this is so a
lot of what we heard today was was things that
we've heard before.
Speaker 1 (10:47):
Like I said, all came out.
Speaker 3 (10:48):
A lot of this came out in Charlie's trial, a
lot of it came out in Katie mc manama's trial.
One thing though, that is new because it happened more recently.
The prosecution presented a supposed alleged I have to say
alleged and everything we're saying, and we have to stay
alleged because she's currently on trial. She has not been
found guilty, but allegedly Donna Adelson had written had been
(11:13):
speaking to people while she's in jail basically saying, I
will pay you allegedly, I will pay you in veneers,
I'll pay you in money, I'll get you prescription drugs,
whatever you need if you will basically perjure yourself and
lie and say Katie magbanawah told you to do this,
(11:33):
that and the other. And they even provide like a
written out alleged script that this informant said, this is
line for line what Donna Adelson told me to come
up on the stand and say to basically say that
Donna Adelson had nothing to do with it, and this
(11:53):
was all actually, like Katie mag Baniwa, and I was
just like, so this is brand new information, right. This
all happened when after Donald Adelson had been taken into custody.
Speaker 1 (12:04):
But I was like, wow, wow, wow, wow wow wow.
Speaker 3 (12:07):
And I'm like, so I'm waiting for that freaking witness
testimony and we all know Jelhouse informants, you have to
be very careful with that testimony. But if this can
be like in any way substantiated this quote unquote alleged script,
this piece of paper, I'm like, oh my gosh. And
so anyway, the prosecution's opening was really it was really
(12:30):
well done. That that prosecutor does a good job.
Speaker 1 (12:34):
The defense is opening. I mean maybe I'm just bia.
Speaker 2 (12:37):
I was gonna say, you're definitely biased, but how could
you know everything that's going on here?
Speaker 1 (12:42):
It's really hard, it is, it is.
Speaker 3 (12:46):
But the other thing that really got me in this
case was the judge. He is an insanely patient man.
So this judge has been dealing with this case.
Speaker 1 (12:58):
Now for years.
Speaker 3 (13:00):
I mean Donna Adelson was first arrested, like, I mean,
ye over.
Speaker 1 (13:06):
A year ago. I want to say it was.
Speaker 2 (13:09):
The end of twenty twenty three, because I think that
sounds arrested because I mean, she did try to flee,
so there's that that's right, or allegedly try.
Speaker 1 (13:19):
To flee to Vietnam.
Speaker 2 (13:21):
But it's like she was arrested I think the end
of twenty twenty three, and then she was gonna have
trial in twenty twenty four. That never happened because the
defense attorney ended up quitting because of you know, conflict
of interest.
Speaker 1 (13:35):
And then because he was Charlie's attorney. Is this the
same judge that did Charlie's I don't believe.
Speaker 3 (13:42):
I don't think it's the same judge who presided over
Charlie's trial. But it's been the same judge that's been
presiding over Donna's trial, and so he's been dealing with
all of like this, change in lawyers, change in this,
and then So it was so funny because the minute
they had started testimony on on one of the things,
(14:02):
he the defense just starts objection, objection, and then and
then event at one point the judge sends the jury
out and he's like, we already established we went over
this so much pre trial. We went like literally like
you know, thing for saying about this, you cannot continue
(14:24):
to waste the jury's time with these objections. We need
to get this clear. Now You're not gonna do this
in front of the jury. You will not continue to
waste their time. We have done this before. Like what
else are you gonna object to? And he has just
so much and he was just like he's like delay,
Like I'm over these delays. And he's like I already
(14:47):
mentioned this multiple times. And the patience of this man
is just commendable. Like this, this guy is like, I
do not run non a no Like this is a
no nonsense court.
Speaker 1 (14:58):
I am not dealing with this.
Speaker 5 (15:00):
This judge was so good.
Speaker 3 (15:01):
And then at one point too, he he had like
this was during one of the breaks or whatever, but
he had sent the jury out and he basically told
Donna Adelson, you need to keep your emotions in check.
He was like, what was she she? He's like your
hand movements, you're flailing this the level.
Speaker 2 (15:19):
Maybe it was something about her she would get.
Speaker 1 (15:23):
You know and like, okay, you're on trial for murder.
Speaker 3 (15:26):
I get it, Like you're like this is an emotional time.
But like they would say something and like she'd apparently
have like a hand motion or she'd have some kind
of like reaction obviously something that the jury could see,
and he was like, you need to like calm.
Speaker 1 (15:39):
That shit down, lady. It was crazy.
Speaker 5 (15:43):
It was crazy.
Speaker 1 (15:44):
So not too much new new information today, but.
Speaker 2 (15:48):
Us if you were too and I mean, I want
anyone to chime in on this, if you guys have
questions or you guys you know, know anything that you're like, Oh,
I wonder where this is going to go or how
this is going to go, But could you give us
an overview of like what is the prosecuting stance and
this is what they brought like summed up, and this
is where the defense is coming from and what we.
Speaker 1 (16:08):
Have to look forward to ye forward.
Speaker 3 (16:10):
So what I'm thinking here is the prosecutions their biggest
like theme that they're going on, is what they're relying on,
is that Donna knew everything from jump, that she was
part of the plan, if not the mastermind of the plan,
that this plan never would have happened, regardless like even
(16:32):
though Charlie that that she's at this point, there have
already been Louis Rivera, Sifredo Garcia or Katie Magvana Law
and Charlie Adelson, regardless of these four other people, these
four other people would not even be in prison right
now had it not been for Donna Adelson, because she's
the one who started it all. She was desperate to get
(16:55):
Wendy and the boys away from Tallahassee. And they are
just setting up a foundation to show a that Donna
Adelson was super super involved in her children's lives and
not just involved, but controlling and manipulative in their lives,
and that she came up with this plan and persuaded
(17:18):
her son Charlie to make it happen. That's what the
prosecution is going to be setting up here. Yeah, And
the defense, I have a feeling that they're going to
go the same.
Speaker 1 (17:30):
Route that Charlie went.
Speaker 3 (17:32):
That that actually because Charlie's whole defense was this happened
because Katie meg Banawah found out that they had this problem.
