September 4, 2025 • 36 mins
Welcome to Like Mother Like Murder's Day 8 Trial updates providing daily coverage in the ongoing trial of Donna Adelson for the murder of Dan Markel.
Today, Rachel and Heather discuss only the second and ultimately the last day that Donna's defense team presents thier evidence. In LMLM's himble opinion this uninspiring and unimpressive presentation by the defense did not do much to convince us (or a jury) that Donna was not connected what she has been accused of. Ultimately the day ended with more floundering by the defense before Donna Adelson decided not to take the stand and the defense rested thier case. Thursday we will be back with closing statements.
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:
On Spotify
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)
On 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.
Today, Rachel and Heather discuss only the second and ultimately the last day that Donna's defense team presents thier evidence. In LMLM's himble opinion this uninspiring and unimpressive presentation by the defense did not do much to convince us (or a jury) that Donna was not connected what she has been accused of. Ultimately the day ended with more floundering by the defense before Donna Adelson decided not to take the stand and the defense rested thier case. Thursday we will be back with closing statements.
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:
On Spotify
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)
On 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. We bring you the good, the badass, and
the crime. 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 (00:53):
Boys, and Donna Adelson, dan Markel's former mother in law,
is the latest conspirator to stan true for this crime.
Rachel and I will be continuing to provide coverage every
day and we'll 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.
Speaker 3 (01:15):
Today was day eight the ongoing trial of Donna Ailsen
for the murder of Dan Markel and uh.
Speaker 2 (01:27):
Wah wah, yeah, it was day eight and to me,
you know, prosecution went first, but we have only gone
further down into this, like what is happening when it
comes to the defense.
Speaker 3 (01:43):
I mean, I I you know, we okay, we were like, Okay,
yesterday we talked about how defense did not come out swinging. No,
maybe they were going to ramp up to something. Yeah,
I mean we have been waiting for Charlie Adelson to
come out. I mean we we know we heard that
he was in town, Like we heard that he had
(02:05):
traveled from where he's been serving his sentence and had
traveled to Tallahassee. So where is he? I mean, what
the heck? He did not testify. They had problems with
their witnesses yesterday. They're having problems with their witnesses non stop. Today.
They started off today having a problem with their witnesses. Basically,
(02:26):
we started today with a witna with a witness not
wanting to even come be their witness. So they basically
wanted to call a sheriff and she basically was like, nah,
I don't want to testify for you anymore. And then
the defense gets up there and they're basically trying to
(02:47):
tell the judge you were asking you to make her,
and the judges like, I cannot make her come in
here and testify, and the judges like, you can try
to subpoena her if you'd like, but I I it
is not within my purview to force someone to come
up here. And then this there's another witness apparently that
(03:10):
they they were gonna try to subpoena. So I think
their first two witnesses of the day basically bailed on them.
Speaker 2 (03:19):
Yeah, And to me, I mean, we you guys already
know where we stand, so I don't have to try
and say this lightly. But it's like the defense has done.
Speaker 3 (03:29):
Literally nothing in my thing.
Speaker 2 (03:31):
And today it's like today, more than anything else, showed
how unorganized and how like I'm like, what is happening here?
Speaker 3 (03:42):
And that made sense to me. It was so bad.
And because then the first person they get actually to
show up and be on the sand, right was Adams.
I think it's like Adamson is how you said it?
And this was Wendy. This was the first of Wendy's
lawyers when she was getting divorce from Dan and when
they were going through all of like the relocation and
(04:04):
custody and all of that stuff. And basically she was
on the stand for a really long time and it
was it was basically just recapping everything that went down
in Yeah, but also it was like here tell me
again how Dan didn't pay you money. Wait, exactly.
Speaker 2 (04:24):
I know you already told me, but can you tell
me one more time how Dan didn't pay you money?
Speaker 3 (04:28):
Wait?
Speaker 2 (04:29):
And again, one more time, can you tell me again
how he didn't pay you money?
Speaker 3 (04:33):
And again? This has to do with Dan and Wendy
and how many times did they even mention Donna? And
it was so annoying because basically they get up there
and they talk about all this stuff, and then they
finally the only time they kind of talk about Donna
is they talk about Basically they they say, okay, so
(04:54):
were you aware that Donna was, you know, sending emails
back and forth to Wendy saying hey, make sure you
mentioned this to your lawyer. And the lawyer, to her credit,
was like, well, if she was doing that, I did
not put any of that into my motions because I
write my own shit, you know, And so like she
basically was like, that's not you know, a family can
(05:16):
do that, clients can do that. I get clients trying
to send me chat GBT stuff to tell me how
to lawyer. I've been practicing I have you know, it's
it's my seven years. She's like, I'm year ninety six. Yeah,
So to her credit, she's like she could have done that.
I didn't. If she did, I didn't know about it.
And I even if I didn't know about it, I
definitely wouldn't have fucking used it. So, you know, they
(05:39):
basically brought her up the stand to basically have to
recap this whole entire thing that to her was like
this was it was annoying as hell, and like it
got to be really annoying because then her own you know,
her like because Dan Markel started to kind of come
after her, and so she basically had to recuse herself
from being Wendy's lawyer and then you know, deal with
all this stuff. So but basically I was like, why
(06:02):
are they bringing all this up? And I was like,
maybe it'll come back later, Maybe this is something foundational,
maybe they're building to something, and I was just like, Okay,
I don't know. And then they pull her off the
stand and then let the drama start because we find
out the same thing that happened yesterday where a witness
was in the courtroom watching another defense witness testify, which
(06:25):
is a no, no, you're not supposed to do this.
Another witness was in the courtroom watching Wendy's lawyer Miss
Adams did not task their shit together, like they were
not my gosh right, and this is they definitely did
not have their shit together. So basically what happened was
(06:47):
this isn't Their next witness was something Bailey, and she
was basically another lawyer who had actually worked with because
they're both lawyers, I think family lawyers from the Tahassee area.
They she had actually worked with Ms Admins Adamson and
they're both family lawyers, and she had actually asked, Hey,
(07:10):
can I sit in on Adamson's testimony, and they the
defense had asked, previously asked the judge, our witness wants
to sit in on the testimony, and the state had said, like,
I don't want that to happen. And I think basically
what had happened is the judge had never made like
(07:30):
a clear ruling on it, but the state he was
like no, and the and I don't think the judge
made a clear ruling because it's not allowed, Like the
rules are very clear, it's not supposed to happen. And
so then you know, there was a little bit of
more drama about this, and the state basically was like,
(07:51):
this is the second time it's happened, throw this witness out,
they shouldn't be allowed to testify. And so then basically,
and the judge was like, look, I understand this, this is
the second time it's happened, but that's a very extreme thing.
And so they basically had to come in and they
had to question Linda Bailey was her name, and they
had to say, is was listening to to Adamson's testimony
(08:15):
gonna change anything you you were going to testify to
Because if her answer was yes, listening to her her
witness testimony changes what I would have said on the
witness stand, then her her testimony would have been out,
like she would not have been able to testify. But
she's like, no, I didn't learn anything new. So basically
she was able to move forward. But the judge did
(08:35):
say like, look, this is the second time this has happened,
like defense, get your shit together, and so she goes
on and it's again a lot of the same, like
you were saying, Rachel, they're just asking her a bunch
of shit and yeah, and it to me it.
