Skip to content
Charlie Adelson trial-day trial-day Georgia CapplemanDan RashbaumBill BrannonWendi AdelsonRyan FitzpatrickJeffrey LacasseLuis RiveraJune UmchindaStephen WebstercrossredirectdirectrecrossDay 2 - October 27, 2023 Day 2 closed out Wendi Adelson's multi-proceeding testimony, turned on a contested motion in limine that temporarily blocked then ultimately admitted Jeffrey Lacasse's account of Wendi's alleged statement that Charlie Adelson had investigated hiring a hitman, and ended with Luis Rivera's eyewitness account of the murder identifying the Adelson family as the contract's money source.
← Day 1 Charlie Adelson Day 3 →

Day 2 - October 27, 2023

Wendi Adelson Completes Testimony; Lacasse Delivers Hitman Allegation; Rivera Names "The Dentist"

Judge Stephen S. Everett
25 Proceedings
9 Pages
7 Witnesses
3,265 Lines
Day 2 of 8
Appearing:

Day 2 closed out Wendi Adelson's multi-proceeding testimony, turned on a contested motion in limine that temporarily blocked then ultimately admitted Jeffrey Lacasse's account of Wendi's alleged statement that Charlie Adelson had investigated hiring a hitman, and ended with Luis Rivera's eyewitness account of the murder identifying the Adelson family as the contract's money source.