Speaker 1 (17:43):
And was like, oh, I took care of it.
Speaker 3 (17:46):
I had him killed pretty much, and if you want
me to keep quiet about it and not tell people
that it was your idea, pay me money, right. And
so basically Charlie's whole defense was I was being blackmailed.
And so I think that's gonna be the same kind
of defense that Donna brings up is that it was
(18:06):
a blackmail situation.
Speaker 5 (18:08):
How does that work?
Speaker 6 (18:09):
For?
Speaker 2 (18:09):
How does that work in two separate cases? Right, because
Charlie has already been convicted and so yeah, in my head,
it's like it's only it only makes sense that that
would be off the off the table when it comes
to that thought process of them thinking that it might
have been blackmail down.
Speaker 5 (18:27):
So they're not.
Speaker 3 (18:29):
So the way legally is they're not gonna be able
to bring up They're they're gonna not gonna be able
to bring up like the results of Charlie's trial, especially
because Charlie has already started the appeals process.
Speaker 1 (18:48):
And stuff like that.
Speaker 3 (18:49):
There's gonna be certain things, certain pieces of evidence that
they can and cannot bring up that.
Speaker 1 (18:55):
That like that have to do with Charlie's trial basically.
Speaker 3 (19:01):
So that's that's how it's gonna work. I mean, we'll
see there. So we'll see because originally too, we'll see
how how Charlie as well, like he's gonna whether or
not he gets on the witness stand and for whom
I don't know, We'll see how that works out because.
Speaker 1 (19:20):
They on the witness stand. Yeah, right, no go please.
Speaker 7 (19:25):
When it came to jury selection. Did they have to
like not know anything at all about any of the
other previous trials.
Speaker 3 (19:32):
That's such a good question, and that's why. So a
big problem with this is the defense pushed and pushed
and pushed to move this case out of Tallahassee because
this is such a huge case in Tallahassee, and the
judge denied it. And so what they did was they
basically spent the first two days getting one hundred people
that they believed had a seemingly decent chance that they
(19:55):
didn't know too much about this trial. So they were
hoping to find people that didn't super consumed true crime,
didn't super consume the media, because this shit was everywhere,
whether you're old school or new school, like this was
in the newspapers, this was all over local news, this
is all over national news. There's been huge podcasts about this,
there's been huge like coverage about this everything.
Speaker 5 (20:17):
But the basically any thing.
Speaker 2 (20:19):
Is they they are pretty well off, so they're known
in the area as well.
Speaker 1 (20:24):
It's like they they are, but they're known in Miami. Oh.
Speaker 3 (20:28):
So that's what that's part of it is the atal
sins are known in Miami, but you're all also right,
is that Dan Markel was a pretty popular guy in Tallahassee,
especially in like the college lawyer scene. But you're right
because the Markel's Dan Markell especially. But the other thing
is the Markel's they're actually from like Canada, but Dan
(20:50):
Markell had made a name for himself at the Tallahassee place.
So what the biggest thing with the jury selection is
even if they if the like, let's say you were
a perspective or even if you did know about the case,
that wouldn't in and of itself have like excluded you
from being a jur So it's always like the questions
would have gone something like this, do you know anything
(21:12):
about this case? You saying yes, wouldn't have said okay,
your excuse, it's okay, yes I know about the case.
The follow up question would have been, what you know
about the case? Regardless of what would you be able
to maintain an impartial you know stance is what you
know about the case going to change the way that
(21:35):
you can look at the evidence, change the way that
you think about like innocence or guilt. And so that
was a major part of the vorder process. It was
a major part of especially the defense in terms of
like whether or not they believe they could find a
jury that would be an impartial jury, that wouldn't you know,
(22:00):
try to like already have this in mind that they
thought Donna Adelson was guilty because this you're right, like
this is a very popular case, especially in the Tallahassee area,
so and I mean throughout everywhere in Miami, I'm sure
as well.
Speaker 1 (22:17):
But you're right, it did play a part.
Speaker 3 (22:20):
But they always at That's why it took three days
of jury selection to find twelve people, because they wanted
they needed to make sure that the jurors, even if
they did know anything about the case, that they could
say I do know about this case. I've heard this,
that and the other. Maybe, but it's not going to
(22:43):
change you know how I would make a decision on
innocence or guilt.
Speaker 2 (22:49):
Yeah, yeah, definitely. It's crazy because I mean I made
it very clear just now, right before you began talking
about all of that, that I couldn't be sitting on that.
Speaker 1 (23:00):
No, not mean either I couldn't.
Speaker 2 (23:02):
Be a jury.
Speaker 1 (23:05):
I know way too much about the case.
Speaker 3 (23:07):
And the thing is, like I don't think I think
if I was ever and so I have been pulled,
you know, like summoned for jury. And I think if
I told them, hey, in my free time, i'm a
true crime podcaster.
Speaker 1 (23:20):
They'd throw me off. They'd throw me off for jury.
Speaker 3 (23:24):
Like most likely the defense would immediately or the or
the prosecution, depending on how it would go. They'd immediately
kick me off for cause. They'd say no. And even
before that, if I had told them I'm a criminal
justice student and or I was a like when I
was in college, if I had said, I'm I study
psychology and I study forensic psychology and I'm a criminal
(23:44):
justice major, they would have kicked me out just because
you know too much about if there was an eyewitness
in any of any and what I know about eyewitness
is the defense would have or the prosecution, depending on
what side the eyewitness was on. They would have kicked
me off the jury because of what I know about
eyewitness testimony like.
Speaker 4 (24:04):
That in the True crime podcast of it all.
Speaker 1 (24:06):
Yeah, that's exactly what That's exactly what I said.
Speaker 3 (24:08):
They never let any of us, any of us sitting
right here on this call, They've never left.
Speaker 1 (24:13):
It's not a jury.
Speaker 4 (24:14):
I think that's the only reason I got out of
my last jury.
Speaker 5 (24:18):
I'm a true crime.
Speaker 1 (24:19):
Yeah, I'm a true I have a true crime podcast. Yeah,
I'm like.
Speaker 4 (24:24):
I just didn't want to do it.
