Jeffrey Lacasse — Direct/Cross/Redirect
530 linesJUDGE EVERETT: Please call your next witness. Have a good day.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Jeffrey Lacasse.
JUDGE EVERETT: Please raise your right hand, sir.
JUDGE EVERETT: Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give will be the truth?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yes.
JUDGE EVERETT: You may take your seat.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Please introduce yourself and spell your name.
JEFFREY LACASSE: My name is Jeffrey Lacasse, J-E-F-F-R-E-Y L-A-C-A-S-S-E.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: How are you employed, sir?
JEFFREY LACASSE: I'm an associate professor at Florida State University.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: How long have you been with FSU?
JEFFREY LACASSE: I came back in 2013. I was also there from 2000 to 2008.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Have you always lived in Tallahassee?
JEFFREY LACASSE: No, I'm from California originally. I went to Phoenix for five years from 2008 to 2013. I really love Tallahassee, so when I got a tenure-track job here, I was excited to return in fall of 2013.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Did you have a relationship at some point with Wendi Adelson?
JEFFREY LACASSE: I did.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: What was that relationship?
JEFFREY LACASSE: We met in the fall of 2013.
JEFFREY LACASSE: Apologize for my voice. I'm just getting a little water.
JUDGE EVERETT: You can have water.
JEFFREY LACASSE: We started dating in the fall of 2013, September 2013.
JEFFREY LACASSE: We dated casually in the fall, and more seriously in the spring and summer of 2014.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: When did the relationship end?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Well, that's a little tricky, but basically July of 2014.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right, we'll walk through that a little more in detail. During the time that you were dating Ms. — Adelson — I don't know, maybe we need to move it.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: It's just about the right distance here. I'm not sure, but I know it's hard to get right.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right, so during the time that you were together, did you become aware of Wendi Adelson's recent divorce from Dan Markel?
JEFFREY LACASSE: I did. On our first several dates, that was the primary topic of conversation.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And were you aware that this was an unusually nasty divorce?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: During the time that you were dating her, did you become aware that even subsequent to the divorce there was ongoing litigation pending?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Did you know Dan Markel?
JEFFREY LACASSE: I met Professor Markel. I did not know him. I probably spent 10, 15 minutes in his presence across the course of that relationship.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And were you specifically familiar with the litigation concerning Wendi Adelson relocating with her children to South Florida?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yes, that was a topic of conversation, for sure.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: If you know, did Wendi want that relocation to take place?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yes. On our second date, the topic of relocation and being stuck in Tallahassee came up, and the date was ended abruptly when she went to the bathroom, returned with tears in her eyes, and just left the date because she was so upset. That was about two, two and a half months after it was denied.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And they continued to be a topic, but — but that issue seemed to be specifically what was upsetting her on that day?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Definitely was. She left a group date suddenly because it came up.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And did she have family in South Florida?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And what family was that?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Well, her brother Charlie Adelson, Harvey Adelson her father, and Donna Adelson her mother were the ones primarily that I heard about.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Were you also familiar with the litigation seeking to limit the exposure of Wendi Adelson's young sons to her mom, Donna Adelson?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yes. In spring of 2014, yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And did you observe Wendi to be taking that filing seriously? Did she seem stressed or worried about it?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Every filing she took seriously, and she was stressed. I reported it to EPD that every time a motion was filed it affected our relationship because she was very upset.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: During the time that you were in a relationship with Wendi, did you have an occasion to meet her family members in South Florida?
JEFFREY LACASSE: I did. Well, I met her parents mostly up here, so I met Donna and Harvey Adelson probably eight to twelve times up here. I met the defendant down in South Florida one time.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right, so you only met Charlie Adelson one time?
JEFFREY LACASSE: That's correct.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: When was that?
JEFFREY LACASSE: That was March — the evening of March 11th, 2014.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And had you already met the parents several times at that point?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yes, probably six, eight times at that point, maybe more.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: So they came here quite frequently?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: What about Katherine Magbanua — did you meet her?
JEFFREY LACASSE: She was present at the dinner that I attended on March 11th, where it was myself, the defendant, Wendi Adelson, and her. We went to dinner that evening, March 11th.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: You're saying "the defendant" — do you see the person in the courtroom?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: That you had dinner with? Who's that?
JEFFREY LACASSE: That is Charles Adelson, known to me as Charlie.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Could you point him out and describe what he's wearing?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yeah, he's sitting in the center of the defense table, wearing a light blue tie and a navy blue sports coat.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And so Katherine Magbanua — how is she related to this family, or affiliated with the family?
JEFFREY LACASSE: I was introduced to her as Charlie's new girlfriend, essentially.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And was it your understanding that this was the first time that Wendi was meeting Katherine Magbanua as well?
JEFFREY LACASSE: That was my understanding. She was excited about Katherine Magbanua, and that was my impression, yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. So, anything unusual happen at the dinner?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Well, at the dinner, Ms. Magbanua mentioned that she had a — I guess it was her ex-common-law husband — who had a criminal history that sounded very serious, and I did raise my eyebrows at that.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Did Charlie Adelson seem disturbed or upset by Katherine Magbanua mentioning that?
JEFFREY LACASSE: I don't recall him seeming disturbed, no.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: What about after dinner? Where did you go next?
JEFFREY LACASSE: We went to Mr. Adelson's home and we sat in his hot tub and had a few drinks and talked for a little while.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Who's the "we" that sat in the hot tub?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yeah, myself, Wendi Adelson, Charlie Adelson was in the hot tub for a while, and his then-roommate, Dr. Jerome Obed.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right, so Dr. Obed was living with Charlie Adelson at that time?
JEFFREY LACASSE: That was my understanding. He was his roommate, yeah.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right, and where — where was Katherine Magbanua at that time?
JEFFREY LACASSE: She did not accompany us back to the house.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: In the hot tub, did the defendant make some statements that were of interest in this case?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: What were those?
MR. RASHBAUM: Judge, objection. Motion in limine.
JUDGE EVERETT: Approach.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I'll continue.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Let me ask a more specific question.
