Skip to content
Dan Markel — Case Archive
Donna Adelson trial-day trial-day Georgia CapplemanSarah Kathryn DuganJackie L. FulfordJoshua D. ZelmanLouis BronsteinChristopher CorbittOscar Jimenez Jr.Brian KendallPatrick SanfordJames Keith McElveendirectcrossredirectDay 4 - August 27, 2025 Sergeant Corbitt's cell-site and route analysis is cross-examined at length; the court permits an adoptive-admission theory; FBI witnesses describe the 2016 undercover bump and wiretap surveillance operations.
← Day 3 Donna Adelson Day 5 →

Day 4 - August 27, 2025

Corbitt's Cell-Site Cross, Adoptive-Admission Ruling, Undercover Wiretap Witnesses

Judge Stephen S. Everett
13 Proceedings
6 Pages
6 Witnesses
2,336 Lines
Day 4 of 9
Appearing:
Georgia Cappleman Sarah Kathryn Dugan Jackie L. Fulford Joshua D. Zelman Louis Bronstein Christopher Corbitt Oscar Jimenez Jr. Brian Kendall Patrick Sanford James Keith McElveen

Sergeant Corbitt's cell-site and route analysis is cross-examined at length; the court permits an adoptive-admission theory; FBI witnesses describe the 2016 undercover bump and wiretap surveillance operations.

Full day summary

Court resumes with Sergeant Christopher Corbitt's direct examination on cell-site records, rental-car corroboration of Luis Rivera's account, and phone/route analysis for July 18, 2014. Corbitt compared Wendi Adelson's selected liquor-store route with a mapped direct route to lunch and separately compared Donna and Harvey Adelson's 8:32-to-10:53 travel interval with mapped driving time. Over the lunch recess, Judge Everett rules that testimony about a statement in which Donna Adelson allegedly agreed her son Charlie Adelson's trial testimony was true is admissible as an adoptive admission, overruling defense Crawford and foundation objections while requiring the State to establish that Donna heard the statement she is said to have adopted. On cross, defense counsel Joshua Zelman presses Corbitt on the limits of cell-site data, unresolved call-order questions, incomplete traffic and route-condition records, and gets Corbitt to agree that no records place Donna's or Harvey's handset at the same cell site as Charlie's on July 18, or establish that Donna was at Charlie's house. Redirect and a brief recess follow, with the judge ordering that an upcoming witness's face not be broadcast due to prior law-enforcement employment. FBI witnesses then describe a 2016 undercover operation. Oscar Jimenez Jr. testifies that he posed as a gang member and approached Donna Adelson near her home during an active wiretap, handing her a flyer referencing Dan Markel's murder and $5,000; on cross he confirms he never spoke the dollar amount aloud. Subsequent calls show Charlie Adelson did not offer payment and Donna told Jimenez he had the wrong person, was not involved, and should pursue the $100,000 reward instead. Agents Louis Bronstein and Brian Kendall describe covert restaurant surveillance of Charlie Adelson with Katherine Magbanua and with Harvey Adelson; the defense declines cross-examination of both. Audio forensic expert James Keith McElveen explains his method of isolating a subject's voice while suppressing surrounding restaurant noise, and several enhanced recordings are admitted. FBI Special Agent Patrick Sanford begins the day's final direct examination, describing Luis Rivera's 2016 proffer detail—a bullet that disabled the getaway Prius the day before the murder—later corroborated by physical inspection of the recovered vehicle. Sanford also explains the rationale for the 2016 undercover bump as an effort to "tickle the wire," and describes Donna Adelson's calm reaction afterward, her call to Charlie without naming Markel, and a subsequent low-voiced, roughly thirty-minute meeting between Charlie and Donna near a restaurant that agents could not record. Before adjourning, defense counsel Jackie Fulford places on the record an objection that the prosecutor's narration of a recorded call while jurors read a highlighted transcript was improperly cumulative testimony; the court reaffirms its earlier ruling permitting contextual questions and adjourns until 8:30 the next morning.

