Opening Statements
279 linesMS. CAPPLEMAN: The evidence in this case will show that at 11:00 a.m. on July 18th, 2014, Jim Geiger is with his wife and grandchildren at his home on Trescott Drive when he hears a noise that sounds like a gunshot.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: He goes to a large bay window at the front of his residence and looks outside toward his neighbor's house, and he observes what appears to be a light-colored Prius or Prius-type vehicle back quickly out of his neighbor's driveway and take off toward Benton Road.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Concerned, Mr. Geiger walks out his front door and walks in the direction of his neighbor's residence.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: His neighbor is Dan Markel.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Seeing that Mr. Markel's vehicle is running in the garage, he's thinking, well, maybe Mr. Markel's about to back out. So he kind of goes back to his house, but he kind of keeps an eye on the driveway.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: When Mr. Markel does not back out after a couple moments, Mr. Geiger goes over to do some further investigation, and that is when he sees a terrible sight: his neighbor, Dan Markel, behind the wheel with a terrible wound to his head. There is shattered glass everywhere. Mr. Markel is seated in the driver's seat. He's alive, he's moving, he's still groaning, but he's not able to talk, he's not responsive, and he's obviously in distress.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Mr. Geiger, seeing this, runs home for his phone and calls 911. That call came in at 11:01 a.m., in broad daylight.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: First responders arrive to find 41-year-old Dan Markel unresponsive. He's taken to the hospital, where he survives for some time — I think about 14 hours — before he is officially pronounced deceased.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Dan Markel, father of two young boys and highly respected attorney at law and professor at the Florida State University College of Law, was shot twice in the head in his own garage in broad daylight.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Who would do such a thing? Nothing seems to be missing from the crime scene. There's no sign of a forced entry or a robbery attempt.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: How do you begin to investigate a case like this?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: What clues did the killers leave behind?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Well, thanks to our 911 caller, we know that the suspect vehicle is a light-colored Prius. And there's a second 911 call as well. You'll learn that Mr. Markel was on the phone at the time he was murdered, and the person that he was on the phone with heard Markel say, "Hold on a moment, there's someone in my driveway I don't recognize." Then the line went dead, and the man was unable to reach Mr. Markel again. So he called 911. So we learn from that that the person that murdered Mr. Markel was a stranger to him. It was someone he did not recognize.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: An inquiry into Dan Markel's movements that morning revealed that he dropped his two young sons off at daycare at about 8:50 a.m., then went to work out at Premier Gym, and then was killed shortly upon his return home from the gym. Law enforcement obtained surveillance from the gym and later surveillance from a city bus — there are cameras mounted to city buses — and they got surveillance from the city buses along the route that they think this Prius might have traveled, along the route that they think Mr. Markel would have traveled between the gym and his residence. And they discover something ominous on the surveillance footage.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: A white-colored Prius, which they deduced from this surveillance was silver pine mica — that's the exact color — which appears to follow Dan Markel into the gym parking lot at 9:11 a.m. on the morning of his death.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: The Prius waits in the parking lot for Mr. Markel to work out, which is approximately an hour, and then the Prius follows Mr. Markel out of the parking lot at about 10:38 a.m. The Prius was also observed on a surveillance camera from the city bus, which narrows the time of Mr. Markel's death even further, because we see that Prius on a bus both before — minutes before — and then moments after the murder as well, fleeing at a high rate of speed north on Thomasville Road toward the interstate. And you will observe these surveillance videos and learn a few things from these images that were captured about our suspect vehicle.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: You'll learn the exact color of the Prius — silver pine mica — the approximate year of the vehicle, the fact that the vehicle had a black aftermarket side mirror attached to it, a missing tow hook cover, which is just a little round circle on the front bumper of the vehicle, and a SunPass transponder mounted to the front of the windshield.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Also, in one of the images from the city bus captured after the murder, you will see the presence of what appears to be a driver in a dark-colored shirt and a passenger in a light-colored shirt. That becomes important because later, when we have two suspects develop, we find an ATM video that shows, in Pembroke Pines, Florida, on the same day of the murder, a silver pine mica Prius at an ATM with our two suspects pictured inside. And you'll see those images as well. So meanwhile, law enforcement's gathering these surveillance images, trying to get information about the suspects and the vehicle that might be involved in this murder. While they're doing that, they're simultaneously trying to learn more about Dan Markel's life — who is close to him, who might have a motive to want him dead. Law enforcement meets with Markel's ex-wife, Wendi Adelson, whereby they learn that she has been embroiled in a very contentious divorce and continued litigation with Mr. Markel regarding the enforcement of the divorce settlement agreement and specifically the custody of their two boys. Pleadings from the divorce indicate that Wendi Adelson had made efforts to relocate to South Florida. She'd actually moved to South Florida with the kids, and a court ordered her on June 20th, 2013, that she had to come back to Tallahassee — she couldn't leave with Mr. Markel's children. Emails between Wendi Adelson and her mother, Donna Adelson, that occur around the time of this litigation, about one year before the murder, indicate that Donna Adelson despised Dan Markel and was desperate to find a way for Wendi and these two kids to move down to where she was located in South Florida.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Donna Adelson in these emails refers to Dan Markel as a religious zealot, a bastard.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: She says, "Let's show this F-blank-blank-blank-blank what will make him absolutely miserable," and proposes a plan of action for how to threaten and/or bully and/or bribe Dan Markel into allowing Wendi to move to South Florida with the children.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: These plans included converting the children to Catholicism, even though the entire family was Jewish.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All the Adelsons were Jewish as well.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: But this suggestion was a way to gain leverage against Mr. Markel, because Dan Markel was very observant in his faith and it was very important to him that his children be raised in an environment that observed and was committed to the Jewish faith. The divorce between Wendi and Dan Markel was final back on July 31st of 2013, but as I mentioned, the litigation continued as both sides filed pleadings back and forth in reference to alleged violations of the divorce agreement, in reference to child custody. And specifically, one of the last pleadings filed prior to Dan Markel's murder is in reference to Wendi Adelson's mother, his mother-in-law, Donna Adelson.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And in this pleading, he alleged that the children's grandmother, Donna Adelson, was disparaging him to the kids. And he was petitioning the court to order that Donna Adelson not be allowed to have unsupervised contact with his children, her grandchildren.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: A ruling was never made on that motion because Dan Markel was murdered before the hearing was conducted.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Wendi Adelson was interviewed, as I mentioned, and she will tell you that she sure hopes someone didn't do this on her behalf.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: She will tell you that her brother, Charlie Adelson, who also lives in South Florida with her mother — not with, but in the same area as her mother, Donna Adelson, and her father, Harvey Adelson.