Speaker 2 (08:52):
Was like nothing was relevant, like none of this was
making a case in my opinion.
Speaker 3 (08:59):
And that was one of the big objections that ended
up having to send the jury out of the room
because the defense tries to pull some show, tries to
pull some drama, and basically one of the things they
were trying to establish that between both Adamson and this
Bailey lawyer, these are both family lawyers. You know, between
(09:22):
the two of them, they've got lots and lots of
years of working various divorce you know, relocations, you know,
child custody cases, this kind of stuff. They're very experienced.
These are two very experienced women in this kind of realm.
And so what the defense is trying to say with
(09:45):
both of these lawyers is this was not a contentious case.
They're trying to say, Look, this was no big deal.
This was not a contentious case. And I think what
they're trying to say by saying this is Donna wouldn't
have had any reason to take such a drastic, you know, act,
such as murdering her ex son in law. They're trying
(10:08):
to say, like, this was no big deal because this
kind of stuff happened all the time. Listen to these
two lawyers tell you this wasn't a contentious case. And
so then what the defense tries to do is play
this drama, and they take a bunch of They asked Bailey,
was this a contentious case? And she goes, no, not really,
and then they pull out like four boxes full of
(10:29):
binders and they stack it up on the freaking witness
stand and they were like, is you know this was
a case that you worked on that was a contentious case.
How many boxes do you have? And Kapelman's like, at
this objection of relevance, what is this because this was
not Wendy's case, this was some other random case. And
(10:49):
then defense gets all riled up and the judge is
like whoa, whoa, whoa, sends the jury out and then
they have to go talk about it, and then basically
he the judge throws this ship out. There's no show
bouting in Judge Everett's courtroom. Okay, okay, you shut that
ship down. And because basically the defense was trying to say, hey,
(11:12):
you know, we should be able to establish that Wendy's
case was not a contentious case just by sheer fact
that there was you know that that this the case
that had all of these boxes. Look at all these
boxes and Wendy's case wasn't that big of a case,
but had four boxes, Wendy's had one. Okay, oh why
did Wendy's have one? Yeah, Georgia brings it up because
(11:37):
why well not to you know how many? Uh in July,
because four months into after you know, after the after
one of Dan Markel's filings, he was murdered. So hmm,
so in which Georgia capl membrings up. So basically a
(11:59):
lot of the same from Bailey there. She basically testifies,
oh no, this wasn't a contentious thing. They asked her
too about like did you know about any of the
because she was brought in not because she was a
lawyer on Wendy's case. She was brought in specifically to
look at all of the divorce filings and the and
(12:19):
the relocation stuff as an expert witness to testify to
to you know, whether or not this was a quote
unquote contentious case. And then she was also given some
of the communications and she basically testified that, you know, yes,
Donna was upset after the relocation was denied, and that
(12:46):
she's like, yeah, that's normal. Family members reach out, you know,
because she also worked as a mediator, you know, because
a lot of times and to avoid going to a
full trial and a judge making a final decision on right,
you know, who gets what and how this all works out.
You try to go to a mediator. And so she testified,
(13:07):
you know, with her experience in that, and she's there
to say, yes, that's normal for family to want to
be part of that, and you know, she's like, you know, yeah,
Donna wanted to wanted to keep on keeping on fighting
for relocation. But then eventually she you know, she was
maybe in denial the first couple of weeks after the ruling,
(13:30):
but then eventually she got over it. And then they
were also both both her and the other lawyer also
testified that, yeah, it's not uncommon for people to pay
for for the other party to allow them to relocate.
They're like, yeah, that happens all the time where and
we know that. You know, at one point, Adelson's were like,
we'll give we'll give Dan a million dollars if he'll let.
Speaker 2 (13:52):
You reokay, And I mean I forget one of them,
I forget which one, but one of them talked about
the fact that you know, because they said they eventually
get to the point that you know, Dan was murdered,
and she said like I said, I don't remember if
it was the first one or the second one, but
she's like, yeah, I've had that happen as well, Like,
(14:13):
this is not my first case that there's been a murder,
there's been suicide, there's been other things. You know, well, yep, exactly,
and so and and this witness she also she said
that she also read the communications where Dan was telling
(14:35):
where he had emailed Wendy and the parenting coordinator like look,
Donna's telling the boys, I'm stupid, you know.
Speaker 3 (14:41):
Blah blah blah blah blah, and that the and then
she this is where it gets kind of interesting, right,
because a big part of the prosecution's case was this
quote unquote grandmother motion. And what this witness testifies to
is that, look, this quote unquote grandmother motion that the
(15:02):
prosecution relied so heavily on wasn't maybe as big a
deal as they made it out to be, because she
says that this grandmother motion was actually just one paragraph
out of like ten. He had basically filed this motion
that had like ten different points, one of which was
that Donna Adelson, you know, had been making disparaging remarks
(15:27):
and that it had to do with his the first
right of refusal, meaning you know you can't just if
you're not gonna if you don't want to take care
of the kids, you need to allow me to do it.
Don't just allow the kids to go straight to the grandma.
And she's trying to say stuff like, because you know,
we heard on when prosecute, when the prosecution was presenting
(15:49):
evidence that he basically was the the motion was that
he didn't want her to have unsupervised contact right the kids.
And so she he's basically saying, no, there's nothing like that,
and this motion was basically just all talk and it
was not based in any actual court rulings. If he
(16:10):
really wanted this motion to be real, if he really
wanted Donna Adelson to have no unsupervised contact with the kids,
he would have had to file a whole other petition.
This was just talk blah blah blah blah blah. So
as a lawyer, she's saying, basically, like the legal standing
behind what Dan was filing was not really there. It
(16:32):
was baseless, and he and she was also there to
say that. And we don't know that Donna ever saw
this something that the defense had also brought up during
the prosecution presenting evidence that how do you know that
Donna even saw this to be mad? At? Okay, great,
And so then Kapelman gets up there and she's pissed.
(16:56):
Kaplman's mad. She does not lie, Miss Bailey. You can
tell Cabman's human. She's like holding her head like oh,
and she's like almost yewling at her. But she's going
up there and she's pretty pissed because this lady is
basically downplaying not only the grandma motion, but downplaying kind
(17:22):
of the whole idea that that is a big part
of a lot of people's lives. And she's saying, look
to you, a lawyer, you know these things that are
routine for you these day in, these day out, these
divorce filings, these child custody, these relocations, they're no big
deal to you. But to someone this is their life,
(17:43):
this is make her break, this is their kids, this
is their career. Whatever whatever it is to you, it's
no big deal. To them, it's huge. And the lady
exactly and the and and Bailey is just trying to say,
well ah ah, and she's kind of like pussy footing
around it. And then Georgia Kaplman says, okay, fine, have
you ever had someone murdered or like you said, have
(18:05):
you ever had someone murdered or commit suicide? And during
one of your cases, and the lady said, yes, once
I had someone say if you file for divorce, I
will commit suicide, and unfortunately, this person did just that
their significant other. I filed for divorce and the next
(18:29):
day that person committed suicide. And Georgia Kapelman straight up asked,
is that something you know? Do you think divorce is
something to commit suicide over? She goes me, personally, no,
but that person thought it was something to commit suicide over,
And she goes, well, obviously, yes, obviously because to you,
divorce this is your job, this is routine. You go
(18:51):
through how many of these a week, how many of
these a month, how many of these a year? But
to that person that was their whole life. So what
Capelman's doing is she's b sickly explaining that you're trying
to downplay the grandma motion. You're trying to downplay this
whole proceeding the Adolson Markel you know, relocation and divorce
(19:15):
and child custody arrangements as oh, it was baseless it
wasn't based in core. It meant nothing. Even if Donna
had read it, she couldn't have possibly had worried about
it or been mad about it, because it wouldn't mean anything.