Speaker 3 (24:27):
Yeah, it's but like, honestly, it's true because it's it's
really hard knowing what you know about the criminal justice
system when you've you've revealed this many.
Speaker 1 (24:35):
Cases like it is.
Speaker 3 (24:38):
I mean, maybe if it was like a like a
even if I mean, I don't know, maybe if it
was a financial crime, they might I might be able
to be because I don't know too much about that,
Like I could maybe be impartial.
Speaker 1 (24:49):
I don't know, but yeah I don't. It's but it's true.
Speaker 3 (24:53):
I mean, it's a good question, Jasmine, because it definitely
plays a role in a high profile, a high profile
case like that.
Speaker 2 (24:59):
Definitely, all right, what are we thinking's happening next week?
Speaker 1 (25:04):
Also, how long have they said? How long they yes, they.
Speaker 3 (25:07):
Did be so interestingly, the judge thinks this is only
gonna be a two week trial. Okay, he thinks this
is gonna be like two weeks, and he's and he's
a no nonsense, he's like we're we're we're getting this
shit done. And he's very much he's very much like
we are not here to waste the jury's time. So
he he and he told the jury where we think
(25:27):
we're only gonna need you for two weeks. They're not
being sequestered or anything like that. So yeah, he's he's
no nonsense and in this he's like he's boom boom boom.
He's like, we're getting this done. I think he's like, look,
I have Labor Day holiday plans.
Speaker 5 (25:43):
We are stretching this out.
Speaker 3 (25:46):
So I'm thinking by the time crime conrolls around, y'all,
we're gonna have a We're gonna have a an answer for.
Speaker 2 (25:53):
This, a guilty verdict.
Speaker 1 (25:57):
I mean most like allegedly.
Speaker 2 (25:59):
I know, hey, you say allegedly for real.
Speaker 1 (26:07):
I was like, do you guys have any other questions.
Speaker 3 (26:10):
I'm excited because Monday we're probably going to see We're
probably going to be introduced to some more newer evidence,
is my guess the prosecution is going to bring, because
today was really just laying foundations, you know, summing up
for the jury more of just like the basics of
the crime itself and foundations about how this all ties
(26:30):
back to Donna.
Speaker 1 (26:32):
And I think as we continue into.
Speaker 3 (26:34):
The early parts of next week, we're really going to
start to see more of the how this all, how
the prosecution is going to start tying this to Donna,
and so I think that's when some of the newer
information is going to start to be.
Speaker 1 (26:53):
Shown. And so I'm I'm that's where I'm really starting to.
Speaker 3 (26:57):
See some some new stuff, some interesting stuff that we're
gonna we're gonna talk about.
Speaker 5 (27:02):
But do you guys have any questions.
Speaker 1 (27:05):
I don't thank you for joining on.
Speaker 5 (27:07):
Our first day. This is exciting for me.
Speaker 1 (27:09):
I think that's something you got caster, and you should
and you did a.
Speaker 4 (27:13):
Great job, our newscaster.
Speaker 1 (27:15):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (27:16):
I mean you've been following this, uh very very like
insanely for a long time, like every single article, every
single update.
Speaker 1 (27:24):
I feel like this in.
Speaker 2 (27:26):
Crystal Rogers has had the most amount of updates on
like motherlike murders specifically for where it was just like,
oh my gosh, I need to bring this up, bring
this up, bring this up.
Speaker 1 (27:36):
But just tell everyone, you.
Speaker 2 (27:39):
Guys, we're going to be back here as often as
we can. I think we're going to try to do
a daily talk everying as.
Speaker 1 (27:46):
Long as there's a child. Yeah, day Monday, So we'll
be back on Monday.
Speaker 4 (27:50):
Yep.
Speaker 2 (27:51):
Sounds good and there might be more people joining us.
I know some of you are muted, but I would
love if you guys gave yourself a little plug for
being here.
Speaker 1 (27:58):
Alicia, you're not.
Speaker 5 (27:59):
Muting, ye us.
Speaker 3 (28:00):
Tell us about your podcasts, your podcast plural in Alicia's.
Speaker 4 (28:06):
Case, I am one half of the Twisted and Uncorked
podcasts that I host with my American bestie Sierra, and
I also host Truly Twisted podcast on the fire As
Media Networks.
Speaker 2 (28:21):
Yes, you do all right, April, you're.
Speaker 6 (28:25):
Up, Sarah. I'm the host of Crime to Burn. We
focus on our sun and criminal fires, and we just
had a big week. We launched our Patreon this week,
and Rachel is over first.
Speaker 1 (28:35):
Yes, I am am. And let me tell you.
Speaker 3 (28:37):
Rachel tell you what she wanted the most from your Patreon.
Speaker 4 (28:43):
The Chaotic newsletter.
Speaker 5 (28:46):
What did I say?
Speaker 4 (28:47):
Then the internal thoughts that April provides.
Speaker 3 (28:52):
She had told me at one point we were just
randomly talking and she told me at one point what
she wants most from you, April is just like a
like a twelve minute blooper rail from you, just to
get through her day.
Speaker 6 (29:04):
I mean, that's actually on the list of Patreon ideas.
Speaker 5 (29:07):
Okay, good, but I was.
Speaker 2 (29:09):
Like, I get that at the end of every single
one of your episode. Anyways, I can just go play back.
Speaker 5 (29:12):
She wants like a non stop.
Speaker 6 (29:16):
You'll work on that. We actually have, Rachel, since since
you're our only Patreon member so far, we have some
content coming for you this weekend.
Speaker 2 (29:25):
I can't wait. I am eagerly awaiting it. All right, Jasmine,
take it away, do a Jasmine.
Speaker 7 (29:34):
My background is not quite so sorry, that's but I
host Black Coffee, Crime and Crochet. We are on break
Break right now, but season two is coming soon. But
we focus on scams, frauds, and sometimes murders committed by
black men and women, while also sharing a crochet project
and ice coffee recipee.
Speaker 1 (29:53):
Yes, yes, gotta love it. Guys.
Speaker 2 (29:56):
We've worked with Alicia, we worked with Jasmine. We haven't
had April on yet in the sense of we need
to have her for a collaboration.
Speaker 4 (30:05):
April is the only person I haven't collaborated with. That's
a crime.