Video thumbnail 8:41:04
Watch →

1. Christopher Corbitt — Direct/Cross/Redirect

Sergeant Christopher Corbitt completes his testimony on Day 4, covering cell-site location analysis, route timing, and the "Tudor" nickname. Outside the jury's presence during the lunch recess, Judge Everett rules that Donna Adelson's alleged affirmative agreement with her son's prior trial testimony may be admitted under an adoptive-admission theory, with a foundation requirement. Zelman's cross-examination tests the limits of the CDR, tower, and route-timing evidence; redirect follows. The day closes as a protected witness with a camera restriction is called.

→
Procedural
Day 4 Court Convenes — Jury Greeted, Corbitt Examination Resumes

Judge Everett calls Day 4 to order, checks on jury snacks, and hands examination of Sergeant Corbitt back to the prosecution.

Direct
Christopher Corbitt Sarah Kathryn Dugan
837 lines

TPD Sergeant Christopher Corbitt continues direct examination using rental, call-detail, cell-site, GPS, text, iCloud, and wiretap records to reconstruct the June and July trips and murder-day communications. He also gives a bounded handset-route estimate for Donna and Harvey's night travel and compares Charlie Adelson's wire statements with iCloud messages.

Procedural
Adoptive Admission Ruling — Defense Crawford and Foundation Objections Overruled

Judge Everett permits the State's adoptive-admission theory for Donna Adelson's alleged statement agreeing with Charlie Adelson's trial testimony, notes the Crawford objection, and requires the State to lay foundation that Donna heard and adopted the statement.

Cross
Christopher Corbitt Joshua D. Zelman
353 lines

Joshua Zelman cross-examines Sergeant Christopher Corbitt about CDR location limits, raw frequency-count methodology, unresolved call and deletion details, and the assumptions and bounded research behind a 2025 route re-drive. Corbitt agrees the CDRs cannot establish Donna Adelson was at Charlie Adelson's residence.

Redirect
Christopher Corbitt Sarah Kathryn Dugan
39 lines

On redirect, Corbitt calls Donna Adelson's "outside your house" text indicative of her location, describes selected 2025 route drives that tracked Esri estimates, and explains part of his cell-site method. His final "Yeah" answer to whether anything suggested unreliability is not developed.

Procedural
Recess Before Protected Witness; Camera Restriction Ordered

Brief recess granted before next witness; Judge orders witness face not broadcast due to prior law enforcement employment.

Highlights

Christopher Corbitt - Direct (Continued) testimony highlight Corbitt combines Donna and Harvey Adelson handset locations with Donna's 8:59 p.m. text, "Outside your house," and Esri route estimates. He estimates that the 8:32-to-10:53 interval exceeded mapped driving time and that a stop at Charlie Adelson's residence was possible. The court limited him to researched analysis; the records do not establish who carried each handset or what occurred during the interval, and Corbitt said Dugan's proposed overlap only "could have" occurred. Adoptive Admission Ruling — Defense Crawford and Foundation Objections Overruled ruling Judge Everett says the proffered testimony is permissible under the adoptive-admission theory raised by the State, cites Jones v. State, 127 So.3d 622 and a treatise provided by Professor Earhart, and says other admissibility grounds also exist. The later foundation question is addressed separately. Adoptive Admission Ruling — Defense Crawford and Foundation Objections Overruled “I was able to research the matter during the lunch break, and at the conclusion of that research, the ground for which it's being offered is as an adoptive admission, which is permissible under the rules of evidence.” — Stephen Everett The court's core admissibility ruling, delivered after independent research over the recess. Christopher Corbitt - Cross admission Corbitt confirms that at no point on July 18, 2014 do the call detail records show Donna Adelson's or Harvey Adelson's handset connecting to the same cell site as Charlie Adelson's handset, and that he cannot tell the jury Donna Adelson was at her son's house. Christopher Corbitt - Cross “That's correct.” — Christopher Corbitt Confirms Corbitt's answer that call-detail records do not allow him to tell the jury Donna Adelson was at Charlie Adelson's house; it does not resolve what other evidence may show.