Dan would have had to file a whole nother motion
for it to even have taken effect. You know that
as a lawyer, but to your average person it could
(19:36):
have been very scary. Yeah, for sure, right, And she
did a damn good job of explaining that, and she
really turned it right back on her and just said, yeah,
like here you go, let's take a case example from
your own personal case history here. So she did a
really good job. And then the next person they call
(19:59):
up is actually, interestingly, the lawyer who, for a very
short period in time actually represented Donna. She was Donna's
lawyer ride around the time that Charlie was on trial
and convicted, kind of ride up until around the time
that Donna was arrested. And basically all this lawyer kind
(20:20):
of testified to was that a Donna Adelson seemed to
be making suicidal comments around the time that Charlie Adelson
was on trial and had been convicted. And this all
kind of, she said, in her opinion, stemmed from the
fact that her son was seemingly going to jail for
life and she was really worried about him, and that
(20:43):
their trip to what turned out to be a Vietnam
and non extradition country in her from her knowledge, was
supposed to just be a vacation to help her clear
her mind. That she had no knowledge that it was
going to be an extradition country, and that's basic all
she was there to testify to. That is pretty okay,
(21:07):
Mike ma waw like and substantial either way. I don't
think it played. Yeah, the majority of the it was,
and it didn't I think it you know, it wasn't.
It wasn't there. And then the last witness a spoiler
alert here for the last thing we'll kind of talk about.
The last witness was the victim advocate that actually was
(21:28):
there the day that Dan Marcal was shot and was
with Wendy at the police police station. I mean, if
you guys have followed this case, you know that the
day that that that Dan Markaer was shot and they
brought Wendy into the police station. This is the victim
advocate you often see coming in and out of the
police videos of Wendy in the in the in the room.
(21:52):
She just testified that you know, she was there when
Wendy called her mom to say, Mom, you know, sit down,
gotta tell you something. Danceman shot and the witness pacified. Yeah,
Donna sounded shot. And here's the video. Let's get kind
of it bing bang boom, bing bang boom, because then
(22:18):
we get to the the kind of the grand finale
not really pop fizz bleep.
Speaker 2 (22:24):
Well, to me, it was the only it was the
only part that was worth watching today because the judge
was so irritated with the defense, was the only thing
worth it for me. I was like, so in this moment,
they you know, it's okay, who are you gonna call?
Speaker 3 (22:41):
And the defense.
Speaker 2 (22:45):
Wants a break. They want a reason to break yet
another to talk with Donna because they want to see
if Donna is going to go on the stand. And
you know, what's the right wording, like not not exercise.
Speaker 3 (23:04):
Her right to be silent? Right, yeah, exactly, And so fifth, yeah, plead,
the fifth, plead, the fifth. I was like, wait, plead
the what wait? Yeah?
Speaker 1 (23:13):
Fifth.
Speaker 2 (23:14):
He's like, you've had time. The judge is like, no,
you've had this time to have these conversations and then
he's like, what did you do yesterday? And you know,
and they're like, well we And I will say it
was hilarious too because when when the guy was first
talking and then the defense girl, we still don't know
(23:36):
their names.
Speaker 3 (23:36):
Salman is the guy I just for the life of me,
the lady's name is don't make an impact on me.
Speaker 2 (23:45):
Yeah, no, but but for real. But so, like he
started talking and then when she started talking to Judge
was like, no, no, no, only one of you gets
to have this conversation, and he like backs away, he
shies away. He's like, oh, well I was only gonna
say this one thing, and then she was gonna do.
Speaker 3 (24:03):
It, you know.
Speaker 2 (24:05):
So she stands up, she starts sacking, and it's like, well,
we didn't have this sufficient amount of time. He's like, no,
she had the exact same amount of time as every
other person in this case.
Speaker 3 (24:15):
And he goes and.
Speaker 2 (24:16):
I'm because she was like, well yesterday we did this,
this and that, like we went back to you know,
have other conversations, and then we went to the jail.
They have this conversation, but it still wasn't enough time, right.
But then he also talks about the fact that he's like,
you also had pre trial, yep, and then you have
during and then yep, you guys have it made it
(24:37):
up in that time. I don't know what to tell you.
And eventually it comes.
Speaker 3 (24:41):
Down to where he grants them five minutes with.
Speaker 2 (24:44):
The biggest like huff puff, cackle, laugh everything because he
is over it, dude. But he's like, you have five minutes.
Speaker 3 (24:52):
Well, and the crazy part is, right, is that this
defense team already got an extension, right they are he
got pre trial. They already got extra time, right because
Donna switched her lawyers. And then they said that the
they said that, you know, the there was too much
stuff to go through and that they needed extra time,
(25:14):
so he gave them extra time. Like this this defense
has got has gotten extension after extension after extension. I'm sorry.
He has been more than lenient with the time that
he's allotted them. And and then it was funny because
when he's like, Okay, I'll give you five minutes and
that's it. And then he came back after that five
minutes and he goes, excuse me, excuse me, I'm not
(25:34):
just talking to be talking. He sounded he was like
literally like having when you talk to kindergarteners like I'm
not just talking to talk to hear my own voice,
like you need to listen to me, like I am
the judge. It's time. Your time is over. And that
is when he's like, okay, Donna, what's your answer? Are
you going to testify? And she decides she's not going
(25:55):
to testify at this time and that's that.
Speaker 2 (25:59):
That's that. So we have no Charlie.
Speaker 3 (26:01):
We have no Donna.
Speaker 2 (26:03):
I didn't think Donna was gonna talk, in my opinion,
but I know nothing Charlie would be here this. It
blew my mind when they said we rest I was like, what.
Speaker 3 (26:12):
I'm trying to think if there was anything compelling? Bill
answer is no, there's.
Speaker 2 (26:20):
Nothing memorable from it.
Speaker 3 (26:22):
I mean.
Speaker 2 (26:24):
No, the only memorable moments are when Kapelman decides to
be like, hey, guess what I'm here and nothing you
say matters.
Speaker 3 (26:33):
That's it. So, I mean, that's it. Defense rested and
it's crazy, you guys. I will tell you I was
actually behind watching today because my spoilery. My job was
like jobbing today, so I was behind watching my trial
and I'm texting Rachel. I'm like, okay, I'm catching up.
I'm catching up and she's I was just like, blah
(26:54):
blah blah, it's boring, like what's happening today, Like why
is this sucking step? And she I was like da
da da da, and then she goes yeah, and then
they rested. I was like, shut up, you're lying. You
can't be for real and she's like no, like for real.