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: She'll tell you that Charlie, quote, looked into hiring a hitman, but decided buying her a TV as a divorce present would be cheaper.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And what was her alibi for the murder?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Where was she when Dan Markel was killed?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: She has a witness who was present at her home, a repairman who was fixing that very TV — an appointment that was set up by her mother, Donna Adelson.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: So Wendi's brother, Charlie Adelson, has made references to hiring a hitman to kill Dan Markel, and now hitmen have murdered Dan Markel.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Meanwhile, law enforcement is still putting together more information about the Prius and the killers.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: They have gotten a search warrant for all the phone numbers that interacted with the cell tower consistent with people being in the area of Premier Gym at the time that we know they were there.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: So literally every cell phone that interacted with those towers during that hour period of time.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And they cross-referenced all of that data with Mr. Markel and his in-laws. So basically, have any of the phone numbers that appear on that tower around the time that we know the suspects were at the gym been in contact recently with Dan Markel, or with his in-laws, or with his ex-wife? The purpose of that was to try to see if there was any link there. And combing through all this data and putting it all together was a very tedious task, but they did find one number with a South Florida exchange which was present both in the area of Premier Gym at the time that the killers were there and was linked to a single phone call on July 1st, 2014 — so about 17 days before the murder. This number that was at Premier Gym from South Florida contacted Harvey Adelson, so the father-in-law of the deceased, husband of Donna Adelson, father of Wendi Adelson. And that number that contacted Harvey Adelson and that was also present at the gym on our date in question belonged to Sigfredo Garcia, the defendant in this case, AKA Tuto, T-U-T-O.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And an examination of Garcia's call logs showed a frequent contact with another number, which also was present on what we're calling tower dumps, so all those numbers that interacted with that cell phone tower at Premier at that time. Another number — no connection with the Adelsons that we found, but a frequent caller of Sigfredo Garcia — is Luis Rivera. That phone number was also present at Premier at the time that our suspect vehicle was there. Luis Rivera's AKA is Toto. So we've got Tuto and Toto.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: So why would these two guys, Tuto and Toto, with no apparent ties to Tallahassee, be all the way up here from Miami hanging around the gym at the same time that our suspect Prius was there?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Possibly because they're our suspects. They're the ones inside the Prius.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: So now that we have these suspect phone numbers, we subpoena all the location information from the cell phone providers to show information about Rivera and Garcia's phones. Where were they during the time leading up to the homicide, and after the homicide, and at the time of the homicide? And what it shows, which you'll get detailed testimony about in the form of digital evidence, is that Rivera and Garcia's phones leave Miami on July 16th, 2014. You'll see their movements up from Miami to Tallahassee. You'll see their movements around Tallahassee, including being in the area of Premier Gym.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And then you'll see that both phones are consistent with having been turned off around the time that the Prius was at Premier Gym waiting for Dan Markel to come out.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And both phones remain inactive until about an hour after the murder, where they popped back up headed southbound on the interstate toward Miami. As a result of this evidence, Luis Rivera and Sigfredo Garcia were charged with first-degree murder of Dan Markel. The police work that has just taken me a few minutes to summarize took about two years to accomplish. By the time Rivera and Garcia were arrested for this murder, Rivera was in custody on an unrelated federal racketeering charge, which concerned Rivera's affiliation with a criminal street gang.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: So when we develop these suspects, Rivera's in custody on something else.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Ultimately, the state made a deal with Rivera to tell the truth in exchange for a plea to second-degree murder and a 19-year prison sentence to run concurrent, or at the same time as, his federal sentence.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Rivera will tell you that he was hired by his lifelong friend, Sigfredo Garcia, who was hired by his longtime girlfriend and children's mother, Katherine Magbanua, AKA Katie, to come to Tallahassee and to kill Dan Markel.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Magbanua had an on-again, off-again relationship with Mr. Garcia, and during one of the off-again periods — you will learn, prior to the murder, during one of these off-again periods with Mr. Garcia — she was seeing somebody else, a wealthy dentist by the name of Charlie Adelson.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Charlie Adelson had a sister in Tallahassee, Wendi Adelson. And Wendi Adelson had a problem, and her problem was named Dan Markel. And the solution to that problem was Magbanua, Rivera, and Garcia.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Garcia told Rivera that Katherine Magbanua had gotten them a job, and it was a big one. It was going to pay a lot of money.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: The job was in Tallahassee.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Rivera and Garcia made, you'll learn, not one, but two trips to Tallahassee. The first trip was about six weeks prior to Markel's death, and it was intended to be a murder trip, but it ended up being more of a scouting trip. The murder did not occur.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Garcia told Rivera on the way to Tallahassee on that first trip that they were coming up here to do a murder.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Garcia showed Mr. Rivera a photograph of who they were coming to kill. He had a piece of paper with a picture of Dan Markel on it and some typed words underneath.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: He indicated to Rivera that they needed to kill this guy so that his wife could get their kids, and that they were going to be paid $100,000 for the job, with Rivera's cut being $35,000.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Rivera bought a gun off the street, and Garcia rented a car for this June trip. Rivera asked Garcia — and this is the first trip — Rivera asked Garcia who knew that he was going along, who knew he was involved, and Garcia assured him that only Katie knew, Katherine Magbanua. On the way, Garcia showed Rivera the piece of paper, and Rivera also overheard several phone calls between Garcia and Magbanua during this first trip, which included Magbanua instructing Garcia about what they needed to do, including things like: make sure you do everything right, don't do anything stupid, when you are done, call me. Garcia and Rivera got a hotel room here in Tallahassee on this first trip. They did some scouting around the Markel residence, but couldn't get the job done, and ultimately headed back to Miami. Six weeks later, the two returned to Tallahassee in the green Prius rented by Luis Rivera in Miami, Florida. They brought the same gun that was present on the first trip — the one that Luis Rivera bought off the street, and that ultimately becomes the murder weapon. On this trip they spend two nights in Tallahassee, again scouting around the Markel residence, attempting to follow Mr. Markel. And you'll hear — You know, Katie — Katherine Magbanua — previously instructed them not to do anything stupid.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And her reasoning for that will be evidenced by some of the activity that they get up to when they're here.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: For example, Garcia accidentally shot a hole in the floorboard on the passenger side of the Prius with the murder weapon prior to the murder, which resulted in them severing the gas line and rendering the vehicle inoperable.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Then they had to get a ride to the store to buy some supplies to fix the thing, and fix the thing on the side of the road.