2. Oscar Jimenez Jr. — Direct/Cross/Redirect

FBI undercover agent Oscar Jimenez Jr. testifies about a controlled April 2016 approach to Donna Adelson, authenticates exhibits documenting three answered calls to the undercover line, and is cross-examined on the scripted nature of the operation before redirect establishes she was alone at the moment of contact.

→
Direct
Oscar Jimenez Jr. Georgia Cappleman
77 lines

FBI undercover agent Oscar Jimenez Jr. describes approaching Donna Adelson during an active Title III operation, handing her a flyer with an undercover number and $5,000 reference, and authenticating encounter recordings. Admitted phone records include calls from Charlie and Donna Adelson; their content is not covered here.

Cross
Oscar Jimenez Jr. Jackie L. Fulford
133 lines

Fulford cross-examines FBI undercover agent Oscar Jimenez Jr. about the 2016 bump and follow-up contacts. He says the $5,000 amount was written but not spoken, the team handled the letter and scripted the aggressive text language, neither Charlie nor Donna Adelson paid, and Donna denied involvement and suggested pursuing the $100,000 reward.

Redirect
Oscar Jimenez Jr. Georgia Cappleman
11 lines

Jimenez confirms on brief redirect that Donna Adelson had no children with her when he approached her. At the defense's request, the court keeps him under the State's subpoena in case the defense chooses to call him.

Highlights

Oscar Jimenez Jr. - Direct testimony highlight Jimenez says he posed as a gang member and approached Donna Adelson near her South Miami residence during an active Title III intercept. He explains generally that a "tickle the wire" operation seeks to prompt a subject to discuss the investigation when intercept activity is limited; the excerpt does not identify the intercepted line. Oscar Jimenez Jr. - Cross “Well, during the bump, I didn't mention the $5,000 or anything. I didn't mention the money.” — Oscar Jimenez Jr. Clarifies that the $5,000 figure appeared only in writing on the flyer, not verbally during the in-person encounter. Oscar Jimenez Jr. - Cross testimony highlight Donna Adelson calls Jimenez back on May 6, 2016, tells him he has the wrong person and that she is not involved, never pays, and instead encourages him to pursue the $100,000 reward for information about Dan Markel's homicide.

3. Louis Bronstein — Direct/Cross

FBI Special Agent Louis Bronstein testifies about his surveillance role at the Dolce Vita restaurant during the April 20, 2016 undercover operation, describing his position and authenticating covert recording and photo exhibits involving Charlie Adelson and Katherine Magbanua. Defense waives cross-examination.

→
Direct
Louis Bronstein Georgia Cappleman
79 lines

FBI Special Agent Louis Bronstein describes covert surveillance of an April 20, 2016 meeting between Charlie Adelson and Katherine Magbanua at Miami's Dolce Vita restaurant, and the photographs and recording of that meeting are admitted into evidence.

Cross
Louis Bronstein Jackie L. Fulford
7 lines

The defense waives cross-examination of FBI Special Agent Louis Bronstein following his direct testimony on the Dolce Vita restaurant surveillance; Judge Everett confirms neither side intends to recall him and releases him from the stand.

4. James Keith McElveen — Direct/Cross

Audio forensics expert James McElveen explains how he enhanced restaurant recordings from Dolce Vita and Matsuri for use as trial exhibits; cross-examination is brief and ends with questions about the July 18, 2014 law-enforcement interview with Wendi Adelson, which McElveen says he does not recall receiving.

→
Direct
James Keith McElveen Georgia Cappleman
81 lines

The court permits James Keith McElveen to offer expert opinions in electrical engineering and audio forensics. He explains his audio clarification work and supplies foundation for admission of Exhibits 115, 116, 132, and 133; Exhibit 118 remains for identification only.