Full day summary

Day 2 opened with the conclusion of Wendi Adelson's cross-examination and redirect. Rashbaum used defense exhibits to establish that she had no foreknowledge of the murder — scheduling family visits, work meetings, and travel after July 18 — while stipulated preschool records confirmed she did not have custody of her children on July 17, directly addressing any claimed sighting near Markel's house. Wendi confirmed comprehensive cooperation with investigators on the day of the murder and rebutted the suggestion that she had benefited from Markel's death. On redirect, Cappleman countered the "future plans" argument by establishing that none of those plans came to pass — Wendi relocated to South Florida out of fear, summing up the loss as "all our plans were broken." Cappleman also clarified for the jury that Wendi is not charged in the case and that Charlie's alleged co-conspirator is Katherine Magbanua, not Wendi. The redirect closed with Wendi stating she had learned only the prior day — at trial — that the defense theory holds Charlie knew who killed Dan Markel since 2014, while she had in the interim moved her family closer to those killers in South Florida. TPD Officer Bill Brannon testified briefly about a Honda Odyssey — the model Wendi Adelson drove — that approached his roadblock at the Trescott Drive crime scene around noon to 1:00 p.m., stopped quickly, and turned around without the driver asking about the police activity. Brannon established the roadblock was not visible from the Centerville/Trescott intersection and required deliberate navigation to reach. Rashbaum's cross noted that cell phone data placed the vehicle at the perimeter after 12:30 p.m. and that Brannon could not see whether the driver was on a phone, introducing an innocent-distraction alternative. Jeffrey Lacasse, an FSU associate professor who dated Wendi Adelson from fall 2013 through July 2014, testified on direct about three matters: a March 2014 South Florida dinner at which he met Charlie Adelson once and was introduced to Katherine Magbanua as Charlie's new girlfriend; Charlie's hot-tub statement that evening claiming connections on "both sides of the tracks" including a criminal element in Cuban neighborhoods, delivered in what Lacasse described as a bragging tone; and Wendi's extreme anxiety in early June 2014, which Lacasse later understood coincided with hitmen visiting Tallahassee. His direct examination ended abruptly when he began recounting a July 13, 2014 conversation in which Wendi asked to tell him something in confidence about Dan Markel — defense counsel twice invoked a motion in limine and the jury was removed. Out of the jury's presence, Judge Everett heard argument on whether Lacasse could testify that Wendi told him on July 13, 2014 that Charlie had "looked into all possible options to take care of the Danny Markel problem, including hiring a hitman" at a cost of roughly $15,000 to $50,000. The prosecution argued the statement was admissible as impeachment following Wendi's denial; the defense argued Rashbaum had been told at morning sidebar the prosecution was not going down that path, causing him to forgo questions to Wendi he could no longer ask because she could invoke the Fifth Amendment. Judge Everett ruled on fundamental fairness grounds — not hearsay law — that defense strategy had been materially affected and that Wendi's Fifth Amendment right compounded the prejudice. The statement was excluded from the jury for the time being, with the door left open for revisitation. A full proffer followed, including Lacasse's account of Wendi's demeanor ("dead serious," "chilling," "my stomach flipped") and a second excluded item: Lacasse's account that Wendi told him Charlie referred to a post-murder dinner as a celebration dinner. Both items were deferred. Cappleman objected for the record that the same impeachment technique had been admitted in the prior trial with the same defense team present. Jury-side cross of Lacasse covered three impeachment tracks: the timing of his TPD statement (three days after the murder, after being called in as a suspect himself); a warm thank-you text he sent Charlie the day after the dinner despite the alleged criminal-connections remarks (Lacasse conceded he was "polite rather than honest"); and a prior statement in which Lacasse told law enforcement that "everyone in the legal community" expected Markel's custody motion to fail. Lacasse was a combative witness who volunteered references to suppressed testimony and told Rashbaum directly "I know you have an agenda." Dan Markel's last family law attorney, Stephen Webster, testified that the custody case was heading toward trial, not resolution. He confirmed the day before the murder, Markel had emailed him in fury about Wendi unilaterally enrolling their son in school. Webster recounted Donna Adelson allegedly calling Markel "stupid" on a Skype call and Markel's intent to seek her enjoinment from unsupervised contact with the children. He flatly denied the defense theory that a million-dollar Adelson payoff could have resolved the dispute, and denied that Markel had any relocation plans. When Rashbaum noted on cross that Webster had never appeared in court with Markel, Webster replied: "No, he got killed before I had my chance." June Umchinda, Charlie Adelson's last serious girlfriend, testified under acknowledged continuing emotional attachment to the defendant. She recounted Charlie's instruction to say "I don't know anything" if police came asking questions, his extreme behavioral changes after Magbanua's October 2016 arrest — violent, agitated, sleepless, acquiring a second phone — and a horoscope exchange in which Charlie read about past wrongs returning to haunt a person and responded "Isn't that so true? Wow, that's on point." She also confirmed Charlie told her about the murder by saying "they know who did it." On cross, Rashbaum introduced "the bump" — the FBI extortion sting targeting Donna Adelson — as an alternate explanation for Charlie's agitation, and reframed his security posture as a frightened man's response to public scrutiny. Umchinda volunteered that her sense of danger came from threats directed at Charlie and the risk of public recognition, not from fear of Charlie himself. Wendi Adelson was recalled briefly to place her flat denial of Lacasse's proffer account on the record — she denied telling Lacasse that Charlie had investigated hiring a hitman and denied any reference to a celebration dinner. A brief recross by Rashbaum established that detective Jane McPherson, not Wendi, had introduced Lacasse's name in the July 18 police interview. Lacasse was then recalled before the jury and delivered the prosecution's most significant direct testimony of the day. He testified that on July 13, 2014 — five days before the murder — Wendi asked to speak with him confidentially and told him, in a tone he described as chilling and entirely distinct from a recurring television joke, that Charlie had investigated all possible options to deal with the problem of Dan Markel, including hiring a hitman at a cost of roughly $15,000 to $50,000. He testified that only the dollar figure was uncertain; the substance of the disclosure was not. He further testified that on July 14, Wendi questioned him in unusual detail about his planned July 18 trip to Tennessee — his departure time, route, whether he was still going — and that had he followed his original plan he would have driven past Markel's neighborhood in his silver-gray Nissan Sentra at approximately the time of the murder. He described the killers' June reconnaissance trip as coinciding with his only other out-of-town drive that semester and concluded that both of his out-of-town trips aligned with murder-related activity. The examination closed with his account of Wendi telling him, roughly ten days after the murder, that Charlie had taken her to dinner he called a celebration dinner, and that she vomited spontaneously at the table. On cross, Rashbaum built a credibility attack on Lacasse's acknowledged belief that Wendi tried to frame him, his romantic attachment during early police interviews ("fairly pathetic" and "still under her spell"), and an eight-month delay in disclosing the celebration dinner. Lacasse explained the delay as fear of Charlie Adelson and produced contemporaneous notes — which he later destroyed after using them to guide recorded investigator interviews, a concession Rashbaum closed on. Ryan Fitzpatrick, Charlie's near-daily friend for roughly six years before a bitter falling-out, testified under subpoena with stated reluctance. He confirmed the Adelson family was "not fond" of Dan Markel, that Charlie routinely carried large sums in stapled hundred-dollar bundles, and that after the murder Charlie made a statement along the lines of "you get away with anything, you get away with murder, and you keep your mouth shut" — which Fitzpatrick characterized as a tasteless joke. He testified that Charlie's demeanor became markedly more nervous after Magbanua's arrest, and that despite daily contact throughout 2014 and 2015, Charlie never mentioned Magbanua extorting him before the murder. On cross, Rashbaum produced threatening texts Fitzpatrick sent Charlie during their business dispute — including an explicit threat to contact the FBI about the murder if Charlie pursued repayment — and trial-week true crime social media posts in which Fitzpatrick posted Charlie's photo and wagered on a life sentence, contradicting his reluctant-disinterested posture. The cross was deferred to Monday. The day closed with a proffer on whether Rashbaum could question Luis Rivera about his Latin Kings affiliation. Judge Everett ruled it admissible as relevant to the defense theory of the case. Rivera then testified before the jury, wearing a jail uniform under a cooperation agreement. He described two Tallahassee trips in 2014 — a June surveillance run and the July 16–18 trip ending in murder. He identified the money source as "the dentist" — his name for Charlie Adelson and Wendi Adelson — and described Garcia shooting Markel twice in his driveway from the driver's side while Markel raised his hands. Rivera testified that immediately after leaving the murder scene, Garcia called Magbanua; before Garcia could say anything, she responded "I know." Rivera received $35,000 in stapled hundreds the morning after the murder. Cross-examination of Rivera was deferred to Monday.