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: So you'll hear a little bit about that.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Then, the night before the murder, Rivera will tell you that he took a picture of an owl and posted it on Instagram, which, as y'all may know, indicates where you are when you post something.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And he'll tell you that Katherine Magbanua immediately called Garcia to tell Rivera how stupid he was and to take the picture down, because nobody could know where he was.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Again, Rivera overhears conversation during the second trip between Garcia and Magbanua.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Katherine Magbanua indicates that they have to get this job done because the professor is planning to leave town in the near future.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: So on July 18th, 2014, Rivera and Garcia follow Professor Markel to the daycare where he drops off his kids at approximately 8:50 in the morning. Then they go to the gym, where they wait in the parking lot while Mr. Markel works out. And then they go to his home, where Rivera pulls the Prius into the driveway close up to the bumper of Mr. Markel, where he's parked in his driveway. You'll hear that Garcia gets out and approaches Markel with the revolver purchased on the street by Luis Rivera, and that Garcia shoots Mr. Markel twice through the driver's window before hopping back into the Prius. Rivera backs out of the driveway and they head back to Miami. I mentioned earlier that both men had their phones off, and that once they turn their phones back on, the very first call that either of them makes after the homicide is Mr. Garcia to Katherine Magbanua. And what does he say?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: He says, the job is done. And what does she reply?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: She says, I know.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: There's a brief discussion about when they'll get their money.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And Katherine Magbanua says, don't worry about the money. I will get the money. You'll get it tomorrow.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Then the next day, Rivera was at the barbershop when he talked to Katherine Magbanua. She advised that she had the money and was looking for Garcia to pay up. Wasn't able to find Garcia. Rivera knew where to look for Garcia — at another young lady's residence. Rivera successfully rounds up Garcia, and they all meet at Rivera's house, where Rivera gets his payment. So Rivera, Garcia, and Magbanua are all present. Rivera gets his money — $35,000, stapled into packs of $1,000 apiece.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Garcia also gave Rivera a little extra money later that night while they're out celebrating.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: In the weeks and months after the homicide, Rivera and Garcia bought — they each bought — a motorcycle.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Garcia also bought a car.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Katherine Magbanua also got a car, a black Lexus, whose previous owner happens to be Harvey Adelson.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Magbanua was also put on the payroll at the Adelsons' dental practice shortly after the homicide and began receiving regular checks for approximately two years, although law enforcement has yet to determine what, if any, service she provided to that dental office. And the folks that work there don't seem to know either.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: She got a breast augmentation surgery shortly after the homicide.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: She had trips paid for by Charlie Adelson after the homicide that didn't even include him.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And she deposited large amounts of cash into her bank account around the time of the murder, sometimes multiple deposits at different banks in the same day.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: So, in an effort to ferret out who are all of the members of this conspiracy, and to prove how information flowed — how was the conspiracy structured — we, on April 19, 2016, so almost two years after the murder, law enforcement conducts an undercover operation.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: They got court authorization to go up on a wire — what's called a wire — on Katherine Magbanua's phone and also Charlie Adelson's phone, which means they could listen in real time to what was being said on these phones. That's, despite some popular belief, not something the government normally can do without special authorization.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: In this case, that authorization was put in place and law enforcement was prepared to listen to both Katherine Magbanua's calls and Charlie Adelson's calls. They then sent an undercover agent posing as someone who basically was on behalf of Rivera to walk up to Donna Adelson on the street and basically try to extort money out of her. This undercover officer handed Donna Adelson a piece of paper, and on the paper is a story about the death of Dan Markel. It includes a photograph of Dan Markel, and written on the page is a phone number and the amount $5,000. And the undercover agent — I'm summarizing — tells Donna Adelson, basically, my buddy Rivera — I didn't say the word Rivera — but my buddy's sitting in jail and you're out here taking care of Katie and Tudor, so basically he's asking for five thousand dollars for Rivera to even things out. So now law enforcement starts listening to the calls. Like, you know, we do this little thing. It's two years after the murder. We do this undercover operation to try to generate some chatter and see who will say what to whom, and you'll get an opportunity to hear some of those phone calls that result from this undercover operation. That phone number, the undercover agent's phone number, that's written on that piece of paper that's handed to Donna Adelson — you're going to see that it travels from Donna to Charlie to Katie and then to Sigfredo.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: You will hear and see evidence of these calls, and you can make of them what you will. But in conclusion, I believe that you will be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the State is not pulling a fast one on you, but rather that Katherine Magbanua was hired to solicit Garcia, who in turn solicited Rivera to come to Tallahassee and to execute Mr. Markel in cold blood.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: At the conclusion of the evidence, I will ask you to return a verdict of guilty as charged for both defendants. Thank you.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Mr. Zangeneh?
MR. ZANGENEH: If it pleases the Court, counsel for the government, for the co-defendant, ladies and gentlemen of the jury.
MR. ZANGENEH: Seven years. Seven years in Florida State Prison.
MR. ZANGENEH: That's what Luis Rivera got in exchange for his participation in a first-degree murder case.
MR. ZANGENEH: And who gave him a seven-year deal offer?
MR. ZANGENEH: The prosecution.
MR. ZANGENEH: So you have to think, and you have to ask yourself, what did the prosecution get in return? For the deal of the century, what did the prosecution get for giving a defendant with an extremely long criminal history, including a recent federal conviction for racketeering as a Latin King — what did he give?
MR. ZANGENEH: Did he give the information of a mob boss or a drug kingpin, a foreign or domestic terrorist, a hiding school shooter? He gave up Sigfredo Garcia.
MR. ZANGENEH: Why does that matter?
MR. ZANGENEH: Why does what he gave up matter?
MR. ZANGENEH: Why does Luis Rivera's information in this case matter?
MR. ZANGENEH: Because, as it's clear from the government's opening statement, their focus in this case is on the Adelsons.
MR. ZANGENEH: Donna Adelson, Charlie Adelson, Wendi Adelson — that's who their real targets are. And so what do they do? They go after the low-hanging fruit. They go to Luis Rivera, who was charged with first-degree murder and subject to the death penalty, and they tell him, we're gonna cut you a deal where you only have to serve seven more years.
MR. ZANGENEH: Seven.
MR. ZANGENEH: So what does he do, then, with his lawyer Chuck Collins? You're gonna see a tape. You're gonna see an interview the government's gonna play where law enforcement officers are sitting at a table with Luis Rivera and his attorney Chuck Collins, and it's gonna be considered his initial statement, okay? And they're gonna ask him things back and forth, and you'll see that Luis Rivera gives a statement that in essence becomes — and he becomes — the prosecution's parrot. He says pretty much everything that coincides with their strategy, with their theory of the case.