I was like stop it, like you're you're pulling my leg,
like you've got to be joking. She's like, I'm so sorry,
Like I thought you knew. But I literally had been
glued to my work computer for a couple hours, like
(27:15):
not even checking on anything. And I swear to god,
I was like, no way, how in the world, And
cause I was like, there's absolutely no way. I mean,
they did not if you put together the amount of
time that they actually had any presented any evidence, because
they had taken so many breaks, they had so many issues,
(27:36):
there were so many sidebars, there's so many times the
jury had to be taken out of the corner, like
there's so many like for instance, yesterday they recessed early
so that they could go confer with Donna, like they
barely had a full day.
Speaker 2 (27:49):
If deep Corbett spent more time on the stands than
anyone of theirs combined, and he was there.
Speaker 3 (27:57):
One hundred corbet. It's time on the witness stand was
longer than the defense's entire like one hundred percent. So
tomorrow will be closing arguments and then we're just waiting
for the jury. We're're just gonna be We're literally gonna
be at crime con being like, what's the what's the
freaking verdict? And I don't, I mean to me, there
(28:21):
is no. I mean, it's very it's very clear cut.
But obviously we're very biased in this case. I guess
if I was to put on my maybe I know
nothing about this case hat while I'm trying to could
I see that reasonable?
Speaker 2 (28:38):
Yeah? Where where is it? And all?
Speaker 3 (28:41):
I mean, it only it takes one person to see
reasonable doubt. It only takes one. It takes one grandma
who says, oh, she would never. Yeah right, I'm a
grandmother and I would never. So it only takes that
one person.
Speaker 2 (28:56):
To think the opposite and say, wow, she would do
that to the grandchildren's fault. Now, wow, huh, that's crazy.
One thing I wanted to say about the fact that
you were talking about how I like, spoiler spoiler for you, Kylie,
spoiler alerted it for me. You guys. She so in
(29:19):
one of our group chats she had I thought she
was joking, so I thought she was joking. And then
after because I was like, oh, I'm not there, shut
your face, and she's like, no, I'm totally kidding. I'm
totally kidding. So then when I fast forwarded it and
I saw what had actually happened, I had to message
her on my own because I was like, dude, you
(29:39):
little butt head.
Speaker 3 (29:42):
It was so funny. Oh my god, Oh.
Speaker 1 (29:46):
My gosh, it was so funny.
Speaker 3 (29:49):
Oh this is I did this ession. It's so it's
crazy because it's it's such a like it's like that
moment where you're like, oh my gosh, what's gonna happen
with the It's like when you go up a roller poster.
It's like that one. If you guys have ever been
to Disneyland and you go on Pirates of the Caribbean
and you think it's going to be like that, It's
gonna be a huge like ooh, but it ends up
(30:11):
being just like oh yah.
Speaker 2 (30:13):
Yeah, you know. I have two things. So the first,
I mean talking about escalation or whatever it's like. When
the defense first started, right after prosecution rested, we had
high hopes, like we were like, day, there's going to
(30:34):
be some stuff that comes our way. There's gonna and
we even have the conversation of is there going to
be something that gives us that reasonable doubt right because
we are where we stand? And I was like, what
are they going to bring that's me gonna make me
question something? The answer was nothing. They did a very
poor job in my.
Speaker 3 (30:53):
Opinion, here we are.
Speaker 2 (30:55):
Did you watch after the defense wrested? So that was
one other thing where I could not stop laughing with
the judge again when they asked for them to change
the capitalization to react.
Speaker 3 (31:12):
Anybody, so you're asking for a stylistic change? Here are
you seriously asking? You? Just you just put this judge
through two days of your bullshit, suleman, and now you're
gonna say, hey, judge, can you do me an inc favor?
We don't want that cap her name and their charges
(31:34):
aren't capitalized?
Speaker 2 (31:35):
Please? Yeah?
Speaker 3 (31:37):
For real?
Speaker 1 (31:38):
Oh my god?
Speaker 2 (31:40):
Was his his reaction was so funny because not only
was his like remark hilarias like his face, his like
his like.
Speaker 3 (31:49):
He's like, you know, he's like, he was so.
Speaker 2 (31:54):
Over it, dude, he was so funny.
Speaker 3 (32:00):
He has been a absolute wonderful judge to watch throughout
this entire process. Between him and Kapelman, it has just
been it's been. It's when you watch the defense and
it's just like, I'm sorry, it's been a dumpster fire
(32:22):
and this crazy thing. They're rich, the Atosn's gonna afford
some good ass attorneys.
Speaker 1 (32:29):
Yep, I'm sorry.
Speaker 3 (32:31):
Why in the world did you spin all of it
on Charlie's I don't because come on, man, then to
just you know, be able to just look across and
see Georgia do her thing, and I feel really bad
because the other the other lawyer she's with, Ooh, I'm
gonna have to look up her name too because she
she does a pretty good job as well. But then, yeah,
(32:55):
Judge Everett is just they're they're a joy chair are
And this is the thing you guys, I you know,
and it doesn't make me think Rachel because I am
I'm a huge reasonable doubter. I'm a huge you know,
you guys have heard me talk about I've covered throughout
(33:16):
like mother like Murder's history, a lot of cases when
it comes to wrongful convictions, and whenever I cover those cases,
even sometimes ones that aren't fully come out to be
wrongful convictions. If you guys haven't heard, I covered it
a while a while back. But the Koreatown massacres that
(33:39):
I covered because those were local here in LA, there's
the Korea Town massacres, right, I think is that what
they called them. I'll have to go back.
Speaker 2 (33:48):
There was different names, but.
Speaker 3 (33:50):
There was different You're right, it was different names, so
I could be getting getting them confused. That one that
you know there, it isn't considered technically a wrongful conviction
because he is still he is still in in prison.
But in my mind, I'm like, God, there's so much
reasonable doubt in this case. Right, So I'm a huge
proponent of reasonable doubt, but just just just don't see
(34:13):
it in this case. You see it in this case?
Speaker 2 (34:17):
Nope.
Speaker 3 (34:18):
So uh, we will have to see I I and
you'll be getting our next up tomorrow crime con tomorrow. Baby,
Rachel and I are literally on on planes tomorrow, So
we apologize now with the audio. The next couple of
days is gonna be it is what it is, but
we will have to be bringing you updates. This will
(34:40):
not be the first time we bring you an Adelson
update from an airport or a hotel event, because I've
done it before. We will do it.
Speaker 2 (34:49):
Yes, I mean, I leave, I leave to my plane
in three hours, so I look, I'm ready to pop
on this mic and have these conversation.
Speaker 3 (35:03):
Okay, Well, with that, you guys will hear from us
tomorrow at the very least so that we can discuss
how awesome Georgia Kapelman's closing arguments are going to because
we know they're going to be amazing, and then you
may not hear from us the next day, depending on
how long it takes the jury to deliberate. Other than that,
(35:25):
you will probably see us all over Instagram because we
will be updating NonStop from crime con follow along for
all of our shenanigans and other than that, y'all, please
take care of yourselves and we will talk to you
guys tomorrow. Thank you so much for following along with
us on this journey of our Mark hal Adelson trial updates.