Cross
James Keith McElveen Joshua D. Zelman
20 lines

McElveen explains that recent work on the second restaurant recording was reformatting, not a new enhancement. He says he was not provided the July 18, 2014 Wendi Adelson interview audio; Zelman's question whether the government requested analysis is unanswered.

5. Brian Kendall — Direct/Cross

Brian Kendall, a Plantation police officer assigned to a federal task force, testifies about carrying a covert audio-video recording device into the Matsuri sushi restaurant in Miami on April 21, 2016, and sitting beside Harvey Adelson at the bar to capture conversation. He authenticates State's Exhibit 131, which is admitted without objection. The defense waives cross-examination and Kendall is released.

→
Direct
Brian Kendall Georgia Cappleman
44 lines

A former Plantation police officer assigned to a federal task force testifies that he covertly recorded Charlie Adelson meeting his father at a Miami sushi restaurant in April 2016, using a hidden bag-style device; the recording is admitted into evidence without objection.

Cross
Brian Kendall Jackie L. Fulford
8 lines

Fulford waives cross-examination of Brian Kendall. Cappleman says the State will not recall him, and the court releases him.

6. Patrick Sanford — Direct (Part 1)

FBI Special Agent Patrick Sanford's direct examination opens, covering corroboration of Rivera's 2016 proffer through the recovered, repainted Prius with a bullet-severed fuel line, admitted wiretap calls, and four calls made within hours of the April 2016 FBI bump operation — including Donna Adelson's call to Charlie characterizing the approach as concerning "both of us," Charlie's use of "Yelp review" as cover language, a warning not to speak inside the apartment, a $5,000 demand and a "TV" reference whose meaning Sanford did not establish, and Charlie's call to Katherine Magbanua. Day 4 concludes with Fulford preserving a record on testimony method and the court adjourning.

→
Direct
Patrick Sanford Georgia Cappleman
583 lines

FBI Special Agent Patrick Sanford begins direct by describing corroboration following Luis Rivera's proffer, selected wiretap evidence, and the design and observed aftermath of the undercover bump involving Donna Adelson.

Procedural
Day 4 Recess — Fulford Preserves Record on Cumulative Testimony

End-of-day recess with a substantive preservation record: Fulford objects that Cappleman’s narration of the recorded call, paired with a highlighted transcript before the jury, constitutes improper cumulative testimony. Judge reaffirms his earlier ruling and adjourns to the following morning.

Highlights

Patrick Sanford - Direct (Part 1) evidence event Sanford describes new corroborating detail from Luis Rivera's September 2016 proffer — a bullet hole that disabled the getaway Prius the day before the murder — later confirmed when investigators found matching damage, admitted as State's Exhibits 48 through 52. Patrick Sanford - Direct (Part 1) “One thing was, he told us the day before the homicide occurred that him and Sigfredo Garcia were riding around in the green Prius in Tallahassee when Mr. Garcia accidentally shot a hole in the floorboard of the Prius, and it actually disabled the vehicle, and Mr. Garcia had to actually fix the vehicle to get it running again.” — Patrick Sanford Identifies the specific undisclosed detail from Rivera's proffer that investigators were later able to corroborate physically. Patrick Sanford - Direct (Part 1) evidence event Sanford explains the 2016 undercover "bump": an agent posing as a former cellmate of Luis Rivera approached Donna Adelson on the street and handed her a note referencing the murder, an operation designed to reactivate wiretap conversations two years after the killing. Day 4 Recess — Fulford Preserves Record on Cumulative Testimony objection Fulford preserves a record objection she failed to complete at sidebar, arguing that Cappleman’s narration of recorded call content while a highlighted transcript was before the jury constituted improper cumulative testimony and a violation of evidence rules.
← Day 3 Donna Adelson Day 5 →