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yes, he did. He mentioned having contacts on both sides of the tracks — meaning dentists, lawyers, professional-class people, but they also had people he knew that were a criminal element.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Yes. Anything about these people that were the criminal element that he mentioned specifically?
JEFFREY LACASSE: I repeated it to TPD — about Cuban neighborhoods where you might find that criminal element.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Okay, so he had connections to those type of people?
JEFFREY LACASSE: That's what he said.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And what was the context of this? Was he just — seemed scared about it, worried about it, or something else?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Seemed to be bragging.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I want to ask you about a meeting with Wendi at a coffee shop that occurred on June 4th, 2014. You recall that?
JEFFREY LACASSE: I do.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: What happened at the coffee shop?
JEFFREY LACASSE: We went to the Red Eye coffee shop to have coffee, just to meet midday, and Ms. Adelson canceled a trip that we had planned for July 11th to 17th to go see my parents, which was a big deal in the relationship. And she abruptly canceled it.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Did she offer an explanation as to why she needed to cancel the trip?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Not one that made sense. She said that she feared that we would not get back in time, and she had — she emphasized — had to be back on the 18th to pick the kids up out of school, which would have been July 18th, 5 p.m. is my understanding. And I couldn't fathom why in the summer, going through Atlanta, you wouldn't be able to get back in time. It didn't make any sense to me.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: So she was worried you could be delayed and she wouldn't be able to pick the kids up?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Right. And we had people who could babysit. It didn't make any sense at all, but that was what she said. That day was very important.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And so that occurred on June 4th?
JEFFREY LACASSE: It did.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All — right. Did you see her later that evening?
JEFFREY LACASSE: I did. I went to the house to hang out with her and her children.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And is that her residence on Aqua Ridge?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yes, ma'am.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And how was she that night? This is June 4th, right?
JEFFREY LACASSE: It is.
JEFFREY LACASSE: She was a nervous wreck, to the point where she was sick to her stomach — asked me to get to her house as soon as possible. She was in that much distress, and she didn't have food poisoning or flu or anything obvious. She was just a nervous wreck. So I went to her house immediately, went to the store to get her Pepto-Bismol and a couple things from the convenience store. I have the credit card receipt is why I recall that so specifically.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And did you have any idea why she's acting — I assume this is unusual for her?
JEFFREY LACASSE: It was fairly unusual. The degree of severity was definitely unusual, but that whole week — June 4th to 9th — she was very nervous.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And she didn't tell you it was because killers were in Tallahassee to kill Dan Markel, did she?
JEFFREY LACASSE: No. I was starting to later find out that there were hit men in town at the time.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Okay. So let's go forward a little bit to this TV situation. Do you know anything about Wendi's TV being broken?
JEFFREY LACASSE: I do.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And when was the TV broken, if you know?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Between June 11th and 18th. I think it's closer to the 11th, but 100% in that week. And how do I know it was in that week? Because we rented a movie — How to Train a Dragon 2 — to give the kids a special movie night, and I have text messages where I'm discussing and having seen the movie by the 18th with friends.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: So you were able to refresh your memory?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yeah, I was able to refresh my memory.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. So do you get the movie?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Well, it was back in the day. It was Redbox, so I rented a DVD from a Redbox. It was 2014.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And go over there with the movie — what happens when you arrive?
JEFFREY LACASSE: I walk in the door, and Ms. Adelson asks me to look at her television because there's something wrong with the television.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And what was wrong with the television?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Well, I turned it on and I was immediately confused, because it really shouldn't have been a question. As soon as you turn the TV on — it's been struck by an object and is damaged and basically unusable.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Can you explain what the damage looked like?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yeah. It looked like somebody stood in front of it, took their fist and hit it — like, that was my first impression.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Is it kind of like a shatter mark with spiders?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yeah. There's, like, an impact crater, and then there's — from that there's — and it's all pixelated and distorted, which makes it very difficult, or really no one would watch this TV unless you had to. And I had second thoughts about that. I looked around the room — maybe the kids broke it — so I looked all around the room, and it didn't seem plausible that the children broke it. They're very small. This object had to be kind of heavy. I'd thrown a ball around with them. I just couldn't see how the kids could have done it.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: But you didn't see how it got busted?
JEFFREY LACASSE: I didn't see. I didn't know for sure, and I didn't know we'd be discussing this in a murder trial, so I didn't, like, investigate further or think about it very much, to be honest with you. I just thought, okay.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Were there other TVs in the house?
JEFFREY LACASSE: There was a TV in the back bedroom, a similar make and model that we had watched television with the kids before on that TV before, so yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Is that where you watched the movie that night?
JEFFREY LACASSE: No, I went to go hook up the DVD player in the back room. Ms. Adelson insisted that it would not work, and actually stopped me from even trying.
JEFFREY LACASSE: So I thought that was very odd, but I didn't want to argue, and it's her house, her TV, her kids. So I said, okay.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: So did you watch the movie on the broken TV?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yeah, we gave the kids movie night where we watched a movie on a broken television that was distorted enough that you could follow what was happening. But the kids are whining and crying the whole time.
JEFFREY LACASSE: And I wasn't whining or crying exactly, but I was tempted to, because it was pretty frustrating.
JEFFREY LACASSE: And I just didn't understand, you know, what was going on. And, of course, I had related that this TV is broken. It's unwatchable. It's not covered by warranty.
JEFFREY LACASSE: You're going to have to get a new TV. And I offered to go do that for her any time she wanted. She's a busy single mom. I'll run by Best Buy, get you a new TV. It was not like an 80-inch TV or something that was really that luxurious. It was a TV like you'd see in a dorm room, so we could have replaced it right away.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. Did you end up getting a new TV?
JEFFREY LACASSE: No. She turned me down several times on that offer, and, again, it's her house. I tried to respect her boundaries, and I said, oh, okay. But it was inconvenient, because after dinner, it's nice to be able to put the kids in front of that TV while you clean up the dishes and stuff.
JEFFREY LACASSE: And it sat there being an inconvenience for a while.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. I want to ask you about — when is Ms. Adelson's birthday?