Speaker 6 (30:10):
I'm here, I'm here, and can I tell you that, Jasmine.
I can't wait for you to put on new episodes
because for some reason, your voice puts me in the
most soothed state, and I re listen to your old
episodes when I've had a long day and I can't
fall asleep. Just excuse me to sleep. So if you're
downloads are have not dropped since you went on break,
(30:31):
it's my fault.
Speaker 5 (30:33):
I listened to at least two.
Speaker 4 (30:35):
Episodes a week.
Speaker 7 (30:37):
They really have been like consistent.
Speaker 4 (30:40):
It's me.
Speaker 5 (30:42):
I love that so much.
Speaker 2 (30:45):
I love it, and I can actually vouch for that
because April has told me that before, so she ain't
lying from the.
Speaker 4 (30:54):
I love that.
Speaker 3 (30:55):
I love this podcasting group of amazing women.
Speaker 6 (31:00):
It is.
Speaker 4 (31:00):
Well.
Speaker 3 (31:00):
Thank you guys so much for joining us on our
very first Like Motherlike Murder coverage of the Donna Adolson
trial for the murder of Dan Markel. We will be
back next week with some more trial coverage. Until then,
is everyone ready.
Speaker 5 (31:19):
To say it? Oh?
Speaker 2 (31:20):
Yeah, I always am.
Speaker 1 (31:21):
Everybody get ready?
Speaker 3 (31:24):
Three two one, Caleb, it's so cute.
Welcome to Like Mother Like Murder. I am Rachel and
I'm Heather.
Speaker 2 (00:18):
We bring you the good, the badass, and the crime.
Speaker 1 (00:23):
This is Like Mother, Like Murder, and.
Speaker 2 (00:34):
Right now is Like Mother Like Murders Trial updates, where
we will be providing daily coverage in the ongoing trial
of Donna Adelson for the murder of Dan Markel. We've
been covering this case for years now, and so far
four people have been found guilty in the plot to
murder this father of two young.
Speaker 3 (00:52):
Boys, and Donna Adelson, dan Markel's former mother in law,
is the latest conspirator to stand trial for this crime.
Rachel and I will be continuing to provide coverage every
day and will be joined by special guests throughout this
special series. We will be bringing you this every day
that there is trial coverage.
Speaker 1 (01:12):
So let's do this. Today is technically day.
Speaker 3 (01:16):
Three if you want to count jury selection, but really
it's the first day because they started with the opening
statements today for the Donna Adelson trial for the murder
of Dan Markel. Now she stands with the same things
that everybody else pretty much in this trial has been
accused of, so murder, conspiracy to commit murder, and then
(01:41):
the third charge, which is some other kind of conspiracy
murder charge. But basically she is now the fifth person
so already who's been charged with this. We've got the
two men who were the hired hitmen right for this crime,
who actually traveled all the way from Miami to Tallahassee.
(02:04):
We've got the trigger man and the driver who were
hired to commit this. We've got the trigger man's baby
mama who stood trial already and was found guilty. We
also have Charlie Adelson, who was the trigger man's baby
mama's boyfriend, who also was found guilty.
Speaker 1 (02:26):
And he is the brother.
Speaker 3 (02:31):
Of Wendy Adelson, who was the ex wife of the victim.
Speaker 1 (02:35):
So if you're following here, it just like I should.
Speaker 3 (02:39):
I should have like a whiteboard behind me. The victim
in all of this is Dan Markel. His ex wife
is Wendy Adelson. Her brother was Charlie Adelson. Charlie Adelson
was dating Katie Macbanawa, whose baby daddy was the trick man,
(03:01):
and baby daddy's best friend was the driver.
Speaker 1 (03:05):
Now driver triggerman.
Speaker 2 (03:07):
Uh, you gotta say, you gotta add the name though.
So we have Lewis Rivera, and we have.
Speaker 1 (03:14):
Garcia.
Speaker 3 (03:15):
These were the driver and the trigger, Van Matt, Catherine Macbanawa,
and Charlie Adelson. These four have already been found guilty
and then so we have all of them now. Donna Adelson,
this is the matriarch of the Aidelson family. She is
now on trial, and the prosecution is using a lot
(03:39):
of the same evidence that has already been brought forth,
specifically in Katie's trial and in Charlie's trial, and they're
they're basically saying that all of this trickled down basically
from from Donna, that it was Donna's whole. Like in
the in their opening statements, they really the prosecution relied
(04:00):
heavily on saying that like Donna Adelson as the maintriarch,
she persuaded, she manipulated, and she basically was telling Wendy like,
we need to do any and everything we possibly can
to get you and the boys down here. There's the
other than the things we've heard before, which is, let's
(04:22):
basically bribe Dan Markel with a million dollars to let
you just like come down here. The other thing that
I actually hadn't heard before, or even if I had,
I forgot get this.
Speaker 1 (04:32):
So A big part.
Speaker 3 (04:33):
Of Dan Markel's identity was he was very very into
it and making sure as well that his sons understood
their Jewish faith. Okay, And so one thing that Donna
Adelson apparently told Wendy Adelson to do was to take
(04:56):
pictures of them in front of like a Catholic church
and pretend to get them like baptized in the Catholic church, to.
Speaker 1 (05:04):
Like egg him on and like everything that they were
get dirty.
Speaker 2 (05:09):
Like her part the things that you hear from her
is just dirty. I love in the news article so
bad it is. I love in the news articles though
that it says like you see the headlines saying like
normal person or matriarch, mastermind, like it's all about because
it's stemmed down, trickled down from her.
Speaker 1 (05:29):
Also, Hi, Jasmine, right, thank you for joining us. Yeah,
so we are joined today.
Speaker 3 (05:36):
Our special guests today as we as we go through
the first day of this trial is April and Jasmine.
April from Crime to Burn and Jasmine from Black Coffee,
Crime and Crochet.
Speaker 4 (05:49):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (05:50):
So they're basically painting this picture, right that Donna Adelson
is this mastermind and she put all of this together
and she's saying that, you know, Donna was manipulating, very,
very involved in Wendy's life. They provided evidence that basically
she had laid out a list of like basically match
(06:12):
dot com guys and was like, Oh, Wendy, all of
these seem really good.
