Day 7 - September 2, 2025

At the close of the state's case, defense counsel Joshua Zelman moved for judgment of acquittal on counts one and three, arguing the evidence was insufficient to establish principal liability under the standard set out in Denise Williams v. State, 314 So. 3d 775 (First DCA 2021). Zelman contended the state had not placed Donna Adelson in direct communication with any participant in the murder and that the evidence required impermissible stacked inferences. Prosecutor Dugan responded with a catalog of the state's evidence: the 2014 planner containing Markel's vehicle information, phone records placing Donna at Charlie's home on the night of the murder, Katherine Magbanua's testimony about Donna washing the murder payment, 44 checks to Magbanua from the Adelson Institute, the bump video statement in which Donna tells Charlie "it involves both of us," and evidence of consciousness of guilt including an attempt to travel to a non-extradition country after Charlie's conviction. Judge Everett pressed Zelman to distinguish Williams, noting the record here included an alleged confession, suborning perjury, and flight — evidence absent from Williams. The court denied the motion. The defense case then opened with Ann Elizabeth Cunningham, a longtime friend of Donna Adelson. Cunningham testified that Adelson was never threatening, never said she wanted Dan Markel killed, and described receiving an emotional call from Adelson on July 18, 2014, in which Adelson reported the shooting and expressed worry about Wendi and the children. On cross, prosecutor Cappleman challenged Cunningham on a comment about a bar mitzvah dress, an alleged bribe offer, and the conversion remark, and drew uncertain and contradictory answers on the extortion claim, with Cunningham confusing Donna's alleged extortion with a separate claim that Charlie had been extorted by Katherine Magbanua. Text messages established that Cunningham hosted Donna during Charlie's trial, disagreed with his conviction, and texted that she believed the whole family was innocent. Questions about Donna's planned Vietnam trip produced a cross implication that the destination's non-extradition status was relevant, countered on redirect when Cunningham said she first heard that characterization on cross and that Donna had told her she was coming back. The defense recalled Cunningham briefly after expert testimony to establish that she and Donna routinely communicated by Viber rather than regular phone lines; Cappleman then noted that WhatsApp did not offer voice calls until March 2015, and Cunningham shifted her account to Viber. Ron Gutterson and Richard Shagran, friends of the Adelson family, each testified that after Charlie's conviction the family was under media pressure and that the Vietnam trip was understood to be temporary, with a planned return for Lincoln's bar mitzvah in January or February. Both witnesses acknowledged, on cross, that a first-degree murder warrant would be an abnormal circumstance that might change that plan. Defense digital forensics expert Kelsey Guay testified that she could not reproduce Sergeant Corbitt's slide-26 figure of 417 unique communication events between Charlie and Donna Adelson's phones for the May-through-July 2014 window. She obtained lower figures using Charlie's records without deduplication and counted 211 deduplicated events using Donna's records alone — a reduction of more than 49 percent. She also consolidated 80 raw rows in Donna's June-to-July records to 69 events, and agreed that failing to review the records manually produced an overinflated frequency count. On cell-site evidence, Guay said she was not given AT&T's master tower list and did not identify Donna's phone connecting to a tower covering Charlie's home, or the two phones connecting to the same tower, on July 18. On recross, she confirmed that Donna did use her phone for ordinary voice calls that afternoon, evening, and night. Defense investigators Tarana Khan and Eddie Varnes both testified about separate pre-trial interviews with Patricia Byrd at the Leon County Jail. Each denied that Byrd reported Donna Adelson had offered her money, land, a trailer, dental veneers, or a vehicle, or that Adelson had confessed to any charged conduct. Varnes additionally recounted that Byrd told him she had not known Donna's name before meeting her roughly four weeks earlier and that she expected an offer from the state. Both witnesses were asked on cross why their interviews were not recorded; each cited instructions from defense counsel. Khan confirmed on redirect that she took real-time handwritten notes. The state challenged whether the defense had ever listed Byrd on a witness list; Varnes responded only that he did not know, and Zelman on redirect represented that prior counsel had listed Byrd before a September 2024 trial setting, which Varnes said would not surprise him. A sequestration dispute arose when Judge Everett learned that realtor Tim Kelly had been seated in the courtroom watching prior defense testimony before taking the stand. The court removed Kelly and took a recess to determine whether to permit his testimony. Kelly was ultimately allowed to testify in a narrow direct examination, confirming that in November 2011 Dan Markel arranged a Tallahassee home-showing for Donna and Harvey Adelson and that Markel, Wendi, and at least one child were present. The Adelsons did not purchase any home. Leon County Sheriff's Detective Josh Turner was called by the defense to authenticate a December 19 jail surveillance video. Turner testified that Drina Bernhardt told him she had information about Donna Adelson and had positioned herself to be recorded interacting with Adelson on the detention facility's camera. The defense moved the video as Defense Exhibit 70; the state successfully requested admission in its entirety under the rule of completeness. Zelman walked Turner through timestamped portions of the silent footage showing Bernhardt and Adelson exchanging notebooks and appearing to write and converse over more than an hour. Turner confirmed the recording was made the day after Bernhardt first reported having information about Adelson and the day before her recorded interview at the State Attorney's Office. On cross, Turner confirmed that Bernhardt reported Adelson was soliciting perjured testimony and had provided a written script she was instructed to copy in her own hand. He agreed the footage corroborated Bernhardt's account but confirmed he is not a handwriting expert. The court closed the day with a direct admonition to defense counsel against further sequestration violations.