Video thumbnail 8:15:05
Watch →

1. Wendi Adelson — Cross/Redirect

Wendi Adelson's testimony concludes on Day 2: Rashbaum finishes cross-examination focused on her pre-murder plans and post-murder cooperation, Cappleman delivers redirect rehabilitating her credibility and clarifying she is not a charged co-conspirator, and Judge Everett dismisses her subject to possible recall.

Cross
Wendi Adelson Dan Rashbaum
420 lines

Defense continued cross-examining Wendi Adelson, establishing through document-refreshed testimony that she had made concrete future plans before the murder, tracing her innocent July 18 movements, highlighting her full police cooperation including naming herself first as a suspect, and closing with evidence that she preserved Dan Markel's memory for their sons.

Redirect
Wendi Adelson Georgia Cappleman
208 lines

Cappleman's redirect systematically dismantled the defense's cross-examination framework — exposing that Wendi's Tallahassee plans never materialized because she fled in fear, narrowing the Profs Blog's reach to a law-professor audience to limit its exculpatory weight, and rebutting the 'unindicted co-conspirator' framing by naming Katherine Magbanua as Charlie's actual alleged partner. The examination closed with a dramatic confrontation in which Wendi stated she had learned only the day before — at trial — that the defense theory holds Charlie knew since 2014 who had killed Dan Markel while she unknowingly moved her family closer to the killers.

Procedural
Recess and Sidebar Preview — Next Two Witnesses

Highlights

2. Bill Brannon — Direct/Cross/Redirect

TPD Officer Bill Brannon's testimony covers his crime scene role on July 18, 2014 and his observation of a Honda Odyssey that approached the Trescott Drive roadblock, stopped, and turned around without inquiry. Cross-examination challenged the distance of the tape and the timing of the turn-around; redirect restored the visibility of law enforcement activity at the scene.

Direct
Bill Brannon Georgia Cappleman
105 lines

TPD Officer Brannon established the July 18, 2014 crime scene perimeter on Trescott Drive and testified that a Honda Odyssey — the same model Wendi Adelson drove — approached his roadblock around noon, then quickly turned around without the driver stopping to ask about the police activity.

Cross
Bill Brannon Dan Rashbaum
23 lines

Defense cross targeted two narrow points from Brannon's direct: the precision of his crime scene tape distance estimate and the timing of the Honda Odyssey approach — extracting concessions that cell phone data placing the car after 12:30 p.m. is consistent with his memory and that he could not see whether the driver was on a phone.

