2.Craig Isom — Direct/Cross/Redirect/Recross; Rivera-Attorney Deposition Logistics
2,428 linesMS. CAPPLEMAN: The State calls Craig Isom.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Come up here, please, sir. If you would face the clerk and be sworn, please, sir.
whereupon, CRAIG ISOM was called as a witness, having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows:
JUDGE HANKINSON: Have a seat and slide up to the microphone, please, sir.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Please introduce yourself and spell your name.
CRAIG ISOM: Craig Isom, C-R-A-I-G, last name, I-S-O-M.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And how are you employed?
CRAIG ISOM: I'm currently retired.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Yay for you.
when -- when were you last employed?
CRAIG ISOM: September -- end of September, 2017.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And where were you employed last?
CRAIG ISOM: Tallahassee Police Department.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: How long did you work for TPD?
CRAIG ISOM: Twenty-eight-and-a-half years.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And what were your duties there at the time when you retired?
CRAIG ISOM: I was a violent crimes investigator in the Criminal Investigations Division.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And was that your position back in July of 2014?
CRAIG ISOM: It was.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: were you assigned to investigate the murder of Dan Markel?
CRAIG ISOM: I was.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: were you the lead investigator for the Tallahassee Police Department on that case?
CRAIG ISOM: I was.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And were there other agencies that assisted you in this investigation?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes, there was.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: what agencies were those?
CRAIG ISOM: Predominantly, the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And what was the purpose of having the FBI assist you?
CRAIG ISOM: Initially, it was because we found out rather soon that this case was probably going to take on investigations in another part of the state and possibly the country.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And you don't have jurisdiction outside the state, but the FBI does?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. Did you go to the crime scene?
CRAIG ISOM: I did.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: when did you go to the crime scene?
CRAIG ISOM: It was probably around, I would say, 11:30, 11:45 on July 18th.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: when you arrived, had Mr. Markel already been transported to the hospital?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes, he had.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And did you look around the scene to observe whether there was any evidence to indicate there had been a robbery attempt or any forced entry to the residence?
CRAIG ISOM: I did and found none.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And did you -- I assume it was relatively easy to identify Mr. Markel?
CRAIG ISOM: well, he wasn't at the scene, but it was his car, his residence.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And his wallet was in the vehicle with his identification?
CRAIG ISOM: The wallet was --
MR. ZANGENEH: Objection, Judge, as to leading.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled. A The wallet was there, his cell phone, his eyeglasses.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. Did you make an effort to talk to people that were close to Mr. Markel?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And who was the first person you interviewed?
CRAIG ISOM: The first person I interviewed was his ex-wife, wendi Adelson.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And where did you locate Ms. Adelson?
CRAIG ISOM: She was at the Mozaik restaurant in the Killearn common area.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: About what time did you make contact with her at the restaurant?
CRAIG ISOM: I believe it was about 1:30, 2:00 on the same day.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: 1:30 or 2:00 p.m. on the day of the homicide?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: So a couple hours after?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes. After I was done at the crime scene, I went to her location.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Okay. And as a result of your interview with Ms. Adelson, did you take an interest in her parents and her brother?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And did you, as a result of your interview, review any court filings?
CRAIG ISOM: I did.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: what court filings did you review?
CRAIG ISOM: I reviewed -- I reviewed the filings from the Adelson-Markel divorce.
MR. ZANGENEH: Your Honor, I'm going to object. The detective is using -- it appears that he's got his entire file in front of him. I can't see if he's reviewing it.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled. Before cross-examination, you'll be able to see whatever he has.
MR. ZANGENEH: Thank you.
JUDGE HANKINSON: You can proceed, Ms. Cappleman.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: what did you review in reference to court filings?
CRAIG ISOM: I reviewed the filings from the Clerk of Court for Leon County concerning their divorce.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: whose divorce?
CRAIG ISOM: wendi Markel -- wendi Adelson and Dan Markel.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I'm going to approach and show you what I've marked as State's Exhibit 75. Have you had an opportunity to review this exhibit?
CRAIG ISOM: Over time, yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And is this a fair and accurate copy of the divorce file of wendi Adelson and Dan Markel?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: How many pages is it?
CRAIG ISOM: It's numerous, I'd have to count. It's a full binder.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: well, they're numbered.
CRAIG ISOM: Okay. well, we'll go to 575.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Okay. And was there -- were there any --
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Well, Judge, at this time, I'd ask to move into evidence State's 75, a certified copy of the divorce file of Dan and wendi Markel.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Is there objection?
MR. DECOSTE: Objection. Motion to limine sidebar.
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right. we'll go sidebar.
AT THE BENCH
JUDGE HANKINSON: Mr. Decoste.
MR. DECOSTE: Yes, our objection is -- and understanding that we litigated this in motions in limine -- there is hearsay within hearsay within hearsay.