JEFFREY LACASSE: April 22nd, Earth Day.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I've got this out of order. Let's skip over that for now and go to the big fight in June.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Ms. Adelson mentioned that there was a big fight toward the end of June. Do you recall that?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yeah, that's the weekend of June 27th, 28th.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Where were you when that fight occurred?
JEFFREY LACASSE: We were in Gainesville. Ms. Adelson accompanied me for a work trip, and we had had that scheduled for a while.
JEFFREY LACASSE: She accompanied me on a work trip, and we ended up having a pretty big argument Saturday night in the hotel.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Did that have to do with you accusing her of seeing other men?
JEFFREY LACASSE: That was one of the issues. There had been a lot of tension bubbling. That was the major issue. But just to give that some context, I suspected very strongly she was seeing other men. Of course, your office had confirmed recently to me that there were multiple online active dating accounts the whole time we were supposed to be exclusive. But just to give context to that, that was combined with Wendi promising me the world in June — talking about me moving in, "shouldn't get it cheap, you should get a car," "the car — you know, the kids' car seats will fit," "the kids should start calling you Daddy" was the most outrageous one. And so she's, like, throwing herself at me over the top in a way that felt totally disingenuous and fake, and at the same time I think she's seeing other guys. So it just kind of boiled over. I tried to have, like, a serious honest relationship conversation with her, and that didn't go very well.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: So you were kind of — at least up until all of this started happening — you were kind of full steam ahead, and it seems like she was a little stop-and-go, hot-and-cold. Is that —
JEFFREY LACASSE: It was a roller coaster is what I would say. And I had felt since April that I was perhaps being strung along. I had that intuition. I couldn't fathom a reason why you would string a guy along like that. It didn't make any sense at the time.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right, so June — we're in June, like 28th range. Okay, okay. When do you come back from Gainesville?
JEFFREY LACASSE: The morning of the 29th. After this fight or argument, we drive back to Tallahassee. You know, I had another ride back, and I offered to take that other ride if the fight was that bad — because we could have broken up after this. But she wanted to ride back with me.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: You rode together.
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yeah, we rode together.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right, so you rode back together. And then was she leaving that day?
JEFFREY LACASSE: I believe it was the — I thought she picked up the kids the next day from Professor Markel's house, and that's when she met Amy Adler, and that was a big deal to her.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Amy Adler was Dan's girlfriend at the time?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Okay, so at some point after the big fight and the return from Gainesville, does she leave to go to South Florida?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yeah, a day or two later, she definitely leaves to return to South Florida. She's in South Florida by July 1.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And was that the trip that she was there for her dad's birthday?
JEFFREY LACASSE: That's correct.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Did you attend the dad's birthday?
JEFFREY LACASSE: No, I was never invited to the dad's birthday.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And were you aware what the big gift was for dad's birthday?
JEFFREY LACASSE: No.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right, so when did you see Wendi next — after she leaves to go to South Florida, or I guess after you returned from Gainesville?
JEFFREY LACASSE: So during that two-week period we're exchanging emails, texts, long phone calls, video chats with the kids. Things are up and down, but it seemed like it's probably going to be okay. That's the impression I was given by Ms. Adelson — or I was being strung along for two more weeks. But I see her again on the 13th, when she comes back in town and is excited to have a date with me. So we had a day.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: So now we're at July 13, 2014. That's correct, within a week of the murder?
JEFFREY LACASSE: That's right.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Tell us about your interactions with her that day.
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yeah, we went to dinner and a movie, and we returned to our house on Aqua Ridge.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And did she tell you anything in — ask to tell you anything in confidence that evening?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yeah. Again, a very serious tone of voice. The topic of conversation as we're walking up to the house is about relocation, being stuck in Tallahassee. And Danny — as the conversation always was about Danny Markel — she said in a very serious tone of voice, "Can I tell you something in confidence?"
MR. RASHBAUM: Objection, Your Honor. Motion in limine.
JUDGE EVERETT: Ms. Cappleman you understand the court's rulings?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I think I do, Judge, but I'd ask to approach.
JUDGE EVERETT: Please approach.
JUDGE EVERETT: Jurors the bailiff is going to escort you out. Mr. Lacasse, you can step down from the witness stand now. Okay. Please step back outside.
JUDGE EVERETT: Everyone can be seated.
JUDGE EVERETT: Bringing up both the motion in limine and the prior order that have been issued on this matter.
JUDGE EVERETT: Nothing that was made as to the defense motion in limine concerned the state eliciting this as a part of its case in chief.
JUDGE EVERETT: However, Mr. Rashbaum, at this point, Ms. Adelson has specifically denied making this statement.
JUDGE EVERETT: Why is this an improper ground for the state to explore this on impeachment?
MR. RASHBAUM: It's still hearsay, Your Honor. It's double hearsay.
MR. RASHBAUM: It's not done —
JUDGE EVERETT: All sorts of matters that otherwise would be inadmissible can become impeachment.
MR. RASHBAUM: Judge, if Dr. Adelson — Charlie Adelson — made that statement to Mr. Lacasse, and he denied it, he could impeach him.
MR. RASHBAUM: They're impeaching another witness. That's not allowed.
MR. RASHBAUM: That's number one. Number two, I brought up —
JUDGE EVERETT: The impeachment of one witness's testimony through another is not allowed?
MR. RASHBAUM: But they're impeaching her to go to his statement.
MR. RASHBAUM: They're stuck with her answer. They could have kept on cross-examining her if they thought her answer was wrong.
MR. RASHBAUM: They can't now backdoor it through hearsay in another witness. That was the whole point of the motion.
MR. RASHBAUM: Similarly, Judge, we brought this issue up first thing this morning. Sidebar.
MR. RASHBAUM: Because if they were going to be allowed to do it, I was going to ask Ms. Adelson other questions on this issue.
MR. RASHBAUM: They said they weren't going to do it.
MR. RASHBAUM: So I didn't ask her those questions.
MR. RASHBAUM: And I didn't ask her those questions because I didn't want to open the door to it.
MR. RASHBAUM: And I can't call Ms. Adelson back as a witness because she has a Fifth Amendment right, and I can't give her immunity.