Redirect
Bill Brannon Georgia Cappleman
22 lines

Cappleman's two-question redirect re-established that crime scene tape and Brannon's patrol vehicle were visible in the roadway, and drew Brannon's first-person confirmation that he could see the law enforcement activity from his position.

3. Jeffrey Lacasse — Direct/Cross/Redirect

Jeffrey Lacasse, Wendi Adelson's former boyfriend, completed his testimony on Day 2 — including a significant jury-out ruling in which Judge Everett excluded, on fairness grounds, Lacasse's account of Wendi telling him that Charlie Adelson had explored hiring a hitman roughly five days before Dan Markel's murder.

Direct
Jeffrey Lacasse Georgia Cappleman
189 lines

Wendi Adelson's former boyfriend testified about Charlie Adelson's 2014 hot-tub boast of criminal-world connections, Wendi's extreme anxiety during the June window when hitmen were in Tallahassee, her conspicuous emphasis on being home by July 18, and Katherine Magbanua's early integration into the Adelson family circle — before testimony about a July 13 confidence was cut short by defense objection.

Procedural
Motion in Limine: Exclusion of Lacasse Proffer on Wendi Adelson's Alleged Hitman Statement — Ruled Out on Fairness Grounds
183 lines

Outside the jury, the court litigated whether Lacasse could testify about a July 13, 2014 statement in which Wendi Adelson allegedly told him Charlie had explored hiring a hitman for Dan Markel. The judge excluded it on fundamental fairness grounds after finding defense strategy was prejudiced by Cappleman's morning sidebar representation, but ordered a proffer — which Lacasse delivered in detail, including the chilling content and context of the alleged statement.

Cross
Jeffrey Lacasse Dan Rashbaum
150 lines

Defense cross-examination attacked the reliability of Lacasse's criminal-connections testimony by establishing he spoke to police only after being called in as a murder suspect, then read back a warm post-dinner text to Charlie that directly contradicted his trial portrayal — while Lacasse proved resistant throughout, volunteering unsolicited inculpatory asides and openly accusing Rashbaum of having an agenda.

Redirect
Jeffrey Lacasse Georgia Cappleman
11 lines

Cappleman's three-question redirect reframed Lacasse's failure to report Charlie's hot-tub remarks by establishing he had no contemporaneous knowledge that Charlie or Magbanua were conspiring to murder Dan Markel.

Highlights

4. Stephen Webster — Direct/Cross

Stephen Webster, the Florida attorney who represented Dan Markel in custody proceedings from May 2014 until his death, testified on direct and cross about the state of the case in the days before the murder.

Procedural
Lunch Recess
Direct
Stephen Webster Georgia Cappleman
71 lines

Dan Markel's family law attorney testified that the custody dispute was actively contentious through the day of the murder, that Donna Adelson's parental-alienation conduct had enraged Markel and prompted plans to seek her enjoinment, and that no million-dollar settlement or relocation was ever a possibility — directly rebutting three defense-side narratives.

Cross
Stephen Webster Dan Rashbaum
33 lines

Rashbaum's brief cross attacked Webster's family law credentials — he was a criminal defense attorney with no board certification — and surfaced that Markel's prior lawyer had withdrawn and that the court had admonished Markel earlier in the year. Webster conceded the credential points but delivered a stark, unscripted line when asked whether he had ever appeared in court with Markel.

Procedural
Afternoon Transition — Witness Located, Jury Projector Glare Note

Highlights

5. June Umchinda — Direct/Cross/Redirect

June Umchinda's complete testimony — direct, cross, and redirect — covering her relationship with Charlie Adelson from late 2015 through mid-2017, his behavioral changes after Katherine Magbanua's October 2016 arrest, and competing explanations for that conduct.

Direct
June Umchinda Georgia Cappleman
345 lines

Charlie Adelson's ex-girlfriend testified about his instruction to stay silent with police, his extreme behavioral meltdown after Katherine Magbanua's arrest, large cash holdings, and a horoscope exchange the prosecution frames as an inadvertent acknowledgment of culpability — while repeatedly hedging her stronger 2018 law enforcement interview statements throughout.

Cross
June Umchinda Dan Rashbaum
130 lines

Rashbaum established that he never contacted or deposed Umchinda before trial, anchored Charlie's behavioral changes to the Donna Adelson extortion sting rather than to murder guilt, reframed his security measures as post-murder fear, and closed with a clean denial that Charlie ever instructed her to lie.