MR. ZANGENEH: What they don't tell you and what they don't show you is that before the video camera turns on, law enforcement is in one room, Luis Rivera and Chuck Collins are in another. The detectives go, not to Luis Rivera, but to Chuck Collins to exchange questions, to prepare Luis Rivera for when the lights turn on, to make sure that your story fits, that your story is in unison with what the government wants you to say. They don't show you that, but you're going to hear about it, because the testimony is what it is, and the testimony is that the government spoon-fed Luis Rivera as to what his testimony has to be. Now, why does that matter? Well, let's talk about some of the things that the government said in their opening and what they believe that the evidence is going to show.
MR. ZANGENEH: They talked about an initial trip where Luis Rivera says that him and Sigfredo Garcia traveled from Tallahassee — I'm sorry, from Miami to Tallahassee — to scope out the scene, or to commit murder, or whatever their argument was.
MR. ZANGENEH: And the reason why Luis Rivera has to say this is because there's cell tower records that show that he traveled from Miami to Tallahassee a month before the murder.
MR. ZANGENEH: There's no such records for Sigfredo Garcia.
MR. ZANGENEH: You won't hear one thing. You won't see one piece of data that shows Sigfredo Garcia traveling from Miami to Tallahassee during that first purported trip.
MR. ZANGENEH: If you don't think that's good enough, there's more.
MR. ZANGENEH: During that first trip up, Luis Rivera, who was driving, who rented his car, gets pulled over by a Florida Highway Patrol officer, Trooper Downing.
MR. ZANGENEH: And Trooper Downing testified — and you'll hear that his testimony is — that when he issued the citation, that Luis Rivera was alone, alone in the car.
MR. ZANGENEH: And he knows that because he indicated on the citation. The government has hitched their wagon to Luis Rivera. That's this case, okay?
MR. ZANGENEH: There's going to be speculation and an additional theory of why the Adelsons wanted to hurt Dan Markel. That's an additional case. This case, Sigfredo's case, is premised around Luis Rivera.
MR. ZANGENEH: And I'll tell you why. Because the only person that can put Sigfredo Garcia at the scene, the only person who can tell you that Sigfredo Garcia got out of the car and purportedly shot Dan Markel, is — it's the guy who got the seven years, the guy who got the deal of a lifetime. It's him.
MR. ZANGENEH: That's their case.
MR. ZANGENEH: You will hear statement after statement after statement — Luis Rivera, who adds and subtracts and changes and alters his testimony from A to Z. I mean, it's crazy how much he changes his story.
MR. ZANGENEH: He tells the government, which they're going to tell you, you know, we got $100,000 for this murder.
MR. ZANGENEH: And for driving up to Tallahassee, you know what I got as the driver?
MR. ZANGENEH: I got $35,000.
MR. ZANGENEH: So wait a minute. Let me get this straight.
MR. ZANGENEH: Supposedly, Sigfredo Garcia was hired and given $100,000 bucks, and he decided, because he's such a wealthy guy, to bring you in to do nothing other than drive you up to Tallahassee twice for 35 grand? You know, two and two has to equal four, okay? Luis Rivera also wants you to believe that Katie Magbanua was solicited by Charlie Adelson. Okay, now the evidence is gonna show that my client has children with Ms. Magbanua. He loves her. That's his girlfriend. That's his — that's his — that's his wifey. But they were going through a rough patch. Do you know who she was dating? She was dating Charlie Adelson. They want you to believe — and the evidence will show, from the government's own witnesses — that Sigfredo Garcia was in love with Katie, and he was not happy, not one bit, that this dental playboy that drives around in a Ferrari with nice hair and big muscles and a long, long wallet was with his wifey. They want you to believe that this man, whose heart was broken, decided, you know what, I'm gonna go ahead and help out the guy that's with my wife. Charlie Adelson, he's no numbskull.
MR. ZANGENEH: He's got degree after degree.
MR. ZANGENEH: Who do you think — the evidence is going to show that Charlie Adelson is a smart guy.
MR. ZANGENEH: Charlie Adelson knew Sigfredo didn't like him.
MR. ZANGENEH: Charlie Adelson also knew that crossing — you know, when you make that decision, if you're going to solicit somebody, if you have the option of Luis Rivera, the primero of the Latin Kings. Primero of the Latin Kings means you're the head of the Latin Kings. If you're five foot four and you're the head of a gang organization, what does that mean? That means you're a bad dude. You don't get to become the head of a gang at five foot four if you don't prove yourself as a gang member. And it's not like a fairytale game. This is an international organization known for its involvement in criminal acts, from robbery, homicide, drug dealing, kidnapping, you name it. And how do I prove that Luis Rivera was in this criminal organization, other than he's going to have to admit it? He was serving a federal sentence for racketeering, for 12 years, by the United States Department of Justice. And on that indictment you will see that he had a network of Latin Kings throughout the state of Florida.
MR. ZANGENEH: From Key West up to the Panhandle, they're Latin Kings.
MR. ZANGENEH: And as the primero, which means a leader of the Latin Kings, he had access to other Latin Kings.
MR. ZANGENEH: So if he wanted to go off to Tallahassee to commit a murder, you think he would take a gun?
MR. ZANGENEH: No, because he's a convicted felon. He'd be riding dirty. That means he'd be riding with a gun. Now what does he do?
MR. ZANGENEH: Picks up the phone and he calls one of his brothers up north.
MR. ZANGENEH: That makes sense. That's what the head of a criminal organization would do. This is not a street-level thug. This is the primero of the Latin Kings. And so Luis Rivera, a known drug dealer, a known supplier of — I mean, he is a pharmacy, from soup to nuts, from steroids to cocaine, he supplies it. And it's our position that he has a relationship with Charlie. It's our position that he was the drug supplier for Charlie Adelson.
MR. ZANGENEH: And Charlie Adelson made a decision to instill and to solicit this murder for hire from Luis Rivera.
MR. ZANGENEH: And do you think Luis Rivera — I mean, he took the $100,000.
MR. ZANGENEH: But do you think he's going to tell his buddy, Sigfredo, hey, I'm going to help out the guy that's sleeping with your wife?
MR. ZANGENEH: The Latin Kings have a code of silence. He'll tell you about it.
MR. ZANGENEH: It's known.
MR. ZANGENEH: The Latin Kings are an organization that — they're known to keep their mouths shut.
MR. ZANGENEH: It is in their Bible. There's been specials on HBO about it. And so Charlie Adelson, who's an educated man, instills the services of a known gang leader, not Sigfredo Garcia.