For instance, there's some of the times when Mr. Markel, who was known to be writing the pleadings in his own case, would quote what the children said. So there is hearsay within hearsay within hearsay in these documents. That's all.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Do you wish to be heard?
MR. ZANGENEH: Yes, Judge. I don't think it's relevant. Ms. Adelson is not on trial. She hasn't been charged.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Shh.
MR. ZANGENEH: Ms. Adelson is not on trial. She wasn't been charged. while I understand that there is a substantial portion of the government's theory that's involved in this, I don't see what the relevance is, the fact that they got -- they had a contentious divorce.
By providing this documentation, it provides substantial additional insight, which is completely irrelevant to this specific case with these specific defendants.
JUDGE HANKINSON: I'll overrule the objection as to relevance.
Is there some particular document or documents in this file you want to be heard on, Mr. DeCoste?
(Attorneys confer.)
MR. DECOSTE: It's as to all the documents, Your Honor. There is -- there are certain documents in there that they can use to establish that there was a contentious divorce, but there is so much other hearsay that's being moved in through this document, through this exhibit.
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right. I'll overrule the objection. If there is a particular document or documents you want to be individually heard, we'll hear that at some point; but not on the jury's time, on your time, so at lunch before it's shown to the jury.
There is no reason the document in its entirety needs to be shown to the jury at this point, Ms. Cappleman; is there?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: No.
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right. That will be my ruling.
MR. ZANGENEH: Thank you.
IN OPEN COURT
JUDGE HANKINSON: Subject to my ruling at sidebar, I'm admitting State's Exhibit 75.
(State's Exhibit No. 75 received in evidence.)
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And as a result of your review of this State's exhibit, did you learn about any bad blood between Ms. Markel and her husband, and/or between her family and her husband?
CRAIG ISOM: I did.
MR. DECOSTE: Objection, hearsay. Move to strike.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: You may answer the question.
CRAIG ISOM: I did.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And what was that?
CRAIG ISOM: There was obviously a lot of contention in these filings. They were quite lengthy. The actual divorce occurred in July. It was settled by --
MS. CAPPLEMAN: July of what year?
CRAIG ISOM: 2013.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Okay.
CRAIG ISOM: It was settled in a -- it's what's called an MSA, a Marital Settlement Agreement. And so it was settled at that point. But even after that, the filings continued against one another. Part of it was that there was -- Dan Markel filed a motion about sanctions, which means that he felt like there was money being withheld or --
MR. ZANGENEH: Objection, Judge, calls for speculation.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: You may continue.
CRAIG ISOM: That the -- that his ex-wife had falsified or not come clean about all the money involved in the divorce. And then ultimately in March of 2013 -- I'm sorry, 2014, after the MSA, the divorce was final, Markel filed another complaint or a motion.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Talking about Dan Markel?
CRAIG ISOM: Dan Markel.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: In March of 2014?
CRAIG ISOM: March 26th of 2014.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. Go ahead.
CRAIG ISOM: And he --
MR. ZANGENEH: Judge, I'm going to object. The detective is reading off notes.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
MR. DECOSTE: Your Honor, for Magbanua, just a standing objection.
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right.
CRAIG ISOM: So he was -- this motion in March of 2014 was concerning inappropriate interaction by his mother-in-law. That would be wendi Adelson's mother, Donna Adelson. Because his children had told him that -- had made statements to him repeating what Donna Adelson had stated about Dan Markel.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: which are things to the effect of, grandma hates you, that kind of thing?
CRAIG ISOM: Grandma hates you, grandma thinks you're stupid.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. So what was it that Mr. Markel was seeking the court to do in this motion?
CRAIG ISOM: He wanted to -- he wanted no more disparaging remarks. There was an agreement during the MSA about love and companionship and niceness, for lack of a better term, between himself and his ex-wife, especially in front of the children. And so he requested the court sanction or put into place that Donna Adelson would not be able to have unsupervised visits or contact with the children because of these remarks that he stated his children made.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And where did Donna Adelson reside?
CRAIG ISOM: She resided in Broward County, Coral Springs.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And this motion that you're referring to, was it ever ruled on by a court?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: why not?
CRAIG ISOM: Because of his death.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And prior to this motion to preclude Donna Adelson from having unsupervised contact with the kids, had wendi Adelson sought to relocate?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And that's documented in the divorce filings as ~well?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: where was she seeking to relocate to?
CRAIG ISOM: To Coral Springs, Broward County, where her parents reside.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And was that ruled on by the court?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes, that was actually before the settlement agreement was done that the -- that the judge for that case determined she could not leave Leon County with the children and relocate.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And did you -- when you interviewed wendi Markel, did -- or as part of your investigation, did you conduct an analysis or capture somehow the information on wendi Adelson's laptop computer?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And did you review some e-mails between wendi Adelson and Donna Adelson?
CRAIG ISOM: I did.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And did that further interest you regarding potential motives for this case?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: How so?