Redirect
June Umchinda Georgia Cappleman
30 lines

Cappleman's brief redirect reframed the defense's closing 'never told you to lie' point as Charlie having told Umchinda a lie, reanchored his erratic behavior to weeks before any news coverage, and used Umchinda's 2022 trial testimony to lock in her earlier acknowledgments that Charlie gave Magbanua a car and said he paid for half her breast augmentation.

Highlights

6. Wendi Adelson — Direct/Cross/Redirect (Recall)

Wendi Adelson's recall testimony closes with three short proceedings — a recall direct in which she denied Lacasse's excluded proffer account, a recross establishing that detectives introduced Lacasse's name in her July 18 interrogation, and a redirect confirming the same. Judge Everett then dismissed Wendi subject to subpoena, ending her multi-day testimony.

Direct
Wendi Adelson Georgia Cappleman
19 lines

In a two-question recall, Wendi Adelson flatly denied ever telling Jeffrey Lacasse on July 13, 2014, that Charlie had explored hiring a hitman, and denied ever characterizing the post-murder dinner as a celebration.

Cross
Wendi Adelson Dan Rashbaum
24 lines

Rashbaum's four-question recross established that detective Jane McPherson, not Wendi, first named Jeffrey Lacasse in the July 18 police interview, and that Wendi flatly denied trying to frame him.

Redirect
Wendi Adelson Georgia Cappleman
13 lines

Cappleman's four-question redirect confirmed that detective Jane McPherson, not Wendi Adelson, introduced Jeffrey Lacasse's name in the July 18, 2014 police interview; Judge Everett then dismissed Wendi subject to subpoena.

7. Jeffrey Lacasse — Direct/Cross/Redirect/Recross (Recall)

Jeffrey Lacasse's recalled direct examination — centered on Wendi Adelson's alleged July 13, 2014 disclosure that Charlie had investigated hiring a hitman for $15,000–$50,000 — followed by cross-examination, two redirects, a recross, and a sidebar over Lacasse's destroyed handwritten notes.

Direct
Jeffrey Lacasse Georgia Cappleman
79 lines

Recalled after Wendi Adelson denied making the statement, Lacasse testified before the jury that five days before the murder Wendi told him in a chilling confidence that Charlie had investigated hiring a hitman to kill Dan Markel — and that the following night Wendi questioned him in detail about his scheduled July 18 travel, a route that would have placed him and his gray car near the Markel residence at the time of the killing.

Cross
Jeffrey Lacasse Dan Rashbaum
120 lines

Defense attacked Lacasse's credibility by establishing that he believes the Adelson family tried to frame him for the murder, that he failed to alert police after each of three escalating disclosures, and that he waited eight months to report the alleged celebration dinner — while Lacasse held firm on every substantive point and admitted he had been scared of Charlie Adelson.

Redirect
Jeffrey Lacasse Georgia Cappleman
30 lines

Cappleman's focused redirect corrected Rashbaum's characterization of Charlie's hot-tub statement, surfaced Lacasse's hundred-page note-taking as fear-driven thoroughness, and provided his rationale for not alerting police — Wendi's disclosure was framed in the past tense with no indication of an active plot.

Procedural
Post-Lacasse Sidebar — Notes Inquiry and Break
Recross
Jeffrey Lacasse Dan Rashbaum
16 lines

Defense recross established that Lacasse destroyed the handwritten notes he used to guide his investigator interviews, leaving no independent means to verify their contents.

Redirect
Jeffrey Lacasse Georgia Cappleman
9 lines

Cappleman's two-question re-redirect established that no law required Lacasse to preserve his handwritten notes and that their contents were fully captured in his recorded investigator interview — directly rebutting the recross implication that destruction was improper.