MR. RASHBAUM: I brought this up for this very reason. She denied the statement yesterday; that's why I brought it up today. They can't backdoor a double hearsay statement based on a denial by that witness. Can't do it.
JUDGE EVERETT: Ms. Cappleman?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: This is not hearsey. It's offered as impeachment. Ms. Adelson was specifically drawn to the time and place of this statement and asked if she it? She denied it. This witness heard her make a statement that is now admissible to impeach her testimony.
JUDGE EVERETT: This is not an insignificant fact or an immaterial one. Mr. Rashbaum, if you wish to find some authority, I will give you five minutes to look, if you have anything to argue as to this matter.
JUDGE EVERETT: Ms. Adelson has denied making the statement.
JUDGE EVERETT: She can be impeached through other witnesses regarding this matter.
JUDGE EVERETT: I will give you an opportunity to find some authority, if there's something more specific you can point me to other than what you're arguing right now.
MR. RASHBAUM: Judge, I brought this up this morning so that I could front it with Ms. Adelson, and we were told — you were told — that they weren't going down this path.
MR. RASHBAUM: If I'd been told something different, I would have done something different that I can no longer do.
MR. RASHBAUM: It's precisely why I went sidebar first thing in the morning.
JUDGE EVERETT: What is your response as to that portion of the argument, Ms. Cappleman?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I don't know that that's a legal argument. I was asked if I was intending to offer double hearsay, I said I would never be offering hearsay without an exception.
JUDGE EVERETT: I assume he's making this on fairness grounds, which goes to this would have changed his strategy of how he examined the witness.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I don't know what to do about that, Judge. I can't help Mr. Rashbaum have better strategy. I was real specific with the witness to get that denial. So I'm not sure why the issue wasn't raised at that point.
MR. RASHBAUM: Judge, I was really specific this moment this morning that the double hearsay related to my motion in limine related to Jeffrey Lacasse. You knew what I was talking—
JUDGE EVERETT: Hold on. My ears work perfectly well. You don't have to raise your voice. Make your argument, please.
MR. RASHBAUM: Everyone sidebar knew exactly what I was talking about.
MR. RASHBAUM: And we were told — Ms. Cappleman told you as an officer of the court — that she was not going down that road.
MR. RASHBAUM: And so when Ms. Adelson was on the stand, I stayed away from it not to open the door to it.
MR. RASHBAUM: She knew exactly what statement we were talking about. If you tell me you didn't know what statement I was talking about, I'll sit down.
MR. RASHBAUM: I was very specific.
MR. RASHBAUM: I was very specific that it was the double hearsay statement related to Jeffrey Lacasse that we filed our motion in limine on. I was very specific that it applied to this and also the Juvia dinner. Those were the words specifically out of my mouth back there, because when she asked the questions of Ms. Adelson — which were completely appropriate — I thought she might be going down this path, and so the first thing in the morning we went sidebar so I could stop the charade, so that if the court were going to allow it to come in, I would handle it.
MR. RASHBAUM: She stayed silent, and I've been jumping up and down to try to prevent any possible mistrial twice, and still no mention of it.
MR. RASHBAUM: It's completely unfair, completely improper, and it denies him his constitutional right of due process.
JUDGE EVERETT: Again, that's why I raised the issue. This goes to the fairness aspect of it.
JUDGE EVERETT: So we'll take a brief five-minute recess. If you have any authority you wish to present, I will entertain it further.
JUDGE EVERETT: Everyone can be seated.
JUDGE EVERETT: Unless either party has additional argument, I am prepared to rule at this point.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I did have one thing I wanted to raise.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Ms. Adelson is still under the state subpoena, so I think she could be brought back for whatever additional questions need to be asked.
JUDGE EVERETT: As to that point, Ms. Cappleman, the ability to extend immunity, which you have, Mr. Rashbaum does not have it if he calls her as a part of her — excuse me, as a part of the defendant's case.
JUDGE EVERETT: What is your response to that?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I don't know. I mean, we're still in the state's case.
JUDGE EVERETT: Well, the defense can't call a witness within the state's case.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I know. That's a good point. I just wanted to point out that if we wanted to get creative that might be a solution. I don't - it hasn't been proffered what questions would be asked that weren't asked. I don't know what that is but maybe there's something that could be worked out if that was Your Honor's ruling - that that would be required.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: It hasn't been proper — what questions would be asked that weren't asked, I don't know what that is, but maybe there's something that could be worked out. If that was Your Honor's ruling, was that — that would be required?
JUDGE EVERETT: Mr. Rashbaum, anything else?
MR. RASHBAUM: Judge, I'll just rest on 90.609, the Florida rule and its progeny, and Crawford and its progeny, and what I said before.
JUDGE EVERETT: Very well.
JUDGE EVERETT: The court's ruling is as follows: the defense's motion in limine went to the state's ability, as a part of its case-in-chief, to present testimony from Mr. Lacasse that would be hearsay within hearsay. The motion in limine was granted on those grounds. However, the motion in limine — and also the court's ruling — did not discuss or limit in any way the state's ability to present this information as impeachment.
JUDGE EVERETT: Ms. Adelson, at this point, she has testified — she has denied the statement taking place whatsoever. However, as it goes to fundamental fairness grounds, which are also a part of the ruling that has to be made: the defense did earlier, at sidebar, ask if this was going to come up in some way as it related to substantive evidence. I believe the state responded it was not; the state did not make any representations concerning impeachment. I will find that this did affect the defense's ability, or their strategy at least, in examining the witness, as the witness also can invoke her Fifth Amendment right — and, through a separate pleading, has stated through counsel that she will invoke any Fifth Amendment right unless she is being granted immunity for that testimony.
JUDGE EVERETT: The ability of the defense to address this matter is compounded by the constitutional right of the witness and their inability to call her. On fundamental fairness grounds, I'm not going to permit the impeachment on this topic. You may proffer the testimony; from there, if the state is intending to recall the witness, at that point the issue of impeachment may be revisited. Does everyone understand?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Yes, may I make one clarification for the record?