(35:49):
This has been really fun for us, really fun for me.
You guys know that this particular case has always been
just one I've I've followed very closely, so this has
been a lot of fun for me. Rachel, thank you
for just being the ever so supportive co hosts on
this one. And we will talk to you guys tomorrow.
Speaker 2 (36:10):
Broy denver baby, all right, talk to you tomorrow.
Speaker 3 (36:15):
Okay, love you bye. He love you bye.
Welcome to Like Mother Like Murder. I am Rachel and
I'm Heather. We bring you the good, the badass, and
the crime. 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 (00:53):
Boys, and Donna Adelson, dan Markel's former mother in law,
is the latest conspirator to stan true for this crime.
Rachel and I will be continuing to provide coverage every
day and we'll 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.
Speaker 3 (01:15):
Today was day eight the ongoing trial of Donna Ailsen
for the murder of Dan Markel and uh.
Speaker 2 (01:27):
Wah wah, yeah, it was day eight and to me,
you know, prosecution went first, but we have only gone
further down into this, like what is happening when it
comes to the defense.
Speaker 3 (01:43):
I mean, I I you know, we okay, we were like, Okay,
yesterday we talked about how defense did not come out swinging. No,
maybe they were going to ramp up to something. Yeah,
I mean we have been waiting for Charlie Adelson to
come out. I mean we we know we heard that
he was in town, Like we heard that he had
(02:05):
traveled from where he's been serving his sentence and had
traveled to Tallahassee. So where is he? I mean, what
the heck? He did not testify. They had problems with
their witnesses yesterday. They're having problems with their witnesses non stop. Today.
They started off today having a problem with their witnesses. Basically,
(02:26):
we started today with a witna with a witness not
wanting to even come be their witness. So they basically
wanted to call a sheriff and she basically was like, nah,
I don't want to testify for you anymore. And then
the defense gets up there and they're basically trying to
(02:47):
tell the judge you were asking you to make her,
and the judges like, I cannot make her come in
here and testify, and the judges like, you can try
to subpoena her if you'd like, but I I it
is not within my purview to force someone to come
up here. And then this there's another witness apparently that
(03:10):
they they were gonna try to subpoena. So I think
their first two witnesses of the day basically bailed on them.
Speaker 2 (03:19):
Yeah, And to me, I mean, we you guys already
know where we stand, so I don't have to try
and say this lightly. But it's like the defense has done.
Speaker 3 (03:29):
Literally nothing in my thing.
Speaker 2 (03:31):
And today it's like today, more than anything else, showed
how unorganized and how like I'm like, what is happening here?
Speaker 3 (03:42):
And that made sense to me. It was so bad.
And because then the first person they get actually to
show up and be on the sand, right was Adams.
I think it's like Adamson is how you said it?
And this was Wendy. This was the first of Wendy's
lawyers when she was getting divorce from Dan and when
they were going through all of like the relocation and
(04:04):
custody and all of that stuff. And basically she was
on the stand for a really long time and it
was it was basically just recapping everything that went down
in Yeah, but also it was like here tell me
again how Dan didn't pay you money. Wait, exactly.
Speaker 2 (04:24):
I know you already told me, but can you tell
me one more time how Dan didn't pay you money?
Speaker 3 (04:28):
Wait?
Speaker 2 (04:29):
And again, one more time, can you tell me again
how he didn't pay you money?
Speaker 3 (04:33):
And again? This has to do with Dan and Wendy
and how many times did they even mention Donna? And
it was so annoying because basically they get up there
and they talk about all this stuff, and then they
finally the only time they kind of talk about Donna
is they talk about Basically they they say, okay, so
(04:54):
were you aware that Donna was, you know, sending emails
back and forth to Wendy saying hey, make sure you
mentioned this to your lawyer. And the lawyer, to her credit,
was like, well, if she was doing that, I did
not put any of that into my motions because I
write my own shit, you know, And so like she
basically was like, that's not you know, a family can
(05:16):
do that, clients can do that. I get clients trying
to send me chat GBT stuff to tell me how
to lawyer. I've been practicing I have you know, it's
it's my seven years. She's like, I'm year ninety six. Yeah,
So to her credit, she's like she could have done that.
I didn't. If she did, I didn't know about it.
And I even if I didn't know about it, I
definitely wouldn't have fucking used it. So, you know, they
(05:39):
basically brought her up the stand to basically have to
recap this whole entire thing that to her was like
this was it was annoying as hell, and like it
got to be really annoying because then her own you know,
her like because Dan Markel started to kind of come
after her, and so she basically had to recuse herself
from being Wendy's lawyer and then you know, deal with
all this stuff. So but basically I was like, why
(06:02):
are they bringing all this up? And I was like,
maybe it'll come back later, Maybe this is something foundational,
maybe they're building to something, and I was just like, Okay,
I don't know. And then they pull her off the
stand and then let the drama start because we find
out the same thing that happened yesterday where a witness
was in the courtroom watching another defense witness testify, which
(06:25):
is a no, no, you're not supposed to do this.
Another witness was in the courtroom watching Wendy's lawyer Miss
Adams did not task their shit together, like they were
not my gosh right, and this is they definitely did
not have their shit together. So basically what happened was
(06:47):
this isn't Their next witness was something Bailey, and she
was basically another lawyer who had actually worked with because
they're both lawyers, I think family lawyers from the Tahassee area.
They she had actually worked with Ms Admins Adamson and
they're both family lawyers, and she had actually asked, Hey,
(07:10):
can I sit in on Adamson's testimony, and they the
defense had asked, previously asked the judge, our witness wants
to sit in on the testimony, and the state had said, like,
I don't want that to happen. And I think basically
what had happened is the judge had never made like
(07:30):
a clear ruling on it, but the state he was
like no, and the and I don't think the judge
made a clear ruling because it's not allowed, Like the
rules are very clear, it's not supposed to happen. And
so then you know, there was a little bit of
more drama about this, and the state basically was like,
(07:51):
this is the second time it's happened, throw this witness out,
they shouldn't be allowed to testify. And so then basically,
and the judge was like, look, I understand this, this is
the second time it's happened, but that's a very extreme thing.
And so they basically had to come in and they
had to question Linda Bailey was her name, and they
had to say, is was listening to to Adamson's testimony
(08:15):
gonna change anything you you were going to testify to
Because if her answer was yes, listening to her her
witness testimony changes what I would have said on the
witness stand, then her her testimony would have been out,
like she would not have been able to testify. But
she's like, no, I didn't learn anything new. So basically
she was able to move forward. But the judge did
(08:35):
say like, look, this is the second time this has happened,
like defense, get your shit together, and so she goes
on and it's again a lot of the same, like
you were saying, Rachel, they're just asking her a bunch
of shit and yeah, and it to me it.
Speaker 2 (08:52):
Was like nothing was relevant, like none of this was
making a case in my opinion.
Speaker 3 (08:59):
And that was one of the big objections that ended
up having to send the jury out of the room
because the defense tries to pull some show, tries to
pull some drama, and basically one of the things they
were trying to establish that between both Adamson and this
Bailey lawyer, these are both family lawyers. You know, between
(09:22):
the two of them, they've got lots and lots of
years of working various divorce you know, relocations, you know,
child custody cases, this kind of stuff. They're very experienced.