Speaker 1 (06:16):
You should date all of these guys.
Speaker 3 (06:18):
And she, you know, she had been nagging at her
son Charlie, like, we really need to find a way
to get rid of Dan. We really need to find
a way to get Wendy down here. And the big
thing that I think super the the prosecution is really
going to get into is that whole thing where Dan
(06:39):
Markel had filed a motion. And what we have to
remember is Dan Markel and Wendy both went to law school,
were both lawyers. Okay, So their divorce and their child
custody it was messy, It was dirty.
Speaker 1 (06:54):
There was a lot of motions filed.
Speaker 3 (06:55):
It was it was and the the divorce had been
filed by finalized, but the custody the battle was ongoing
and it was messy. So Dan Markel and had really recently,
up to the point of him being killed, murdered in
cold blood on the street, had filed emotion saying that Donna,
(07:17):
the grandmother of his children, could not have unsupervised contact
with him and Wendy's sons because she had been saying
bad things about basically bad mouthing him to their children,
calling him stupid things like this in front of the kids.
And from what I understand, he heard about it because
(07:39):
the boys would come home and say, Grandma says you're stupid.
So he had filed emotion basically saying, look, she can't
have unsupervised contact with them, because I will not have
my sons exposed to a woman in their life calling
their father dumb. And it was not too long after
this motion was put out that he was killed.
Speaker 1 (08:00):
So that's that got brought up by the prosecution and
they're opening statement.
Speaker 3 (08:05):
And then the other thing that that they brought up,
of course, was the conversations that she has with Charlie
after the quote unquote bump, which is when the when
the authorities come in and they basically under the guise
of like a blackmail go up to Donna and they're like, hey, look,
we know that you're taking care of Louis Rivera, we
(08:27):
know you're taking care of sick Ferry to Garcia, we
know you're taking care of Katie macbanawhile basically paying them
off for this, this hired hit. You need to also
be taking care of like everybody else. And instead of
doing what a normal not guilty person would do, instead
of going to the police and say somebody's blackmailing me
for something, she immediately contacts her son and is saying
(08:50):
and starts talking in code and starts saying, we need
to pay these people off.
Speaker 1 (08:54):
No, no, no, no no, And.
Speaker 2 (08:56):
It's just so good, it was so guilty.
Speaker 1 (08:59):
How much code was there? Actually? Hi, Alisha, we are
now joined by Alicia as well.
Speaker 5 (09:06):
A thing wanted to say, yay, please.
Speaker 1 (09:11):
Jas On as well.
Speaker 2 (09:13):
Now now we've got five people here talking about this,
I wanted to really quickly talk about how you were
talking about the kids.
Speaker 1 (09:19):
So I did not watch the entire trial.
Speaker 2 (09:21):
I'm getting a lot of the updates from you, but
there were certain things that I watched, and one of
the things talking about the kids was they were talking
to I forget exactly who he was, but he might.
Speaker 1 (09:34):
Have been, I don't know.
Speaker 2 (09:36):
The The point has nothing to do with him other
than the fact that they were Like, so you're saying
that you got that statement from the emails that that
Donna called Dan Markel names or something like that, and
he goes, no, I didn't get those from the emails.
Those are not that's not the exact words in the emails.
(09:56):
I got that directly from the grandchildren. And he's like, yeah, yeah,
but the grandchildren are what three and four at this
age and kind of like trying to downplay that. And
I feel like, for me as a mother and just
in general, I feel like that age is probably one
of the most truthful ages, where they're just bloody exactly
what's on their minds.
Speaker 3 (10:16):
What grandma just said to me in the car on
the way over here, Oh for sure, Like that's how
you're like, oh for sure, that's what grandma just definitely
said to you in the car on the way over here.
Speaker 1 (10:25):
That's how I felt.
Speaker 2 (10:26):
I was, yeah, okay, but oh, let me downplay this
because they're.
Speaker 1 (10:28):
Three and four, No, sir, I know, yeah, I know,
you're stretch up.
Speaker 3 (10:32):
Play it for sure from the what do they say
from the mouths of mouths of babes, Like that's a
real thing. The other thing that I was like, this
is just such guilty information, and this is so a
lot of what we heard today was was things that
we've heard before.
Speaker 1 (10:47):
Like I said, all came out.
Speaker 3 (10:48):
A lot of this came out in Charlie's trial, a
lot of it came out in Katie mc manama's trial.
One thing though, that is new because it happened more recently.
The prosecution presented a supposed alleged I have to say
alleged and everything we're saying, and we have to stay
alleged because she's currently on trial. She has not been
found guilty, but allegedly Donna Adelson had written had been
(11:13):
speaking to people while she's in jail basically saying, I
will pay you allegedly, I will pay you in veneers,
I'll pay you in money, I'll get you prescription drugs,
whatever you need if you will basically perjure yourself and
lie and say Katie magbanawah told you to do this,
(11:33):
that and the other. And they even provide like a
written out alleged script that this informant said, this is
line for line what Donna Adelson told me to come
up on the stand and say to basically say that
Donna Adelson had nothing to do with it, and this
(11:53):
was all actually, like Katie mag Baniwa, and I was
just like, so this is brand new information, right. This
all happened when after Donald Adelson had been taken into custody.
Speaker 1 (12:04):
But I was like, wow, wow, wow, wow wow wow.
Speaker 3 (12:07):
And I'm like, so I'm waiting for that freaking witness
testimony and we all know Jelhouse informants, you have to
be very careful with that testimony. But if this can
be like in any way substantiated this quote unquote alleged script,
this piece of paper, I'm like, oh my gosh. And
so anyway, the prosecution's opening was really it was really
(12:30):
well done. That that prosecutor does a good job.
Speaker 1 (12:34):
The defense is opening. I mean maybe I'm just bia.
Speaker 2 (12:37):
I was gonna say, you're definitely biased, but how could
you know everything that's going on here?
Speaker 1 (12:42):
It's really hard, it is, it is.
Speaker 3 (12:46):
But the other thing that really got me in this
case was the judge. He is an insanely patient man.
So this judge has been dealing with this case.