JUDGE EVERETT: Go ahead.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: On the record we were at sidebar, my understanding — what I was asked — is, was I intending to introduce any hearsay within hearsay through Mr. Lacasse? And my answer was that I would not introduce any hearsay within hearsay without exceptions. I think it was clear what I was intending to do was set up an impeachment through Ms. Adelson by drawing her attention to the specific date and time of the statement and asking her specifically if she made the statement, which she denied.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I find it hard to believe that that doesn't alert the defense, in fairness, that that's what I'm intending to do — and that's what I did in the last trial successfully, which the defense in this case was in attendance at. So I think it's unfair to the state, but I understand Your Honor's ruling and we'll be ready to proceed.
JUDGE EVERETT: Please bring in the witness so we can go through the proffer.
JUDGE EVERETT: Our words are our stock in trade.
JUDGE EVERETT: If you're uncertain, Ms. Cappleman, as to what Mr. Rashbaum was raising, we probably should have clarified it at that point. Please bring in the witness.
JUDGE EVERETT: Also, so we don't have to go through this again, Mr. Rashbaum — as it pertains to the other rulings in the defense's motion in limine that the court has previously addressed although they may — not be certain rulings pertain to the state's ability to present as substantive evidence you understand this does not affect their ability to present it as impeachment, as it pertains to all of the items that have been ruled on previously.
MR. RASHBAUM: Well, they still have to follow the extrinsic evidence rule, collateral evidence rule.
JUDGE EVERETT: My point being: something that cannot come in substantively can still be impeached with. You understand this?
MR. RASHBAUM: Can, yes.
JUDGE EVERETT: I'm not saying it's necessarily going to happen.
MR. RASHBAUM: Right.
JUDGE EVERETT: But so we're not doing this song and dance about any other matters.
JUDGE EVERETT: All right. If we need to have sidebars and you're attempting to clarify something — if you're asking specifically as to impeachment — you need to be specific as well.
MR. RASHBAUM: Fair enough, Your Honor.
JUDGE EVERETT: Ms. Dugan, please bring in Mr. Lacasse. You may be seated, Mr. Lacasse.
JUDGE EVERETT: Ms. Cappleman, will you finish your sequence of questions on the topic you were starting?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Mr. Lacasse, when we broke, we were discussing a statement made to you by Wendi Adelson on July 13th, 2014, at her residence here in Tallahassee. Do you recall which statement?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yes, ma'am.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And what was that statement?
JEFFREY LACASSE: After asking to speak to me confidentially, she told me that last summer, Charles Adelson had looked into all possible options to take care of the Danny Markel problem, including hiring a hitman, and that it would cost about $15,000.
JEFFREY LACASSE: I revised the amount. I said potentially that could have been $50,000. I'm unsure of the amount. The rest of the statement — very confident it's true.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: So you weren't sure whether she said 15 or 50?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Right.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: But she didn't say 15 or 50 — she said one or the other?
JEFFREY LACASSE: She said one number that I thought was 15 when I talked to TPD, and later thought that could have been 50.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Okay, I'm with you. And this statement was made in what context? What was her demeanor?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Well, she asked to speak to me confidentially. She was dead serious about it. It was a chilling statement. I had a reaction to it — my stomach flipped. A little scary, a little weird. So it was a very serious statement she's making.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: So clearly not a joke?
JEFFREY LACASSE: No, it was not a joke. There are other jokes in that domain. This was completely distinct and discreet from any joke. This was not funny.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And this statement was made within five days of Mr. Markel's murder by a hitman?
JEFFREY LACASSE: That's correct.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And was this said in any way in context — in the context of the relocation issue?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Well, what preceded her saying that was a discussion of under what circumstances could she or would she leave Tallahassee, and she stated the only way to leave Tallahassee was if something happened to Danny. That's all led into the statement I just told you.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Thank you. That's the proffer, Your Honor.
JUDGE EVERETT: Any cross-examination as to the subject of the proffer?
MR. RASHBAUM: Yes, Your Honor.
JUDGE EVERETT: Go ahead.
MR. RASHBAUM: The statement was chilling and serious, right?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yes.
MR. RASHBAUM: Did you go to the police?
JEFFREY LACASSE: I did not.
MR. RASHBAUM: You were so scared about the statement that you didn't alert the police the next day, that night.
JEFFREY LACASSE: I did not.
MR. RASHBAUM: Why not?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Because it was a past-tense statement, and I thought Charlie was a scary guy, but it was about something supposedly he did last summer.
JEFFREY LACASSE: I did not know there was a present case, a present instant threat. I did not know him, and had not visited Tallahassee. I didn't have the context.
MR. RASHBAUM: So the statement comes out and you say, "All right, now I should call the police. Hey, Wendi, you want to go out tomorrow?" That's not quite how it went?
JEFFREY LACASSE: No.
MR. RASHBAUM: You didn't try to go on a date with her the next day?
JEFFREY LACASSE: No, we did go on a date the next day, and then she cut off all contact, barely talking to me on that date. So I didn't have a lot of time to process it, but it was a shocking enough thing that it took a day or two to process. Also, I had repeated that statement to a friend of mine before the murder, and I didn't get a reaction from her like, "This is shocking." I sought feedback from a friend who would verify that I made that statement before the murder, and she didn't say, "Jeez, you should call the police." So it wasn't just me — there was another person that I consulted with because it freaked me out. And we decided — well, I decided after talking to her — it was past tense.
JEFFREY LACASSE: So probably not that dangerous. And we were really wrong. Maybe I should have called the police.
MR. RASHBAUM: So Charlie Adelson lets you know that he has friends in the criminal element — the Cuban criminal element, right?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yes.
MR. RASHBAUM: And you know that there is a heated dispute between this family. You testified to it today — a heated dispute.
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yes.
MR. RASHBAUM: About relocation, about divorce?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Well, it's just no longer about relocation, but yes, there's an ongoing litigation, for sure.
MR. RASHBAUM: Right. And then Wendi Adelson tells you that this man, who is part of the criminal element, really looked into hiring a hitman.
JEFFREY LACASSE: She did say that.