MR. ZANGENEH: But who's going to tell you otherwise?
MR. ZANGENEH: Well, let's see. The guy looking at the death penalty that the government offered seven years.
MR. ZANGENEH: You're going to hear discrepancy after discrepancy. You're going to hear problematic evidence with Luis Rivera about Sigfredo Garcia's involvement.
MR. ZANGENEH: And you're going to hear over and over and over that Luis Rivera's story fits the government's theory.
MR. ZANGENEH: Because the target at the end of this case is not these two.
MR. ZANGENEH: When Luis Rivera started cooperating in October of 2016, the government, as well as everybody else, believed that they would be the next to crumble to get to the AOC.
MR. ZANGENEH: That's what everybody thought.
MR. ZANGENEH: But yet, here we are.
MR. ZANGENEH: They've maintained their innocence, and we're here in trial.
MR. ZANGENEH: We ask you guys to evaluate the evidence. The government said in opening statement that there is a picture of the Prius that shows two people in it.
MR. ZANGENEH: Don't listen to them.
MR. ZANGENEH: Make your own decision.
MR. ZANGENEH: Our position is that Sigfredo Garcia and Luis Rivera were up in Tallahassee. We will admit to that. But they were there for one of many drug deals that they were involved in, because Luis Rivera is a drug dealer, and he brings along Sigfredo Garcia time and time again.
MR. ZANGENEH: We will submit to you that Luis Rivera is the shooter in this case.
MR. ZANGENEH: We will submit to you that he enlisted the services of his organization to supply the gun and to supply another henchman. And remember, the only person that can put my client in that car, the only person that puts the gun in my client's purported hand, the only person that says Sigfredo Garcia went and killed Dan Markel is who? Luis Rivera.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Just a second. Make one comment. I know you all see the attorneys with coffee cups on their table, but just to let you know that everything's fair in here. I drink water, they drink water, you drink water. Nobody's in here with coffee, and they're under strict orders not to bring coffee in here, so I don't want y'all to think they're sitting there drinking coffee. I have water only. Ruled just because we have so many people coming and going and we don't have much assistance cleaning up. We get coffee all over, we got a big mess. So anyway, we'll take ten minutes, let you step out with the bailiff. Either side, anything?
JUDGE HANKINSON: Take ten minutes.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Just leave your notes where they are.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Judge, it is my understanding from discussing with Ms. Kawass her intentions for opening statement include introducing the photograph of Mr. Rivera.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Introducing photographs or publishing photographs for the jury of her client in her cap and gown and maybe some other photographs. And also, introducing some statements from her client that were captured in Mr. Adelson's iCloud. I would object to those items being published during the opening statements as irrelevant, improper character evidence, and argumentative.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Ms. Kawass.
MS. KAWASS: Your Honor, the photograph that you will be using of Luis Rivera is actually the picture that the state is going to be using on one of their own demonstratives. So it's evidence that I received from them. And then the text messages from the iCloud are evidence that the state turned over to us, which are statements of my client that we intend on introducing in our case in chief.
MS. KAWASS: So it's the evidence we expect to present to the court. If we fail to present it later on, the state can address that in closing argument.
JUDGE HANKINSON: I'm going to sustain the state's objection at this point, and I'm going to make one — and I'm not making a ruling on what ultimately, whether they'll come in or not, but we do.
JUDGE HANKINSON: You've made several comments through the course of several hearings that your client said it, therefore it's admissible. That rule actually just works one way — that statements can be offered against your client. That does not necessarily mean you can introduce statements by your client. Those are hearsay, and there's not an exception. So there certainly is a different legal standard, but I'll sustain the objection at this point in time. Seat the jury, please.
JUDGE HANKINSON: May it be seated, please.
MS. KAWASS: May it please the Court, opposing counsel, counsel for the co-defendant.
MS. KAWASS: Prosecutorial desperation. That is the only reason why Katherine Magbanua is sitting before you today, charged with a crime that she had absolutely nothing to do with. The prosecution's relentless obsession with arresting the Adelson family has led to this day, this moment, in this courtroom, where an innocent person is being accused of a crime that she did not commit. But one thing is a hundred percent certain, members of the jury: at the end of this case, when you are presented with all of the evidence — not just the little bits and pieces from the state — you will see for yourselves that she was completely innocent. So let's talk about Katherine Magbanua. Katherine Magbanua is a young woman who grew up over 400 miles away from Tallahassee, at the other end of the state of Florida, in Miami.
MS. KAWASS: You are going to learn many things about Katherine over the next few days, one of which is that she is a hard-working woman who loves her children and just wants to provide a good life for them — her son Ethan and her daughter Katie.
MS. KAWASS: She is also a very strong woman.
MS. KAWASS: She's one of the strongest women that I have come to know. But her major downfall is her taste in men, and at the end of this case you are going to see that the only thing she is guilty of is having horrible taste in men. So let's start with Sigfredo Garcia, because you have to know and understand what was really going on between Katherine Magbanua and Sigfredo Garcia's relationship to understand and make sense of what really happened all the way back in 2014.
MS. KAWASS: Katherine started dating Sigfredo Garcia when they were just teenagers.
MS. KAWASS: Then, when Katie went off to college, she became pregnant with her son, Ethan.
MS. KAWASS: And even though it's a difficult task, going to school and being a mother, she worked really hard and she graduated with her bachelor's degree in health administration.
MS. KAWASS: Now, the prosecution's own witnesses are going to tell you — and Ms. Cappleman actually said it in her opening statement — that Katherine and Sigfredo were constantly breaking up and getting back together, because even though Katherine seemed to have her head on straight and that she was focused, Sigfredo just could not get it together.
MS. KAWASS: If it wasn't the drinking, if it wasn't the cocaine, it was the — and Katie had Sigfredo would keep messing up over the course of ten years, and she would always take him back, because he is the father of her children.
MS. KAWASS: But in 2013, that all changed.
MS. KAWASS: She was done with Sigfredo. Ten years of the back and forth — she had had it.
MS. KAWASS: So the relationship was over. She kicked him out of her apartment. She didn't want to have anything to do with him.
MS. KAWASS: But even though they're broken up, Sigfredo is the father of her children.
MS. KAWASS: That is why they were keeping in constant communication.
MS. KAWASS: She didn't cut Sigfredo out of her children's life. Now, a few months later, after their breakup, she was working at a dental office called Sophie Dental on South Beach in Miami, and in walks Charlie Adelson, and walks into her life — the second man that she has horrible taste for. Because you are going to learn that Charlie Adelson — they will describe him somewhat of a playboy. At the time he was 37 years old, single, dentist, good income, no kids. The state is going to try and make it seem like he is a millionaire or a billionaire, but it wasn't like that.