Speaker 1 (12:58):
Now for years.
Speaker 3 (13:00):
I mean Donna Adelson was first arrested, like, I mean,
ye over.
Speaker 1 (13:06):
A year ago. I want to say it was.
Speaker 2 (13:09):
The end of twenty twenty three, because I think that
sounds arrested because I mean, she did try to flee,
so there's that that's right, or allegedly try.
Speaker 1 (13:19):
To flee to Vietnam.
Speaker 2 (13:21):
But it's like she was arrested I think the end
of twenty twenty three, and then she was gonna have
trial in twenty twenty four. That never happened because the
defense attorney ended up quitting because of you know, conflict
of interest.
Speaker 1 (13:35):
And then because he was Charlie's attorney. Is this the
same judge that did Charlie's I don't believe.
Speaker 3 (13:42):
I don't think it's the same judge who presided over
Charlie's trial. But it's been the same judge that's been
presiding over Donna's trial, and so he's been dealing with
all of like this, change in lawyers, change in this,
and then So it was so funny because the minute
they had started testimony on on one of the things,
(14:02):
he the defense just starts objection, objection, and then and
then event at one point the judge sends the jury
out and he's like, we already established we went over
this so much pre trial. We went like literally like
you know, thing for saying about this, you cannot continue
(14:24):
to waste the jury's time with these objections. We need
to get this clear. Now You're not gonna do this
in front of the jury. You will not continue to
waste their time. We have done this before. Like what
else are you gonna object to? And he has just
so much and he was just like he's like delay,
Like I'm over these delays. And he's like I already
(14:47):
mentioned this multiple times. And the patience of this man
is just commendable. Like this, this guy is like, I
do not run non a no Like this is a
no nonsense court.
Speaker 1 (14:58):
I am not dealing with this.
Speaker 5 (15:00):
This judge was so good.
Speaker 3 (15:01):
And then at one point too, he he had like
this was during one of the breaks or whatever, but
he had sent the jury out and he basically told
Donna Adelson, you need to keep your emotions in check.
He was like, what was she she? He's like your
hand movements, you're flailing this the level.
Speaker 2 (15:19):
Maybe it was something about her she would get.
Speaker 1 (15:23):
You know and like, okay, you're on trial for murder.
Speaker 3 (15:26):
I get it, Like you're like this is an emotional time.
But like they would say something and like she'd apparently
have like a hand motion or she'd have some kind
of like reaction obviously something that the jury could see,
and he was like, you need to like calm.
Speaker 1 (15:39):
That shit down, lady. It was crazy.
Speaker 5 (15:43):
It was crazy.
Speaker 1 (15:44):
So not too much new new information today, but.
Speaker 2 (15:48):
Us if you were too and I mean, I want
anyone to chime in on this, if you guys have
questions or you guys you know, know anything that you're like, Oh,
I wonder where this is going to go or how
this is going to go, But could you give us
an overview of like what is the prosecuting stance and
this is what they brought like summed up, and this
is where the defense is coming from and what we.
Speaker 1 (16:08):
Have to look forward to ye forward.
Speaker 3 (16:10):
So what I'm thinking here is the prosecutions their biggest
like theme that they're going on, is what they're relying on,
is that Donna knew everything from jump, that she was
part of the plan, if not the mastermind of the plan,
that this plan never would have happened, regardless like even
(16:32):
though Charlie that that she's at this point, there have
already been Louis Rivera, Sifredo Garcia or Katie Magvana Law
and Charlie Adelson, regardless of these four other people, these
four other people would not even be in prison right
now had it not been for Donna Adelson, because she's
the one who started it all. She was desperate to get
(16:55):
Wendy and the boys away from Tallahassee. And they are
just setting up a foundation to show a that Donna
Adelson was super super involved in her children's lives and
not just involved, but controlling and manipulative in their lives,
and that she came up with this plan and persuaded
(17:18):
her son Charlie to make it happen. That's what the
prosecution is going to be setting up here. Yeah, And
the defense, I have a feeling that they're going to
go the same.
Speaker 1 (17:30):
Route that Charlie went.
Speaker 3 (17:32):
That that actually because Charlie's whole defense was this happened
because Katie meg Banawah found out that they had this problem.
Speaker 1 (17:43):
And was like, oh, I took care of it.
Speaker 3 (17:46):
I had him killed pretty much, and if you want
me to keep quiet about it and not tell people
that it was your idea, pay me money, right. And
so basically Charlie's whole defense was I was being blackmailed.
And so I think that's gonna be the same kind
of defense that Donna brings up is that it was
(18:06):
a blackmail situation.
Speaker 5 (18:08):
How does that work?
Speaker 6 (18:09):
For?
Speaker 2 (18:09):
How does that work in two separate cases? Right, because
Charlie has already been convicted and so yeah, in my head,
it's like it's only it only makes sense that that
would be off the off the table when it comes
to that thought process of them thinking that it might
have been blackmail down.
Speaker 5 (18:27):
So they're not.
Speaker 3 (18:29):
So the way legally is they're not gonna be able
to bring up They're they're gonna not gonna be able
to bring up like the results of Charlie's trial, especially
because Charlie has already started the appeals process.
Speaker 1 (18:48):
And stuff like that.
Speaker 3 (18:49):
There's gonna be certain things, certain pieces of evidence that
they can and cannot bring up that.
Speaker 1 (18:55):
That like that have to do with Charlie's trial basically.
Speaker 3 (19:01):
So that's that's how it's gonna work. I mean, we'll
see there. So we'll see because originally too, we'll see
how how Charlie as well, like he's gonna whether or
not he gets on the witness stand and for whom
I don't know, We'll see how that works out because.
Speaker 1 (19:20):
They on the witness stand. Yeah, right, no go please.
Speaker 7 (19:25):
When it came to jury selection. Did they have to
like not know anything at all about any of the
other previous trials.