MR. RASHBAUM: And you thought, "I'm not going to go to the police on that." That's your testimony, right?
JEFFREY LACASSE: That's the decision I made. It didn't really cross my mind because of the past-tense nature of it, and I consulted with the friend, bounced it off of her before the murder, and neither one of us thought, "Oh jeez, we should call the police." So it's possible that — it probably is so dangerous that I should have called the police. Yeah — but I did not.
MR. RASHBAUM: And so at this point in time, your relationship with Wendi Adelson was really bad, right?
JEFFREY LACASSE: It was hard to tell that it was really bad. It was a roller-coaster ride, constantly.
MR. RASHBAUM: Because you referred to the next night, the next day, the 14th. On the 14th, "I got a warm, inviting call from Wendi Adelson, eager to spend time with me."
JEFFREY LACASSE: Maybe trying to distract me, I don't know.
MR. RASHBAUM: Well, we're going to get to the distracting part, because that's what this is all about. But it wasn't in a great spot. The relationship was not in a great spot, I can see that, to you. So your testimony is that when this woman is about to break up with you, when she is avoiding you, when you have just been caught going through her phone and her—
JEFFREY LACASSE: How's she avoiding me?
MR. RASHBAUM: Well, yes, sir — your testimony is that when you are on the outs with her, which the record will show you were during this time period, that she confides in you the most serious, the most important thing in her life. That's your testimony, yes or no?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yes. She has a history of blurting out things that aren't in her own self-interest—
MR. RASHBAUM: Judge, I would ask that to be stricken from the record. It's unresponsive.
JUDGE EVERETT: This is just a part of the proffer — of your cross-examination and the proffer session. We do need to move on.
MR. RASHBAUM: That's fine, Your Honor.
JUDGE EVERETT: Mr. Lacasse — or actually, Ms. Cappleman — the court's ruling remains the same. You're not to inquire further as to this subject matter. We will revisit later if it comes to it.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Yes, sir.
JUDGE EVERETT: Please bring back in the witnesses — or excuse me, the jurors.
MR. RASHBAUM: Before you bring the jury back.
MR. RASHBAUM: There is the celebration dinner. I'm sure that's the next one.
JUDGE EVERETT: One moment, because I don't know what the celebration dinner is all about.
MR. RASHBAUM: It's in the same motion in limine, Judge.
JUDGE EVERETT: Bring it back up.
MR. RASHBAUM: Number two. I believe this just concerns statements — it doesn't say anything about soldiers.
COURT STAFF: All rise. Jury entering the courtroom.
JUDGE EVERETT: One moment.
JUDGE EVERETT: Where is the celebration dinner covered in your motion?
MR. RASHBAUM: It's in the same motion in limine regarding the hearsay statements. There were several of them.
MR. RASHBAUM: The first one was the statement that we just discussed, and the second one is that Charlie Adelson said that he went to — that she told him that Charlie Adelson said it was a celebration dinner. It's in the same motion in limine.
JUDGE EVERETT: Overruled.
JUDGE EVERETT: However, this statement is being directly attributed to your client that was heard by the witness. No — Mr. Lacasse, please step down again.
MR. RASHBAUM: It's the same exact issue.
MR. RASHBAUM: It's Wendi Adelson telling him what Charlie Adelson said.
JUDGE EVERETT: Ms. Cappleman, in response?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Yes, sir. I asked Ms. Adelson about the dinner. She acknowledged there was a dinner. She did vomit at the dinner table, but denied calling it a celebration dinner or — hearing Charlie Adelson call it a celebration dinner. I anticipate this witness would indicate that it was referred to as a celebration dinner.
MR. RASHBAUM: It's the same issue, and you ruled on this issue. It's the same motion in limine.
JUDGE EVERETT: I have. I'm looking at the line now.
JUDGE EVERETT: Right. Mr. Cappleman, I believe we find ourselves in the same position unless you have an argument which differentiates the television from the celebration dinner.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I think I understand what you mean, Judge. I don't have any additional argument other than this is offered for impeachment. It's not hearsay, not covered by the motion.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: The appropriate grounds were laid, and it's admissible as impeachment.
JUDGE EVERETT: Do you wish to proffer the celebration dinner by Mr. Lacasse as well?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: No, sir. I think my preference at this point, assuming your ruling will be the same on the celebration dinner, is to have Mr. Lacasse step off the stand, proceed with another witness, and revisit this issue after the lunch break.
JUDGE EVERETT: Very well.
JUDGE EVERETT: Please bring the jurors back in. You may end your examination in front of them, and then Mr. Rashbaum will have his opportunity.
JUDGE EVERETT: Well, actually, Mr. Rashbaum, how long do you believe your cross-examination of the witness will take in front of the jurors?
MR. RASHBAUM: I'm a little confused.
JUDGE EVERETT: Are you? The ruling on the impeachment as to the celebration dinner is going to be excluded on the same grounds for now.
JUDGE EVERETT: If we need to revisit later, we will. But as to your cross-examination that will be taking place in front of the jurors on the subject matter that's already been covered, how long do you think that's going to take?
MR. RASHBAUM: Oh, she's going to stop asking questions of this witness. I believe she just indicated she would.
JUDGE EVERETT: Okay. For the issues that we've dealt with just now.
JUDGE EVERETT: Prior to any proffers and sending the jurors out.
MR. RASHBAUM: I'm not really sure, Your Honor.
MR. RASHBAUM: Probably, uh...maybe 30 minutes.
JUDGE EVERETT: All right. Let's bring them back in. You can start your cross.
JUDGE EVERETT: We'll take the lunch break and then pick up from there.
JUDGE EVERETT: Please bring back in the witness.
BAILIFF: All rise. Jurors entering the courtroom.
JUDGE EVERETT: Everyone can be seated.
JUDGE EVERETT: Bailiff, if you can please instruct Mr. Lacasse to come back in.
JUDGE EVERETT: State having a further direct examination for this witness.
JUDGE EVERETT: You may cross-examine.
MR. RASHBAUM: Thank you, Your Honor.
MR. RASHBAUM: Professor Lacasse, good morning.