These are two very experienced women in this kind of realm.
And so what the defense is trying to say with
(09:45):
both of these lawyers is this was not a contentious case.
They're trying to say, Look, this was no big deal.
This was not a contentious case. And I think what
they're trying to say by saying this is Donna wouldn't
have had any reason to take such a drastic, you know, act,
such as murdering her ex son in law. They're trying
(10:08):
to say, like, this was no big deal because this
kind of stuff happened all the time. Listen to these
two lawyers tell you this wasn't a contentious case. And
so then what the defense tries to do is play
this drama, and they take a bunch of They asked Bailey,
was this a contentious case? And she goes, no, not really,
and then they pull out like four boxes full of
(10:29):
binders and they stack it up on the freaking witness
stand and they were like, is you know this was
a case that you worked on that was a contentious case.
How many boxes do you have? And Kapelman's like, at
this objection of relevance, what is this because this was
not Wendy's case, this was some other random case. And
(10:49):
then defense gets all riled up and the judge is
like whoa, whoa, whoa, sends the jury out and then
they have to go talk about it, and then basically
he the judge throws this ship out. There's no show
bouting in Judge Everett's courtroom. Okay, okay, you shut that
ship down. And because basically the defense was trying to say, hey,
(11:12):
you know, we should be able to establish that Wendy's
case was not a contentious case just by sheer fact
that there was you know that that this the case
that had all of these boxes. Look at all these
boxes and Wendy's case wasn't that big of a case,
but had four boxes, Wendy's had one. Okay, oh why
did Wendy's have one? Yeah, Georgia brings it up because
(11:37):
why well not to you know how many? Uh in July,
because four months into after you know, after the after
one of Dan Markel's filings, he was murdered. So hmm,
so in which Georgia capl membrings up. So basically a
(11:59):
lot of the same from Bailey there. She basically testifies,
oh no, this wasn't a contentious thing. They asked her
too about like did you know about any of the
because she was brought in not because she was a
lawyer on Wendy's case. She was brought in specifically to
look at all of the divorce filings and the and
(12:19):
the relocation stuff as an expert witness to testify to
to you know, whether or not this was a quote
unquote contentious case. And then she was also given some
of the communications and she basically testified that, you know, yes,
Donna was upset after the relocation was denied, and that
(12:46):
she's like, yeah, that's normal. Family members reach out, you know,
because she also worked as a mediator, you know, because
a lot of times and to avoid going to a
full trial and a judge making a final decision on right,
you know, who gets what and how this all works out.
You try to go to a mediator. And so she testified,
(13:07):
you know, with her experience in that, and she's there
to say, yes, that's normal for family to want to
be part of that, and you know, she's like, you know, yeah,
Donna wanted to wanted to keep on keeping on fighting
for relocation. But then eventually she you know, she was
maybe in denial the first couple of weeks after the ruling,
(13:30):
but then eventually she got over it. And then they
were also both both her and the other lawyer also
testified that, yeah, it's not uncommon for people to pay
for for the other party to allow them to relocate.
They're like, yeah, that happens all the time where and
we know that. You know, at one point, Adelson's were like,
we'll give we'll give Dan a million dollars if he'll let.
Speaker 2 (13:52):
You reokay, And I mean I forget one of them,
I forget which one, but one of them talked about
the fact that you know, because they said they eventually
get to the point that you know, Dan was murdered,
and she said like I said, I don't remember if
it was the first one or the second one, but
she's like, yeah, I've had that happen as well, Like,
(14:13):
this is not my first case that there's been a murder,
there's been suicide, there's been other things. You know, well, yep, exactly,
and so and and this witness she also she said
that she also read the communications where Dan was telling
(14:35):
where he had emailed Wendy and the parenting coordinator like look,
Donna's telling the boys, I'm stupid, you know.
Speaker 3 (14:41):
Blah blah blah blah blah, and that the and then
she this is where it gets kind of interesting, right,
because a big part of the prosecution's case was this
quote unquote grandmother motion. And what this witness testifies to
is that, look, this quote unquote grandmother motion that the
(15:02):
prosecution relied so heavily on wasn't maybe as big a
deal as they made it out to be, because she
says that this grandmother motion was actually just one paragraph
out of like ten. He had basically filed this motion
that had like ten different points, one of which was
that Donna Adelson, you know, had been making disparaging remarks
(15:27):
and that it had to do with his the first
right of refusal, meaning you know you can't just if
you're not gonna if you don't want to take care
of the kids, you need to allow me to do it.
Don't just allow the kids to go straight to the grandma.
And she's trying to say stuff like, because you know,
we heard on when prosecute, when the prosecution was presenting
(15:49):
evidence that he basically was the the motion was that
he didn't want her to have unsupervised contact right the kids.
And so she he's basically saying, no, there's nothing like that,
and this motion was basically just all talk and it
was not based in any actual court rulings. If he
(16:10):
really wanted this motion to be real, if he really
wanted Donna Adelson to have no unsupervised contact with the kids,
he would have had to file a whole other petition.
This was just talk blah blah blah blah blah. So
as a lawyer, she's saying, basically, like the legal standing
behind what Dan was filing was not really there. It
(16:32):
was baseless, and he and she was also there to
say that. And we don't know that Donna ever saw
this something that the defense had also brought up during
the prosecution presenting evidence that how do you know that
Donna even saw this to be mad? At? Okay, great,
And so then Kapelman gets up there and she's pissed.
(16:56):
Kaplman's mad. She does not lie, Miss Bailey. You can
tell Cabman's human. She's like holding her head like oh,
and she's like almost yewling at her. But she's going
up there and she's pretty pissed because this lady is
basically downplaying not only the grandma motion, but downplaying kind
(17:22):
of the whole idea that that is a big part
of a lot of people's lives. And she's saying, look
to you, a lawyer, you know these things that are
routine for you these day in, these day out, these
divorce filings, these child custody, these relocations, they're no big
deal to you. But to someone this is their life,
(17:43):
this is make her break, this is their kids, this
is their career. Whatever whatever it is to you, it's
no big deal. To them, it's huge. And the lady
exactly and the and and Bailey is just trying to say,
well ah ah, and she's kind of like pussy footing
around it. And then Georgia Kaplman says, okay, fine, have
you ever had someone murdered or like you said, have
(18:05):
you ever had someone murdered or commit suicide? And during
one of your cases, and the lady said, yes, once
I had someone say if you file for divorce, I
will commit suicide, and unfortunately, this person did just that
their significant other. I filed for divorce and the next
(18:29):
day that person committed suicide. And Georgia Kapelman straight up asked,
is that something you know? Do you think divorce is
something to commit suicide over? She goes me, personally, no,
but that person thought it was something to commit suicide over,
And she goes, well, obviously, yes, obviously because to you,
divorce this is your job, this is routine. You go
(18:51):
through how many of these a week, how many of
these a month, how many of these a year? But
to that person that was their whole life. So what
Capelman's doing is she's b sickly explaining that you're trying
to downplay the grandma motion. You're trying to downplay this
whole proceeding the Adolson Markel you know, relocation and divorce
(19:15):
and child custody arrangements as oh, it was baseless it
wasn't based in core. It meant nothing. Even if Donna
had read it, she couldn't have possibly had worried about
it or been mad about it, because it wouldn't mean anything.