MS. KAWASS: He was all about fun, though.
MS. KAWASS: And Katherine, she knew this.
MS. KAWASS: Charlie is not one to be shy about what he wants out of life, which is not to settle down.
MS. KAWASS: So even though they were having a good time and they were dating, Katherine knew this was not going to end up anywhere.
MS. KAWASS: Now, Sigfredo — the prosecution's own witnesses will tell you that Sigfredo would follow Katie around.
MS. KAWASS: that he followed her once without her knowing, when she was having dinner with Charlie Adelson.
MS. KAWASS: He was in a truck with Luis Rivera when they were watching him — watching them eating.
MS. KAWASS: And he actually threatened to run them over with his truck.
MS. KAWASS: That is where Sigfredo's head was at.
MS. KAWASS: Sigfredo, the evidence will show you, knew about Charlie.
MS. KAWASS: And the evidence will show you that Charlie knew about Sigfredo. And Charlie knew — he knew that the one driving force that was driving Sigfredo was trying to get Katie back.
MS. KAWASS: Now, the state got up here, and what their whole theory boils down to is they say that the Adelsons are behind this, but the only link that makes sense is that it had to have gone through Katherine Magbanua to get to these two individuals.
MS. KAWASS: But members of the jury, Ms. Cappleman said it to you directly in her opening statement. They have a phone call between Sigfredo Garcia directly to Charlie Adelson. So there is evidence of that communication.
MS. KAWASS: They don't want to highlight it, because if they can show that there is evidence between Luis Rivera and Sigfredo Garcia directly to Charlie, then their entire theory of Katie's involvement makes absolutely no sense.
MS. KAWASS: But you know what, members of the jury?
MS. KAWASS: Let's just use a little bit of common sense. Now, all of this that's going on with Sigfredo — you know, the stalking and all of this — this is taking place a few months before July 18th, 2014.
MS. KAWASS: And make no mistake about it, that day was a tragic day.
MS. KAWASS: Two boys lost their father, and a family lost their son. And if there is one thing that the state and I can agree on, it is that July 18th, 2014 was a horrible, horrific, unjustifiable tragedy.
MS. KAWASS: And although nothing can bring Dan Markel back to his family and to his friends, we do all want the same thing in this case.
MS. KAWASS: Justice for a senseless loss of life.
MS. KAWASS: But one thing needs to be clear, and it needs to be made clear from the very beginning. Justice does not come from convicting an innocent person for a crime that they did not commit. That is actually the opposite.
MS. KAWASS: Now, the prosecution got up here and they told you about their case, and they made it very clear who they think is behind the murder of Dan Markel — the real perpetrators behind this crime, the Adelson family.
MS. KAWASS: But the Adelson family — Charlie, Donna, and Harvey — they're not in this courtroom today, and they're not going to be here during this trial, because you're going to find out that the state hasn't even arrested or charged them with anything, because they don't have the evidence to do it.
MS. KAWASS: You heard Ms. Cappleman in voir dire the past few days already on the defenses, because she's trying to soften the blow when she was asking you, will any of you be concerned if the other people of the conspiracy are not going to be here? Because she doesn't want you to think about it, because it's not good for her case. You have to think about the pivotal question in this case as to why the Adelsons are not in this courtroom, and why that is so important, is because that is the reason, ladies and gentlemen, why Katherine Magbanua was charged in this case — because of the prosecution's desperation and blinding desire to arrest Charlie Adelson and his parents. Do not check your common sense at the door, ladies and gentlemen, because common sense is going to be the only tool that you will need to see that Katherine was just a pawn in Charlie Adelson's plan to kill Dan Markel.
MS. KAWASS: And now the prosecution is trying to use Katherine as a pawn to get to Charlie Adelson. That is the only reason that we are here. The prosecution wants you to believe that Katherine, a young, hardworking mother of two, took money to help coordinate the murder of a man she has never met, for a guy that she has known for less than a year.
MS. KAWASS: They want you to believe that Katherine asked the father of her kids, who she was separated from at the time, to commit a murder for her new boyfriend.
MS. KAWASS: That makes no sense.
MS. KAWASS: Any way you look at it, it just doesn't make any sense, members of the jury.
MS. KAWASS: So let's talk about the evidence that the state is going to bring you against Katherine Magbanua. The cash deposits that Ms. Cappleman talked about.
MS. KAWASS: The prosecution is going to present you with a witness who analyzed Katherine's bank records between the year of 2013 and the beginning of 2016, and these witnesses will tell you that there was an unusual spike in her cash deposits. Mind you, they only looked at an 18-month period to make this analysis. So let's talk about what the state did not tell you. And I sat back at my desk and I was listening to their opening statement and I said to myself, let me see if they're going to give the members of the jury the whole story. And they didn't.
MS. KAWASS: From 2013 until 2015, Katie was working several jobs.
MS. KAWASS: Jobs that paid her in cash.
MS. KAWASS: She worked the club scene at Hard Rock down in Fort Lauderdale. She worked at Club Faith, and she worked at Hollywood Live.
MS. KAWASS: She also worked for a liquor promotional company where they have girls go to these clubs or other places and they stand up at the front and they promote the sales. And it was a great job — it's a great job to have in Miami, because you make a lot of cash when you work in these clubs and you're working bottle service, these VIP. She was in the VIP section. They paid her in cash. Now, members of the jury, this is not a surprise that I am just dropping on the state attorney right now. This is not coming out of nowhere. The FBI, the Tallahassee Police Department, and the prosecution knew about this. This witness, Yindra Velazquez Mascaro, who was Katherine's best friend and worked with her at these clubs, was interviewed by the FBI and the Tallahassee Police Department over three years ago, and she told them this, and they just ignored it. And you want to know how I know that they're going to want you to ignore it? Number one, they didn't mention it in their opening statement. They just left that little piece out. But they're going to present you with summaries of her cash deposits, and their witness will tell you that all that consideration of her getting paid cash from other jobs — that's not in there. They don't want it in there, because they don't want you to see it, because it doesn't fit with their case. But even without that evidence — let's just take that evidence out — they want you to believe that Katherine Magbanua was paid for a murder in cash, and then she walked into the bank to deposit it, the place where no one will ever find it, that she decided to walk into a bank with video cameras and a record, and that that was the plan — to hide the money in the bank. Now, what the evidence is going to show you is that there is no evidence of withdrawals from the Adelsons' accounts, none of them, and there is no evidence of cash deposits into Sigfredo Garcia's and Luis Rivera's accounts.
