Day 2 - October 27, 2023

Wendi Adelson testified about her Tallahassee plans, July 2014 activities, police cooperation, and relationship with Jeffrey Lacasse as the defense challenged a relocation-based motive.

Wendi Adelson explained her move from Tallahassee, addressed the indictment and recorded calls, and responded to questions about family access and the defense theory; the court gave two limiting instructions.

The court set proffer and scope limits for anticipated Rivera testimony, confirmed a hearsay limitation for Mr. Lacasse, and clarified a prior witness could not opine on constitutional law.

Officer Bill Brannon described securing the Trescott Drive scene and observing a Honda Odyssey-type vehicle approach the roadblock, turn around, and leave.

Brannon qualified his estimates about the perimeter and vehicle timing and said he was unfamiliar with cell-phone data.

Brannon confirmed the roadblock markings and said he could see the law-enforcement activity from his perspective.

Jeffrey Lacasse described Wendi Adelson's relocation-related distress, a purported statement by Charles Adelson about criminal connections, and June–July 2014 events before the jury was excused over a disputed line of testimony.

The court barred proposed impeachment of Wendi Adelson through Jeffrey Lacasse on fairness grounds, heard a proffer outside the jury's presence, and temporarily applied the same ruling to the celebration-dinner issue.

Defense counsel challenged Jeffrey Lacasse's memory, the timing of his police report, his cordial text to Charlie Adelson, and the basis for his account of Wendi Adelson's distress.

Jeffrey Lacasse said he did not know of the alleged conspiracy during his earlier interactions with the defendant and Katherine Magbanua.

The court recessed for lunch, reminded defense counsel to keep future proffers from being overheard, and then resumed the State's case.

Dan Markel's attorney described ongoing family-court conflict, rejected a relocation-payoff scenario, and said Markel was not planning to relocate.

Defense briefly questioned Stephen Webster about his family-law experience and representation of Professor Markel.

June Umchinda described her relationship with Charlie Adelson, her observations after the investigation became known to her, and prior statements the prosecutor used to question her current account.

Defense challenged the timing and scope of June Umchinda's observations, while the court excluded a proposed account of Charlie Adelson's response as self-serving hearsay.

June Umchinda addressed earlier statements about Charlie's behavior and his claimed assistance to Katherine Magbanua.

Wendi Adelson denied alleged statements to Jeffrey Lacasse about a hitman and a celebration dinner.

Wendi Adelson said Jane McPherson raised Jeffrey Lacasse's name with police and denied trying to frame him.

Wendi Adelson said Jane McPherson first raised Jeffrey Lacasse's name during her police interview.

Jeffrey Lacasse recounted a reported hitman statement, questions about his planned trip, and evidence he said placed him in Tennessee at the time of the homicide.

Defense challenged the timing and reliability of Jeffrey Lacasse's reported statements; Lacasse maintained his account and explained his delayed police report.

Lacasse clarified his recollection and recordkeeping, then explained why he did not report an alleged hitman-related statement before the murder.

Lacasse said he destroyed notes used to guide investigator interviews, and the defense emphasized that the notes could not be reviewed.

Lacasse said his personal notes were voluntary organizational aids and that their contents were included in the provided interviews.

Former friend Ryan Fitzpatrick testified about Charlie Adelson's family relationships, cash handling, post-2016-arrest demeanor, and alleged disclosures, while acknowledging a later personal falling out and limits on his memory.

Ryan Fitzpatrick acknowledged hostile messages and recent social-media posts about Charlie as the defense questioned his motives and whether public attention could explain the behavior he observed after Katie's arrest.

The court arranged a defense proffer and discussed timing for Rivera's testimony and possible cross-examination.

The court allowed limited defense questioning about Rivera's Latin Kings affiliation, subject to a warning against collateral matters.

Luis Rivera described his cooperation agreement and gave a first-hand account of the alleged planning, shooting, payment, and aftermath of Dan Markel's murder.