Dan would have had to file a whole nother motion
for it to even have taken effect. You know that
as a lawyer, but to your average person it could
(19:36):
have been very scary. Yeah, for sure, right, And she
did a damn good job of explaining that, and she
really turned it right back on her and just said, yeah,
like here you go, let's take a case example from
your own personal case history here. So she did a
really good job. And then the next person they call
(19:59):
up is actually, interestingly, the lawyer who, for a very
short period in time actually represented Donna. She was Donna's
lawyer ride around the time that Charlie was on trial
and convicted, kind of ride up until around the time
that Donna was arrested. And basically all this lawyer kind
(20:20):
of testified to was that a Donna Adelson seemed to
be making suicidal comments around the time that Charlie Adelson
was on trial and had been convicted. And this all
kind of, she said, in her opinion, stemmed from the
fact that her son was seemingly going to jail for
life and she was really worried about him, and that
(20:43):
their trip to what turned out to be a Vietnam
and non extradition country in her from her knowledge, was
supposed to just be a vacation to help her clear
her mind. That she had no knowledge that it was
going to be an extradition country, and that's basic all
she was there to testify to. That is pretty okay,
(21:07):
Mike ma waw like and substantial either way. I don't
think it played. Yeah, the majority of the it was,
and it didn't I think it you know, it wasn't.
It wasn't there. And then the last witness a spoiler
alert here for the last thing we'll kind of talk about.
The last witness was the victim advocate that actually was
(21:28):
there the day that Dan Marcal was shot and was
with Wendy at the police police station. I mean, if
you guys have followed this case, you know that the
day that that that Dan Markaer was shot and they
brought Wendy into the police station. This is the victim
advocate you often see coming in and out of the
police videos of Wendy in the in the in the room.
(21:52):
She just testified that you know, she was there when
Wendy called her mom to say, Mom, you know, sit down,
gotta tell you something. Danceman shot and the witness pacified. Yeah,
Donna sounded shot. And here's the video. Let's get kind
of it bing bang boom, bing bang boom, because then
(22:18):
we get to the the kind of the grand finale
not really pop fizz bleep.
Speaker 2 (22:24):
Well, to me, it was the only it was the
only part that was worth watching today because the judge
was so irritated with the defense, was the only thing
worth it for me. I was like, so in this moment,
they you know, it's okay, who are you gonna call?
Speaker 3 (22:41):
And the defense.
Speaker 2 (22:45):
Wants a break. They want a reason to break yet
another to talk with Donna because they want to see
if Donna is going to go on the stand. And
you know, what's the right wording, like not not exercise.
Speaker 3 (23:04):
Her right to be silent? Right, yeah, exactly, And so fifth, yeah, plead,
the fifth, plead, the fifth. I was like, wait, plead
the what wait? Yeah?
Speaker 1 (23:13):
Fifth.
Speaker 2 (23:14):
He's like, you've had time. The judge is like, no,
you've had this time to have these conversations and then
he's like, what did you do yesterday? And you know,
and they're like, well we And I will say it
was hilarious too because when when the guy was first
talking and then the defense girl, we still don't know
(23:36):
their names.
Speaker 3 (23:36):
Salman is the guy I just for the life of me,
the lady's name is don't make an impact on me.
Speaker 2 (23:45):
Yeah, no, but but for real. But so, like he
started talking and then when she started talking to Judge
was like, no, no, no, only one of you gets
to have this conversation, and he like backs away, he
shies away. He's like, oh, well I was only gonna
say this one thing, and then she was gonna do.
Speaker 3 (24:03):
It, you know.
Speaker 2 (24:05):
So she stands up, she starts sacking, and it's like, well,
we didn't have this sufficient amount of time. He's like, no,
she had the exact same amount of time as every
other person in this case.
Speaker 3 (24:15):
And he goes and.
Speaker 2 (24:16):
I'm because she was like, well yesterday we did this,
this and that, like we went back to you know,
have other conversations, and then we went to the jail.
They have this conversation, but it still wasn't enough time, right.
But then he also talks about the fact that he's like,
you also had pre trial, yep, and then you have
during and then yep, you guys have it made it
(24:37):
up in that time. I don't know what to tell you.
And eventually it comes.
Speaker 3 (24:41):
Down to where he grants them five minutes with.
Speaker 2 (24:44):
The biggest like huff puff, cackle, laugh everything because he
is over it, dude. But he's like, you have five minutes.
Speaker 3 (24:52):
Well, and the crazy part is, right, is that this
defense team already got an extension, right they are he
got pre trial. They already got extra time, right because
Donna switched her lawyers. And then they said that the
they said that, you know, the there was too much
stuff to go through and that they needed extra time,
(25:14):
so he gave them extra time. Like this this defense
has got has gotten extension after extension after extension. I'm sorry.
He has been more than lenient with the time that
he's allotted them. And and then it was funny because
when he's like, Okay, I'll give you five minutes and
that's it. And then he came back after that five
minutes and he goes, excuse me, excuse me, I'm not
(25:34):
just talking to be talking. He sounded he was like
literally like having when you talk to kindergarteners like I'm
not just talking to talk to hear my own voice,
like you need to listen to me, like I am
the judge. It's time. Your time is over. And that
is when he's like, okay, Donna, what's your answer? Are
you going to testify? And she decides she's not going
(25:55):
to testify at this time and that's that.
Speaker 2 (25:59):
That's that. So we have no Charlie.
Speaker 3 (26:01):
We have no Donna.
Speaker 2 (26:03):
I didn't think Donna was gonna talk, in my opinion,
but I know nothing Charlie would be here this. It
blew my mind when they said we rest I was like, what.
Speaker 3 (26:12):
I'm trying to think if there was anything compelling? Bill
answer is no, there's.
Speaker 2 (26:20):
Nothing memorable from it.
Speaker 3 (26:22):
I mean.
Speaker 2 (26:24):
No, the only memorable moments are when Kapelman decides to
be like, hey, guess what I'm here and nothing you
say matters.
Speaker 3 (26:33):
That's it. So, I mean, that's it. Defense rested and
it's crazy, you guys. I will tell you I was
actually behind watching today because my spoilery. My job was
like jobbing today, so I was behind watching my trial
and I'm texting Rachel. I'm like, okay, I'm catching up.
I'm catching up and she's I was just like, blah
(26:54):
blah blah, it's boring, like what's happening today, Like why
is this sucking step? And she I was like da
da da da, and then she goes yeah, and then
they rested. I was like, shut up, you're lying. You
can't be for real and she's like no, like for real.
I was like stop it, like you're you're pulling my leg,
like you've got to be joking. She's like, I'm so sorry,
Like I thought you knew. But I literally had been
glued to my work computer for a couple hours, like
(27:15):
not even checking on anything. And I swear to god,
I was like, no way, how in the world, And
cause I was like, there's absolutely no way. I mean,
they did not if you put together the amount of
time that they actually had any presented any evidence, because
they had taken so many breaks, they had so many issues,
(27:36):
there were so many sidebars, there's so many times the
jury had to be taken out of the corner, like
there's so many like for instance, yesterday they recessed early
so that they could go confer with Donna, like they
barely had a full day.