MS. KAWASS: And why is that?
MS. KAWASS: Remember what Ms. Cappleman said yesterday in voir dire?
MS. KAWASS: Criminals don't leave their DNA and fingerprints.
MS. KAWASS: Remember when she said that?
MS. KAWASS: They want you to believe that Katherine is a part of this elaborate scheme, but she is the only one that is leaving a trace of cash deposits into her bank.
MS. KAWASS: That just makes no sense.
MS. KAWASS: The next thing the prosecutors want you to believe that's evidence — and Ms. Cappleman mentioned it — is a car, a Lexus. Now, she didn't go into the details about this Lexus, just "Lexus," because it sounds like an expensive car, right? It was a 2001 Lexus that had over 150,000 miles on it, the car that kept breaking down — because you will hear on those recordings it kept breaking down — and that she had to fix with her own money. This is payment for a homicide. But we'll go a step further.
MS. KAWASS: I thought the state was going to introduce this evidence to you, but once again, she doesn't mention it.
MS. KAWASS: Ms. Magbanua actually filed paperwork transferring the title from Harvey Adelson to her, and then filed it with the DMV, so that there is a direct paper trail between her and the Adelsons. If you're involved in a homicide, why would you do that?
MS. KAWASS: Why would you put your name on it with the person that you're co-conspiring with? It makes no sense. All these things that she is doing out in the open is evidence of her innocence, that she did not know. The next thing that they want to talk to you about: the breast implants. They are actually going to get here and argue to you that she received the breast implants in the October following the homicide, and that that is somehow payment for a murder. But they're going to ask you to speculate, members of the jury, because they went so far as to obtain her medical records from the doctor, and he knows it — it just, it showed that she paid for it herself. That's what it showed. But they're going to ask you to believe that that somehow links her to this homicide. Next, the paychecks from the Adelson Institute beginning in September of 2014. The prosecution wants you to believe that the Adelson family, in an attempt to secretly pay Katherine Magbanua for her participation in this scheme, they decided to put her on their payroll and file taxes on her behalf.
MS. KAWASS: That is a way to secretly pay someone if they're involved in the homicide.
MS. KAWASS: Now, Katie did work for Charlie. All of their own witnesses are going to tell you that Charlie was her boss. All the witnesses that knew Katie will say they referred to Charlie as her boss. And just because she didn't go to the Adelson Institute from Monday to Friday at these certain times — that is what their argument is going to be, they're going to argue that she didn't work. But members of the jury, they have Charlie's account, they have all of his text messages, they have all of the information from his phone. Mind you, he's never been arrested, but they have his entire iCloud account. Let's see if the state attorney's office is going to show you all of the text messages between these supposed co-conspirators, because I guarantee you, if there is something in there that is evidence of this homicide, they'll show it to you. But if they don't, ask yourself why. Now let's go on to the wiretaps. The state mentioned this. Two years after the homicide, they come up with this elaborate scheme, they do, with the FBI.
MS. KAWASS: Now, they have already made it clear who they think the players are.
MS. KAWASS: The Adelsons. They have evidence that it's Sigfredo Garcia and Luis Rivera, and then they have this suspicion that somehow Katherine is involved.
MS. KAWASS: So they're going to do this elaborate plan where this man is going to walk up to Donna Adelson and hand her this note, and that this guy is going to say Katherine's name — says Katie's name — to Donna Adelson. Now, what's more important, members of the jury, is all you are going to have — there are hundreds, but you have to understand how these recordings come about.
MS. KAWASS: You're not going to get to hear every single phone call that was made on Katherine's phone and on Charlie's phone.
MS. KAWASS: So, first, they only tapped Katherine's phone and Charlie's phone. They didn't tap Donna's phone. They didn't tap Harvey's phone. They didn't tap Wendi's phone. They didn't tap Sigfredo Garcia's phone. Only Katie and only Charlie. Next, they will explain to you how these — what they call T3 calls — how they come to be. It goes through the filter of the FBI. What that means is, all these members of the police department are listening to their phone calls, they determine what they think is relevant and important, and if they don't think it's important, they turn off the recording. So you're not going to get to hear everything. It's like I told you, members of the jury — bits and pieces, what they think is important. So when they make an argument that all this sounds funny, you are not going to have any context to any of these phone calls. But one thing is clear: they have hundreds and hundreds of recordings, and even with that, they still could not arrest, because Even they will tell you, they did not have enough evidence. It was nothing but speculation. This is where the prosecutorial desperation is just growing and growing. Okay, they've got all this stuff with the cash and this, but they themselves know that all of that has an innocent explanation, so that's not enough. They want the thing that is direct, that can get them to put handcuffs on Katie, and they're not willing to listen to anything else that shows that she did not know. So this is what's important, members of the jury. In 2016, the prosecution arrests Luis Rivera and Sigfredo Garcia at the same time that they're monitoring Katherine's phone. You're going to hear her recordings where she says, I don't know what's going on, I have no idea what this is all about. Let's see if they play those phone calls for you. Okay? Because Katherine doesn't know that her phone is being recorded or monitored. But they're going to say, you know what, that was all a ruse. Then the prosecution decides to release to the media the warrants in this case, which basically details —
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Objection. Improper argumentative.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
MS. KAWASS: — which details their case from beginning to end. Not all the things that I told you about, just the little bits and pieces that fit with their theory. So it's out in the media. Katherine doesn't run, she didn't pack up her kids and leave, and that's because she had nothing to do with this.
MS. KAWASS: In her mind, she's like, there's no way that I can be accused of a murder. It's going to come to light, because I didn't do anything wrong.
MS. KAWASS: But she was wrong, because she's sitting here accused of a crime that she did not commit, with no direct, reliable evidence that has her involved. So at this point, the cases are going — Sigfredo's case is set for trial, Luis's case is set for trial — and they want the Adelsons. In August of 2016 — August — Luis Rivera says, I want to talk to the cops. I mean, he is facing the death penalty. They're going to kill him. Okay? And they had set up this meeting, and I need you to pay attention to how this meeting was set.
MS. KAWASS: They are in a room. Luis Rivera is in a room with his lawyer.
MS. KAWASS: They send over questions.
MS. KAWASS: Luis Rivera gets to review the questions with his lawyer, come up with an answer, and send it back over to them.
MS. KAWASS: But what is more important, members of the jury — I need you to pay attention. This first meeting is not recorded in any way, shape.