Speaker 3 (19:32):
That's such a good question, and that's why. So a
big problem with this is the defense pushed and pushed
and pushed to move this case out of Tallahassee because
this is such a huge case in Tallahassee, and the
judge denied it. And so what they did was they
basically spent the first two days getting one hundred people
that they believed had a seemingly decent chance that they
(19:55):
didn't know too much about this trial. So they were
hoping to find people that didn't super consumed true crime,
didn't super consume the media, because this shit was everywhere,
whether you're old school or new school, like this was
in the newspapers, this was all over local news, this
is all over national news. There's been huge podcasts about this,
there's been huge like coverage about this everything.
Speaker 5 (20:17):
But the basically any thing.
Speaker 2 (20:19):
Is they they are pretty well off, so they're known
in the area as well.
Speaker 1 (20:24):
It's like they they are, but they're known in Miami. Oh.
Speaker 3 (20:28):
So that's what that's part of it is the atal
sins are known in Miami, but you're all also right,
is that Dan Markel was a pretty popular guy in Tallahassee,
especially in like the college lawyer scene. But you're right
because the Markel's Dan Markell especially. But the other thing
is the Markel's they're actually from like Canada, but Dan
(20:50):
Markell had made a name for himself at the Tallahassee place.
So what the biggest thing with the jury selection is
even if they if the like, let's say you were
a perspective or even if you did know about the case,
that wouldn't in and of itself have like excluded you
from being a jur So it's always like the questions
would have gone something like this, do you know anything
(21:12):
about this case? You saying yes, wouldn't have said okay,
your excuse, it's okay, yes I know about the case.
The follow up question would have been, what you know
about the case? Regardless of what would you be able
to maintain an impartial you know stance is what you
know about the case going to change the way that
(21:35):
you can look at the evidence, change the way that
you think about like innocence or guilt. And so that
was a major part of the vorder process. It was
a major part of especially the defense in terms of
like whether or not they believe they could find a
jury that would be an impartial jury, that wouldn't you know,
(22:00):
try to like already have this in mind that they
thought Donna Adelson was guilty because this you're right, like
this is a very popular case, especially in the Tallahassee area,
so and I mean throughout everywhere in Miami, I'm sure
as well.
Speaker 1 (22:17):
But you're right, it did play a part.
Speaker 3 (22:20):
But they always at That's why it took three days
of jury selection to find twelve people, because they wanted
they needed to make sure that the jurors, even if
they did know anything about the case, that they could
say I do know about this case. I've heard this,
that and the other. Maybe, but it's not going to
(22:43):
change you know how I would make a decision on
innocence or guilt.
Speaker 2 (22:49):
Yeah, yeah, definitely. It's crazy because I mean I made
it very clear just now, right before you began talking
about all of that, that I couldn't be sitting on that.
Speaker 1 (23:00):
No, not mean either I couldn't.
Speaker 2 (23:02):
Be a jury.
Speaker 1 (23:05):
I know way too much about the case.
Speaker 3 (23:07):
And the thing is, like I don't think I think
if I was ever and so I have been pulled,
you know, like summoned for jury. And I think if
I told them, hey, in my free time, i'm a
true crime podcaster.
Speaker 1 (23:20):
They'd throw me off. They'd throw me off for jury.
Speaker 3 (23:24):
Like most likely the defense would immediately or the or
the prosecution, depending on how it would go. They'd immediately
kick me off for cause. They'd say no. And even
before that, if I had told them I'm a criminal
justice student and or I was a like when I
was in college, if I had said, I'm I study
psychology and I study forensic psychology and I'm a criminal
(23:44):
justice major, they would have kicked me out just because
you know too much about if there was an eyewitness
in any of any and what I know about eyewitness
is the defense would have or the prosecution, depending on
what side the eyewitness was on. They would have kicked
me off the jury because of what I know about
eyewitness testimony like.
Speaker 4 (24:04):
That in the True crime podcast of it all.
Speaker 1 (24:06):
Yeah, that's exactly what That's exactly what I said.
Speaker 3 (24:08):
They never let any of us, any of us sitting
right here on this call, They've never left.
Speaker 1 (24:13):
It's not a jury.
Speaker 4 (24:14):
I think that's the only reason I got out of
my last jury.
Speaker 5 (24:18):
I'm a true crime.
Speaker 1 (24:19):
Yeah, I'm a true I have a true crime podcast. Yeah,
I'm like.
Speaker 4 (24:24):
I just didn't want to do it.
Speaker 3 (24:27):
Yeah, it's but like, honestly, it's true because it's it's
really hard knowing what you know about the criminal justice
system when you've you've revealed this many.
Speaker 1 (24:35):
Cases like it is.
Speaker 3 (24:38):
I mean, maybe if it was like a like a
even if I mean, I don't know, maybe if it
was a financial crime, they might I might be able
to be because I don't know too much about that,
Like I could maybe be impartial.
Speaker 1 (24:49):
I don't know, but yeah I don't. It's but it's true.
Speaker 3 (24:53):
I mean, it's a good question, Jasmine, because it definitely
plays a role in a high profile, a high profile
case like that.
Speaker 2 (24:59):
Definitely, all right, what are we thinking's happening next week?
Speaker 1 (25:04):
Also, how long have they said? How long they yes, they.
Speaker 3 (25:07):
Did be so interestingly, the judge thinks this is only
gonna be a two week trial. Okay, he thinks this
is gonna be like two weeks, and he's and he's
a no nonsense, he's like we're we're we're getting this
shit done. And he's very much he's very much like
we are not here to waste the jury's time. So
he he and he told the jury where we think
(25:27):
we're only gonna need you for two weeks. They're not
being sequestered or anything like that. So yeah, he's he's
no nonsense and in this he's like he's boom boom boom.
He's like, we're getting this done. I think he's like, look,
I have Labor Day holiday plans.
Speaker 5 (25:43):
We are stretching this out.
Speaker 3 (25:46):
So I'm thinking by the time crime conrolls around, y'all,
we're gonna have a We're gonna have a an answer for.
Speaker 2 (25:53):
This, a guilty verdict.
Speaker 1 (25:57):
I mean most like allegedly.
Speaker 2 (25:59):
I know, hey, you say allegedly for real.
Speaker 1 (26:07):
I was like, do you guys have any other questions.