Speaker 2 (27:49):
If deep Corbett spent more time on the stands than
anyone of theirs combined, and he was there.
Speaker 3 (27:57):
One hundred corbet. It's time on the witness stand was
longer than the defense's entire like one hundred percent. So
tomorrow will be closing arguments and then we're just waiting
for the jury. We're're just gonna be We're literally gonna
be at crime con being like, what's the what's the
freaking verdict? And I don't, I mean to me, there
(28:21):
is no. I mean, it's very it's very clear cut.
But obviously we're very biased in this case. I guess
if I was to put on my maybe I know
nothing about this case hat while I'm trying to could
I see that reasonable?
Speaker 2 (28:38):
Yeah? Where where is it? And all?
Speaker 3 (28:41):
I mean, it only it takes one person to see
reasonable doubt. It only takes one. It takes one grandma
who says, oh, she would never. Yeah right, I'm a
grandmother and I would never. So it only takes that
one person.
Speaker 2 (28:56):
To think the opposite and say, wow, she would do
that to the grandchildren's fault. Now, wow, huh, that's crazy.
One thing I wanted to say about the fact that
you were talking about how I like, spoiler spoiler for you, Kylie,
spoiler alerted it for me. You guys. She so in
(29:19):
one of our group chats she had I thought she
was joking, so I thought she was joking. And then
after because I was like, oh, I'm not there, shut
your face, and she's like, no, I'm totally kidding. I'm
totally kidding. So then when I fast forwarded it and
I saw what had actually happened, I had to message
her on my own because I was like, dude, you
(29:39):
little butt head.
Speaker 3 (29:42):
It was so funny. Oh my god, Oh.
Speaker 1 (29:46):
My gosh, it was so funny.
Speaker 3 (29:49):
Oh this is I did this ession. It's so it's
crazy because it's it's such a like it's like that
moment where you're like, oh my gosh, what's gonna happen
with the It's like when you go up a roller poster.
It's like that one. If you guys have ever been
to Disneyland and you go on Pirates of the Caribbean
and you think it's going to be like that, It's
gonna be a huge like ooh, but it ends up
(30:11):
being just like oh yah.
Speaker 2 (30:13):
Yeah, you know. I have two things. So the first,
I mean talking about escalation or whatever it's like. When
the defense first started, right after prosecution rested, we had
high hopes, like we were like, day, there's going to
(30:34):
be some stuff that comes our way. There's gonna and
we even have the conversation of is there going to
be something that gives us that reasonable doubt right because
we are where we stand? And I was like, what
are they going to bring that's me gonna make me
question something? The answer was nothing. They did a very
poor job in my.
Speaker 3 (30:53):
Opinion, here we are.
Speaker 2 (30:55):
Did you watch after the defense wrested? So that was
one other thing where I could not stop laughing with
the judge again when they asked for them to change
the capitalization to react.
Speaker 3 (31:12):
Anybody, so you're asking for a stylistic change? Here are
you seriously asking? You? Just you just put this judge
through two days of your bullshit, suleman, and now you're
gonna say, hey, judge, can you do me an inc favor?
We don't want that cap her name and their charges
(31:34):
aren't capitalized?
Speaker 2 (31:35):
Please? Yeah?
Speaker 3 (31:37):
For real?
Speaker 1 (31:38):
Oh my god?
Speaker 2 (31:40):
Was his his reaction was so funny because not only
was his like remark hilarias like his face, his like
his like.
Speaker 3 (31:49):
He's like, you know, he's like, he was so.
Speaker 2 (31:54):
Over it, dude, he was so funny.
Speaker 3 (32:00):
He has been a absolute wonderful judge to watch throughout
this entire process. Between him and Kapelman, it has just
been it's been. It's when you watch the defense and
it's just like, I'm sorry, it's been a dumpster fire
(32:22):
and this crazy thing. They're rich, the Atosn's gonna afford
some good ass attorneys.
Speaker 1 (32:29):
Yep, I'm sorry.
Speaker 3 (32:31):
Why in the world did you spin all of it
on Charlie's I don't because come on, man, then to
just you know, be able to just look across and
see Georgia do her thing, and I feel really bad
because the other the other lawyer she's with, Ooh, I'm
gonna have to look up her name too because she
she does a pretty good job as well. But then, yeah,
(32:55):
Judge Everett is just they're they're a joy chair are
And this is the thing you guys, I you know,
and it doesn't make me think Rachel because I am
I'm a huge reasonable doubter. I'm a huge you know,
you guys have heard me talk about I've covered throughout
(33:16):
like mother like Murder's history, a lot of cases when
it comes to wrongful convictions, and whenever I cover those cases,
even sometimes ones that aren't fully come out to be
wrongful convictions. If you guys haven't heard, I covered it
a while a while back. But the Koreatown massacres that
(33:39):
I covered because those were local here in LA, there's
the Korea Town massacres, right, I think is that what
they called them. I'll have to go back.
Speaker 2 (33:48):
There was different names, but.
Speaker 3 (33:50):
There was different You're right, it was different names, so
I could be getting getting them confused. That one that
you know there, it isn't considered technically a wrongful conviction
because he is still he is still in in prison.
But in my mind, I'm like, God, there's so much
reasonable doubt in this case. Right, So I'm a huge
proponent of reasonable doubt, but just just just don't see
(34:13):
it in this case. You see it in this case?
Speaker 2 (34:17):
Nope.
Speaker 3 (34:18):
So uh, we will have to see I I and
you'll be getting our next up tomorrow crime con tomorrow. Baby,
Rachel and I are literally on on planes tomorrow, So
we apologize now with the audio. The next couple of
days is gonna be it is what it is, but
we will have to be bringing you updates. This will
(34:40):
not be the first time we bring you an Adelson
update from an airport or a hotel event, because I've
done it before. We will do it.
Speaker 2 (34:49):
Yes, I mean, I leave, I leave to my plane
in three hours, so I look, I'm ready to pop
on this mic and have these conversation.
Speaker 3 (35:03):
Okay, Well, with that, you guys will hear from us
tomorrow at the very least so that we can discuss
how awesome Georgia Kapelman's closing arguments are going to because
we know they're going to be amazing, and then you
may not hear from us the next day, depending on
how long it takes the jury to deliberate. Other than that,
(35:25):
you will probably see us all over Instagram because we
will be updating NonStop from crime con follow along for
all of our shenanigans and other than that, y'all, please
take care of yourselves and we will talk to you
guys tomorrow. Thank you so much for following along with
us on this journey of our Mark hal Adelson trial updates.
(35:49):
This has been really fun for us, really fun for me.
You guys know that this particular case has always been
just one I've I've followed very closely, so this has
been a lot of fun for me. Rachel, thank you
for just being the ever so supportive co hosts on
this one. And we will talk to you guys tomorrow.
Speaker 2 (36:10):
Broy denver baby, all right, talk to you tomorrow.
Speaker 3 (36:15):
Okay, love you bye. He love you bye.
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.