JEFFREY LACASSE: Good morning.
MR. RASHBAUM: You met Charlie Adelson one time, right?
JEFFREY LACASSE: That's correct.
MR. RASHBAUM: It was a trip that you and Wendi took down to South Florida for a day after a—
JEFFREY LACASSE: Spring break with the kids that she taught.
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yeah, we were in Immokalee and then we went over to Miami, to Fort Lauderdale and Miami just for the 11th.
MR. RASHBAUM: That's right. And you had dinner.
MR. RASHBAUM: You said on—
JEFFREY LACASSE: We had dinner on March 11th of 2014 at a place called Yardbird.
MR. RASHBAUM: That's correct.
MR. RASHBAUM: You recall Charlie was in his scrubs?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Don't recall that, but it wouldn't surprise me.
MR. RASHBAUM: And Katherine Magbanua was at that dinner, right?
JEFFREY LACASSE: She was.
MR. RASHBAUM: And I think you said that she was bringing up stuff about her ex, right?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Not a lot, just a little bit, but she did bring that up and I recalled it.
MR. RASHBAUM: Is it — fair to say that she was pushing for information at that dinner?
JEFFREY LACASSE: From whom?
MR. RASHBAUM: From Ms. — Adelson.
JEFFREY LACASSE: I don't recall that.
MR. RASHBAUM: Well, was she trying to get Ms. Adelson to talk about her ex-husband?
JEFFREY LACASSE: I don't recall that.
MR. RASHBAUM: Do you recall there being a lot of discussion at the dinner about Professor Markel?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Don't recall a lot. It always came up for a minute. It came up in the context of Wendi Adelson's book.
JEFFREY LACASSE: Most of it was Charlie talking.
MR. RASHBAUM: You recall Katie asking questions about how the divorce was going, how he was treating her — where he was. You don't recall any of that happening at the dinner?
JEFFREY LACASSE: I do not recall any of that.
MR. RASHBAUM: The only thing you recall is her saying something about her ex-husband.
JEFFREY LACASSE: That's what stuck out. We've had previous legal proceedings where I also could not remember. I mean, I can't — it's at dinner nine years ago. I don't remember a lot of detail of it. It wasn't long either; it was just an hour.
MR. RASHBAUM: Isn't it likely that she was talking about her ex-husband and her problems because there was talk about exes?
JEFFREY LACASSE: I mean, that's pure speculation on my part. I do recall some other things we spoke about, but I don't know if I'm allowed to talk about them or not — they involve your client.
JEFFREY LACASSE: So I'm in my head trying to figure out how much space was there for other stuff.
JEFFREY LACASSE: As I previously testified, most of it was Charlie — telling us stories, kind of.
MR. RASHBAUM: But Katie was clearly wanting to bring up the topic, as you said, about her family situation.
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yeah, but I'm talking about two or three sentences here. I only recalled that in retrospect because it was a murder. I thought, oh geez.
MR. RASHBAUM: And it was important enough for you to — for Ms. Cappleman to ask you about that, right?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Okay, yeah.
MR. RASHBAUM: Right? So you remember her talking about her family situation.
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yeah, and I also remember Charlie talking about a party he had recently attended. There's a few other random things.
MR. RASHBAUM: Fair enough. I didn't ask — with all due respect, I didn't ask you that.
MR. RASHBAUM: Let's just stick with the family situation.
JEFFREY LACASSE: Okay.
MR. RASHBAUM: So Katherine Magbanua was talking about her family situation, correct?
JEFFREY LACASSE: For two or three sentences she mentioned that — Alfredo Garcia, not by name — and the tensions with him, yes.
MR. RASHBAUM: You said that Charlie talked in the hot tub — or the pool — about — having connections to the criminal element. That's what your testimony was, right?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yes. Starting with my initial statement to TPD. Yes, sir.
MR. RASHBAUM: And you're talking about your statement to TPD — after the murder, right?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Three days after the murder.
MR. RASHBAUM: And after you thought Wendi Adelson was trying to frame you for the murder, right?
JEFFREY LACASSE: I didn't think that in that interview. It took me some time to process.
MR. RASHBAUM: You were aware that you were called in as a suspect for the murder, right?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yes.
MR. RASHBAUM: Okay. After that point in time is when you gave that statement to TPD regarding what Mr. Adelson said. Just yes or no.
JEFFREY LACASSE: After I was called into the police station?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yeah, that's when I gave my statement at the police station.
MR. RASHBAUM: Right. What I'm making clear is it's not like you had dinner and were in a hot tub with Charlie Adelson and you went back to Tallahassee and gave the statement then, right?
JEFFREY LACASSE: I would have no reason to do that.
MR. RASHBAUM: I understand that, Professor Lacasse. I'm just trying to make it clear for the jury when you gave TPD the statement.
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yeah.
MR. RASHBAUM: And the answer is you gave him the statement after the murder and after you were called in as a suspect on that murder.
JEFFREY LACASSE: That's correct.
MR. RASHBAUM: Now, do you recall texting Charlie Adelson after you met with him?
JEFFREY LACASSE: I texted Mr. Adelson one time, yes.
MR. RASHBAUM: Okay, and do you recall saying to him, "Hey Charlie, it's Jeff, as in Wendi and Jeff."
MR. RASHBAUM: "Hey man, thanks for your hospitality the other night. Sorry about the clusterfuck with the cab. It was great to finally meet you. I can tell how proud you are of your sister. I am too. She's really one in a million. Take care, dude, and look forward to seeing you again sometime soon." Do you recall texting him that?
JEFFREY LACASSE: I do recall texting him that.
MR. RASHBAUM: Okay. "You like hanging out with the criminal element?"
JEFFREY LACASSE: It was my new girlfriend's brother who she was very close with. I'd been dating Wendi seriously for 12 days. I didn't think it was right to give a... I was polite rather than honest. Let's put it that way. I mean...
MR. RASHBAUM: Let me ask the question again.
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yeah.
MR. RASHBAUM: Do you like hanging out with the criminal element?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Uh, no. I don't do that.
MR. RASHBAUM: Did Charlie Adelson text you or did you text him?