MS. KAWASS: Jason Newlin, the investigator with the state attorney's office, was there. You would think, we are going to speak to Luis Rivera, we're finally going to get the questions answered — that he would even take notes, something.
MS. KAWASS: And he's going to come into this courtroom, take the stand, and tell you, I don't remember.
MS. KAWASS: You know, I can't remember the details.
MS. KAWASS: But one thing's for certain: they didn't cut a deal with him. So whatever he said to them wasn't good enough.
MS. KAWASS: Case is set for trial. Two months pass.
MS. KAWASS: They're getting desperate, because nothing's happening. Luis Rivera knows this, and so does his lawyer.
MS. KAWASS: So what did they do?
MS. KAWASS: We want to talk to you again.
MS. KAWASS: But now the story changes.
MS. KAWASS: All of a sudden, he says he has information that involves Katherine.
MS. KAWASS: All of a sudden.
MS. KAWASS: So the State Attorney's Office contacts the detectives and says, we have struck a deal with Luis Rivera, so we need you to go up to the Jefferson County Jail and take a statement from him. The FBI — and it is offensive, members of the jury, that they went out there with no intention of They are the FBI and the Tallahassee Police Department. All they had to do was bring a recording device, so that you could see for yourself Luis Rivera in action — because the detectives will tell you that even in that statement, he switches from one story to the next to the next. And members of the jury, you're going to see it for yourself. I wish I could tell you what he is going to tell you in this courtroom, but I don't know. You want to know why? He has told so many different versions of what happened that I don't know what he's going to tell you today. Ms. Cappleman made some references to what he's going to say — I'm assuming in this trial that it's the first time I'm hearing of it, so he's changed it yet again. But the state is actually going to ask you — this is what's concerning, members of the jury, and we know this because they kept mentioning it today — are there small little details that they're getting, the inconsistencies wrong? No. These are big details that he is getting wrong. For example, in one of his statements: I didn't know it was a murder.
MS. KAWASS: I found out when I was on my way up to Tallahassee. I thought it was going to be a robbery.
MS. KAWASS: I had no idea it was a murder. I found out on the way, all the way when we were in Orlando.
MS. KAWASS: That's when I found out.
MS. KAWASS: Then another statement: oh no, no, no, I found out at the house before we left that it was a murder. In fact, I am the one that went and bought the gun, I am the one that went and bought the bullets, and I actually rented the car for the second trip.
MS. KAWASS: They want you to ignore these things, members of the jury, which is evidence that shows you that he is a liar. Here.
MS. KAWASS: Luis Rivera, a multiple-time convicted felon.
MS. KAWASS: Not only is he a convicted felon, he is a member of the gang Latin Kings.
MS. KAWASS: Mr. Rivera, the guy who even on his best day can't keep his story straight about what happened. The man who takes pleas — which you will find out, because of his federal case, he just takes pleas to save himself. He has a history of doing it. This is their star witness against Katherine. Because all that other stuff that they talked about, that Prius, has nothing to do with her.
MS. KAWASS: Prosecutorial desperation, members of the jury. They are so desperate to get Charlie Adelson that their belief is the only way to get to him is: we have to get to Katherine. They want to arrest her because that's our way to get to Charlie.
MS. KAWASS: But they were mistaken, because she doesn't have the information that they want. So now, three years later, she is sitting here accused of a crime that she did not commit.
MS. KAWASS: I'm not going to go over too much in detail, because Mr. Zangeneh went over that plea deal.
MS. KAWASS: Do I even need to tell you how ridiculous that plea deal is?
MS. KAWASS: He is already serving 12 years for a RICO federal charge.
MS. KAWASS: The man who was involved with murdering Dan Markel — that is going to show you, members of the jury, how desperate they were.
MS. KAWASS: He isn't even going to serve seven years. You want to know why? Because in Florida, if there's no minimum mandatory, you get gain time. So it really isn't seven years on top of the 12.
MS. KAWASS: He'll probably get two years shaved off of that as well. No probation.
MS. KAWASS: So this murderer is going to get out of jail free, probably before he's even 50.
MS. KAWASS: This is the deal that they cut with their star witness, and they're actually going to ask you to believe him.
MS. KAWASS: And what's more important, members of the jury — one of the interesting things that Luis Rivera said, and it's going to be a very important and pivotal part of it.
MS. KAWASS: In one of his statements, he mentions that Wendi Adelson... He says that Sigfredo told him the lady wants her kids back.
MS. KAWASS: Wendi! He even mentions her name — Wendi.
MS. KAWASS: Because Luis knows how badly they want the Adelsons. So he's thinking, let me throw out Wendi's name too, because maybe I can get 10 years instead of 19. Because that's how bad they want the Adelsons.
MS. KAWASS: And he proceeds to tell them, trying to give more details, you know, add some credibility to his story — he goes so far as to say that the day before the homicide, when they're casing his house, that they're driving down Trescott, and a woman is walking down the street with her two boys. He knows this from the discovery.
MS. KAWASS: Walking down the street with her two boys, and Sigfredo looks at him and goes, hey, that's Wendi.
MS. KAWASS: That's Wendi. The girl that wants our kids — she's making sure that we are up here and doing the job. You'd think that would be enough evidence, right, to put handcuffs on Wendi Adelson and bring her to this courtroom so she can answer questions.
MS. KAWASS: But no — they know that he's not telling the truth, because they have records that show that both boys were at the daycare center the day before, and that Wendi's house is five miles away from Dan Markel's.
MS. KAWASS: They are going to ask you to say Luis Rivera is lying, or mistaken, or whatever excuse he comes up with when he's talking, he's telling the truth.
MS. KAWASS: That's what they're going to — ignore him, but believe him for everything that fits with our case. It's offensive, members of the jury, but that is why you are here.
MS. KAWASS: The prosecution has dug up every single piece of evidence that they could.
MS. KAWASS: They have dug and ripped apart Katherine Magbanua's life. They have gone into everything — her phone records, her taxes, her medical records.
MS. KAWASS: No direct evidence that she was involved. Zero.
MS. KAWASS: And that's because she wasn't involved.
MS. KAWASS: How far are they going to go, members of the jury, before they stop?
MS. KAWASS: But you are here. This is why we don't leave these decisions in the hands of the government — because they are so blinded right now that they can't see the truth. This is why the system is set up that we get you, the members of the jury, to sit here with unbiased eyes, that you can listen to the evidence objectively. Katherine Magbanua is grateful to have you here today, members of the jury, because she has been waiting three years for this day, for people to take a look and see what the truth is in this case. She had absolutely nothing to do with this. She did not know. She is innocent. Find her not guilty.