Speaker 3 (26:10):
I'm excited because Monday we're probably going to see We're
probably going to be introduced to some more newer evidence,
is my guess the prosecution is going to bring, because
today was really just laying foundations, you know, summing up
for the jury more of just like the basics of
the crime itself and foundations about how this all ties
(26:30):
back to Donna.
Speaker 1 (26:32):
And I think as we continue into.
Speaker 3 (26:34):
The early parts of next week, we're really going to
start to see more of the how this all, how
the prosecution is going to start tying this to Donna,
and so I think that's when some of the newer
information is going to start to be.
Speaker 1 (26:53):
Shown. And so I'm I'm that's where I'm really starting to.
Speaker 3 (26:57):
See some some new stuff, some interesting stuff that we're
gonna we're gonna talk about.
Speaker 5 (27:02):
But do you guys have any questions.
Speaker 1 (27:05):
I don't thank you for joining on.
Speaker 5 (27:07):
Our first day. This is exciting for me.
Speaker 1 (27:09):
I think that's something you got caster, and you should
and you did a.
Speaker 4 (27:13):
Great job, our newscaster.
Speaker 1 (27:15):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (27:16):
I mean you've been following this, uh very very like
insanely for a long time, like every single article, every
single update.
Speaker 1 (27:24):
I feel like this in.
Speaker 2 (27:26):
Crystal Rogers has had the most amount of updates on
like motherlike murders specifically for where it was just like,
oh my gosh, I need to bring this up, bring
this up, bring this up.
Speaker 1 (27:36):
But just tell everyone, you.
Speaker 2 (27:39):
Guys, we're going to be back here as often as
we can. I think we're going to try to do
a daily talk everying as.
Speaker 1 (27:46):
Long as there's a child. Yeah, day Monday, So we'll
be back on Monday.
Speaker 4 (27:50):
Yep.
Speaker 2 (27:51):
Sounds good and there might be more people joining us.
I know some of you are muted, but I would
love if you guys gave yourself a little plug for
being here.
Speaker 1 (27:58):
Alicia, you're not.
Speaker 5 (27:59):
Muting, ye us.
Speaker 3 (28:00):
Tell us about your podcasts, your podcast plural in Alicia's.
Speaker 4 (28:06):
Case, I am one half of the Twisted and Uncorked
podcasts that I host with my American bestie Sierra, and
I also host Truly Twisted podcast on the fire As
Media Networks.
Speaker 2 (28:21):
Yes, you do all right, April, you're.
Speaker 6 (28:25):
Up, Sarah. I'm the host of Crime to Burn. We
focus on our sun and criminal fires, and we just
had a big week. We launched our Patreon this week,
and Rachel is over first.
Speaker 1 (28:35):
Yes, I am am. And let me tell you.
Speaker 3 (28:37):
Rachel tell you what she wanted the most from your Patreon.
Speaker 4 (28:43):
The Chaotic newsletter.
Speaker 5 (28:46):
What did I say?
Speaker 4 (28:47):
Then the internal thoughts that April provides.
Speaker 3 (28:52):
She had told me at one point we were just
randomly talking and she told me at one point what
she wants most from you, April is just like a
like a twelve minute blooper rail from you, just to
get through her day.
Speaker 6 (29:04):
I mean, that's actually on the list of Patreon ideas.
Speaker 5 (29:07):
Okay, good, but I was.
Speaker 2 (29:09):
Like, I get that at the end of every single
one of your episode. Anyways, I can just go play back.
Speaker 5 (29:12):
She wants like a non stop.
Speaker 6 (29:16):
You'll work on that. We actually have, Rachel, since since
you're our only Patreon member so far, we have some
content coming for you this weekend.
Speaker 2 (29:25):
I can't wait. I am eagerly awaiting it. All right, Jasmine,
take it away, do a Jasmine.
Speaker 7 (29:34):
My background is not quite so sorry, that's but I
host Black Coffee, Crime and Crochet. We are on break
Break right now, but season two is coming soon. But
we focus on scams, frauds, and sometimes murders committed by
black men and women, while also sharing a crochet project
and ice coffee recipee.
Speaker 1 (29:53):
Yes, yes, gotta love it. Guys.
Speaker 2 (29:56):
We've worked with Alicia, we worked with Jasmine. We haven't
had April on yet in the sense of we need
to have her for a collaboration.
Speaker 4 (30:05):
April is the only person I haven't collaborated with. That's
a crime.
Speaker 6 (30:10):
I'm here, I'm here, and can I tell you that, Jasmine.
I can't wait for you to put on new episodes
because for some reason, your voice puts me in the
most soothed state, and I re listen to your old
episodes when I've had a long day and I can't
fall asleep. Just excuse me to sleep. So if you're
downloads are have not dropped since you went on break,
(30:31):
it's my fault.
Speaker 5 (30:33):
I listened to at least two.
Speaker 4 (30:35):
Episodes a week.
Speaker 7 (30:37):
They really have been like consistent.
Speaker 4 (30:40):
It's me.
Speaker 5 (30:42):
I love that so much.
Speaker 2 (30:45):
I love it, and I can actually vouch for that
because April has told me that before, so she ain't
lying from the.
Speaker 4 (30:54):
I love that.
Speaker 3 (30:55):
I love this podcasting group of amazing women.
Speaker 6 (31:00):
It is.
Speaker 4 (31:00):
Well.
Speaker 3 (31:00):
Thank you guys so much for joining us on our
very first Like Motherlike Murder coverage of the Donna Adolson
trial for the murder of Dan Markel. We will be
back next week with some more trial coverage. Until then,
is everyone ready.
Speaker 5 (31:19):
To say it? Oh?
Speaker 2 (31:20):
Yeah, I always am.
Speaker 1 (31:21):
Everybody get ready?
Speaker 3 (31:24):
Three two one, Caleb, it's so cute.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
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
CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist
It’s 1996 in rural North Carolina, and an oddball crew makes history when they pull off America’s third largest cash heist. But it’s all downhill from there. Join host Johnny Knoxville as he unspools a wild and woolly tale about a group of regular ‘ol folks who risked it all for a chance at a better life. CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist answers the question: what would you do with 17.3 million dollars? The answer includes diamond rings, mansions, velvet Elvis paintings, plus a run for the border, murder-for-hire-plots, and FBI busts.