JEFFREY LACASSE: I texted him.
JEFFREY LACASSE: I can't remember if that was solicited by Wendi Adelson or not, but I texted him.
MR. RASHBAUM: It wasn't solicited by Charlie Adelson, right?
JEFFREY LACASSE: No, we never spoke again, though.
MR. RASHBAUM: Okay. Actually, he texted you back.
JEFFREY LACASSE: Right, I never answered.
MR. RASHBAUM: And he said, "It was great seeing you. I'm glad you made your flight. Hopefully we can all hang out soon."
JEFFREY LACASSE: Mm-hmm.
MR. RASHBAUM: Now.
MR. RASHBAUM: You testified that Wendi was a wreck.
MR. RASHBAUM: Hold on one second.
MR. RASHBAUM: Sorry. One moment, Your Honor.
MR. RASHBAUM: I've lost my place.
MR. RASHBAUM: You testified about some of these divorce filings on direct, correct?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yes.
MR. RASHBAUM: And, that Wendi, you testified that Wendi was a wreck about him, right?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yes.
MR. RASHBAUM: That's not what you thought in the spring of 2014, though, was it?
JEFFREY LACASSE: You're questioning whether...
JEFFREY LACASSE: This is what I thought in spring of 2014.
JEFFREY LACASSE: I noticed.
JEFFREY LACASSE: Repeatedly, her reacting to motions and litigation and getting very, very upset.
JEFFREY LACASSE: That. I'm not saying there was never any good times, but she was very upset when he filed something.
MR. RASHBAUM: Do you recall...
MR. RASHBAUM: Sending an email.
MR. RASHBAUM: To Wendi Adelson in March 27th of 2014.
MR. RASHBAUM: Where you tell her that she's adapting really well to unpleasant circumstances and that she needs to give herself more credit.
JEFFREY LACASSE: That sounds familiar.
JEFFREY LACASSE: I would say it got increasingly worse March, April, May, June in terms of reactions to the entire situation. But I know I was sending that email, yes, trying to encourage my girlfriend at the time, yes.
MR. RASHBAUM: Oh, really? It got worse?
MR. RASHBAUM: Filings in March, April, and June.
JEFFREY LACASSE: I don't know when the last filing was. Her reactions, not just to filings, but the entire situation. Let me clarify that.
MR. RASHBAUM: Hold on a second.
MR. RASHBAUM: Would it surprise you that there weren't any filings in May or June?
JEFFREY LACASSE: No, I'm aware of that.
MR. RASHBAUM: Would it surprise you that there's been testimony in this courtroom that actually things got a little better?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Wendi's status didn't get better. My observations of Wendi saw her spiraling downward in that time period is what I was trying to refer to.
MR. RASHBAUM: Do you recall that in the spring/summer of 2014, Professor Markel asked Wendi's parents to babysit for him?
JEFFREY LACASSE: I didn't know about that. I don't recall it if I did.
MR. RASHBAUM: Yeah.
MR. RASHBAUM: I'm sure you did.
MR. RASHBAUM: Now.
MR. RASHBAUM: Do you recall telling law enforcement that your impression was that Professor Markel's filing was going to fail?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yes, I was repeating things I had heard from Wendi Adelson, so most of that content, that was, I mean...
MR. RASHBAUM: Sir, I'm just asking you for a yes or no question.
JEFFREY LACASSE: Okay. Let me follow up of where you get that information from.
MR. RASHBAUM: Okay, okay.
JEFFREY LACASSE: I know you have an agenda... Yes, I told police that, yes. Okay.
MR. RASHBAUM: So.
MR. RASHBAUM: You told the police that Wendi wasn't concerned about Professor Markel succeeding with that motion.
JEFFREY LACASSE: No. No. She was highly anxious.
MR. RASHBAUM: She was highly anxious.
MR. RASHBAUM: Did she think that the motion was going to be granted?
JEFFREY LACASSE: I don't think she knew. I think that's what caused the anxiety.
MR. RASHBAUM: Didn't you tell law enforcement that your impression was that Professor Markel's motion was going to fail?
JEFFREY LACASSE: I did tell law enforcement that, yes.
MR. RASHBAUM: And didn't you just tell the jury that that impression came from Wendi Adelson?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Well, from my interactions with her and partially my own opinion, to clarify.
JEFFREY LACASSE: But, yes, that's true. Yeah.
JEFFREY LACASSE: Yeah.
MR. RASHBAUM: You also told law enforcement that everyone in the legal community agreed with that assessment.
JEFFREY LACASSE: I didn't speak to everyone in the legal community.
MR. RASHBAUM: Well, let's read your interview then.
MR. RASHBAUM: And let's see if it refreshes your recollection.
MR. RASHBAUM: You don't recall being recorded?
MR. RASHBAUM: Where you said, and I quote, "everyone in the legal community agreed with that assessment" at 2 o'clock on 7-23-14, interview part one, at 34-35 in the interview. You don't recall saying that?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Can you give me the date in the interview again, please?
MR. RASHBAUM: 7-23-2014, interview part one.
MR. RASHBAUM: And 3-6-2015. You reiterated it at 34 minutes and 35 seconds into the recording. You don't recall saying that?
JEFFREY LACASSE: Vaguely, I do recall saying something like that. I'm a non-lawyer trying to figure out this situation.
JEFFREY LACASSE: Any different messages from different people?
MR. RASHBAUM: I have no further questions right now, Your Honor.
JUDGE EVERETT: Any redirect examination?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: At the time you were in the hot tub with the defendant, did you know that he was a criminal element?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I mean, okay, let me rephrase that.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Did you know he was conspiring to commit the murder of Dan Markel?
JEFFREY LACASSE: I had no idea.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And when you were at dinner with he and Katherine Magbanua, did you know that she was conspiring to commit the murder of Dan Markel?
JEFFREY LACASSE: I had no idea.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: So you didn't know when you were in the hot tub that you were hanging out with a criminal element in that regard?
JEFFREY LACASSE: No.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Nothing further.
JUDGE EVERETT: Mr. Lacasse, you may step down. You may be recalled at some point.