Highlights

Jeffrey Lacasse - Direct (Recall) testimony highlight Lacasse testifies before the jury that Wendi Adelson told him on July 13, 2014 that Charlie had investigated hiring a hitman to kill Dan Markel, with only the dollar figure — $15,000 or $50,000 — in question. He characterizes the disclosure as chilling and explicitly distinguishes it from her TV joke. Jeffrey Lacasse - Direct (Recall) “She asked to speak to me confidentially, in a very serious tone of voice, told me that Charlie had investigated all possible options to take care of the problem of Danny Markel — including hiring a hitman, which would cost about $15,000. And I later revised that and thought maybe it was $50,000, but the dollar amount was the only thing in question. She definitely said that Charlie Adelson had looked into hiring a hitman to kill Danny Markel.” — Jeffrey Lacasse The prosecution's central direct-evidence claim: Lacasse's account of Wendi Adelson's July 13, 2014 confidence linking Charlie Adelson to a pre-murder hitman inquiry, delivered five days before the killing. The final sentence is an unambiguous restatement that removes any hedging from the disclosure. Jeffrey Lacasse - Direct (Recall) “No. I'd heard that joke repeatedly. I knew that joke. This was something very different. This was chilling, a little scary, made my stomach flip. I found it disturbing.” — Jeffrey Lacasse Lacasse's demeanor evidence distinguishing Wendi's hitman disclosure from a recurring TV joke — anchoring the statement's gravity and preemptively rebutting any suggestion that the July 13 conversation was casual or ambiguous. Jeffrey Lacasse - Direct (Recall) testimony highlight Lacasse describes Wendi's bizarre July 14 questioning in a yoga studio parking lot about his scheduled July 18 trip — departure time, route, whether he was still going — and explains that following his original plan would have placed him and his gray Nissan Sentra near Markel's house at the time of the murder, likely on the same cell tower as the killers. Jeffrey Lacasse - Direct (Recall) testimony highlight Lacasse recounts that Wendi told him, roughly ten days after the murder, that Charlie had taken her to what he called a celebration dinner and that she spontaneously vomited at the table after he said something. When asked whether the celebration was specified as being about Markel's death, Lacasse answers: not specified. Jeffrey Lacasse - Direct (Recall) “That she went out to dinner with Charlie for what he called a celebration dinner. He said something to her, she spontaneously vomited on the table.” — Jeffrey Lacasse Lacasse's account of the post-murder dinner in which Charlie used the word celebration — Wendi's physical reaction at the table presented as evidence of her understanding of what was being celebrated.

8. Ryan Fitzpatrick — Direct/Cross

Ryan Fitzpatrick, Charlie Adelson's close friend for roughly six years before a bitter falling-out, testified under subpoena about Charlie's cash habits, a post-murder statement about getting away with anything, and a sharp change in demeanor following Magbanua's 2016 arrest. Cross-examination attacked Fitzpatrick's credibility with a $2 million lawsuit Charlie had filed against him, threatening texts Fitzpatrick sent during the dispute, and social media posts made during trial week in which Fitzpatrick had posted Charlie's photo and predicted a life sentence.

Direct
Ryan Fitzpatrick Georgia Cappleman
145 lines

Charlie Adelson's former close friend testified under subpoena about a post-murder 'get away with murder' remark, Charlie's cash-stapling habit, and his escalating stress after Katherine Magbanua's arrest — with Cappleman pre-empting defense impeachment by eliciting the acrimonious falling-out and lawsuit on direct.

Cross
Ryan Fitzpatrick Dan Rashbaum
103 lines

Defense cross exposed Fitzpatrick's bias and financial motive through threatening texts he sent Charlie Adelson during a business dispute — including explicit FBI threats tied to repayment demands — and through social media posts wagering on a life sentence made during trial week, while also offering innocent explanations for Charlie's post-arrest nervousness.

Procedural
Sidebar Transition — Witness Logistics and Cross-Examination Scheduling

Highlights

9. Luis Rivera — Direct

Luis Rivera's direct examination as the prosecution's cooperating eyewitness, preceded by a proffer on his Latin Kings affiliation and closed by a weekend recess deferring cross-examination to Monday.

Procedural
Proffer of Luis Rivera — Latin Kings Gang Affiliation
Direct
Luis Rivera Georgia Cappleman
682 lines

Cooperating co-defendant Luis Rivera admitted driving the getaway car, identified Sigfredo Garcia as the shooter, traced the $100,000 contract back to 'the dentist' (Charlie Adelson) through Katherine Magbanua, and testified that Magbanua already said 'I know' before Garcia could tell her the murder was done.

Procedural
End-of-Day Recess — Luis Rivera Cross Deferred to Monday

Highlights

← Day 1 Charlie Adelson Day 3 →