CRAIG ISOM: The e-mails from her mother were strong.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: what do you mean?
CRAIG ISOM: Strong suggestions, if not demands, of what she should do to facilitate her and the children moving back to South Florida.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: what wendi should do?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And what was Donna Adelson suggesting that wendi Adelson should do?
CRAIG ISOM: She suggested threatening Dan Markel with the children going to a Christian church, specifically at one time a Catholic church, even though he was devout Jewish. She also suggested at one point a bribe, for the most part, of $1 million split up between wendi, Donna and her husband Harvey, and their son, which is wendi's older brother, Charlie.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. Let me back you up just a moment. So the first thing you mentioned was that Donna -- Donna Adelson suggested to Wendi Adelson that in order to facilitate the relocation, she could convert her children to Catholicism, or threaten to do that?
CRAIG ISOM: Threaten to do so.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And, if you know, why would that have any impact on whether or not Mr. Markel would consent to letting his children go to South Florida?
JUDGE HANKINSON: I'1Il sustain the objection to that question.
MR. DECOSTE: Objection, speculation, for the record.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Sustained.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. So she suggests that wendi Adelson could convert her children to Catholicism, or threaten to do so?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And she suggests a bribe to Dan Markel?
MR. DECOSTE: Objection, leading.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
CRAIG ISOM: Yes --
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And when you say --
CRAIG ISOM: -- to offer him money.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: -- "split up between," what do you mean by that?
CRAIG ISOM: Split up three ways is how the e-mail reads, is that wendi would supply $333,000 and change, Donna and Harvey Adelson, her parents, would split -- would have responsibility for $333,000 and change, as well as Charlie Adelson.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Did wendi Adelson stand to gain anything financially from the death of Dan Markel?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes, my understanding, it's a very -- it's a lot. But my best understanding of the situation that Daniel Markel had set up was that he had a large life insurance policy for $2 million.
MR. ZANGENEH: Objection, Judge. This is hearsay.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Sustained.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. So --
MR. DECOSTE: Move to strike and curative, Your Honor.
JUDGE HANKINSON: There was no timely objection. I'll overrule that request.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Okay. So -- I'll just ask her about that. I'll move on.
Attempts to interview the Adelsons. Tell us about your attempts to interview Harvey and Donna Adelson.
CRAIG ISOM: Daniel Markel was shot on July 18th, which was a Friday, just before 11:00 a.m. He subsequently passed on in the wee hours, just after midnight, my understanding, on July 19th, which was Saturday morning.
There was a memorial service the very next day on Sunday morning at Shomrei Torah Synagogue on Kerry Forest Parkway. I attended that service. I went to that service. And while I was there, after the service was completed, I was approached by who I -- who introduced me -- I was approached by a woman who introduced me as her name being Donna Adelson.
we exchanged greetings and she --
MR. DECOSTE: Objection, hearsay.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Let's go sidebar, please.
AT THE BENCH
JUDGE HANKINSON: What do you anticipate the answer?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: He asked them for an interview and they said they would come after the service, but did not show up. Were never able to be interviewed.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Okay.
MR. DECOSTE: Your Honor, I believe that's hearsay without an exception.
JUDGE HANKINSON: I'‘11 overrule the objection.
IN OPEN COURT
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Investigator Isom, or Mr. Isom now, did you request -- the woman that introduced herself to you as Donna Adelson, did you request for she and her husband to come to the police station to be interviewed by you?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And did they ever do that?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And after your initial interview with Wendi Adelson, were you ever able to reach her again?
CRAIG ISOM: I attempted on the Monday, following the Sunday memorial service.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And she basically hung up on you; is that correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And was that your last contact with wendi Adelson?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: After you reviewed these -- I guess you interviewed wendi Adelson, you reviewed these documents from the divorce and the e-mails. Did you jump to the conclusion that these were the people that were responsible?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Did you pursue other leads as well as continuing to follow this lead?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And independent of looking into the ex-wife and the inlaws, did you also attempt to gather information about the suspect vehicle in the case?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. Could you tell us a little bit about the initial efforts to try to find the suspect Prius?
CRAIG ISOM: well, the next-door neighbor was the one that reported the shooting to begin with. And he gave us a general description of a light-colored Toyota Prius-type vehicle. It wasn't enough to put out a national bulletin or anything like that, but locally we had told people that this was the type of car that was seen leaving the house, backing out of the driveway, going towards Betton Road on the day of the = shooting.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: were you able to establish a timeline of the =victim's activities prior to being -- to him being killed?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And what was his timeline that morning?
CRAIG ISOM: Friday morning, he had the children with him, the two small boys. He drove them to the day care center on west Tharpe, I believe it's Creative Preschool. He dropped them off at 8:50 a.m. He left from there, traversed back across town and went to the Premier Fitness on Maclay Boulevard.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And at the Premier Fitness, was surveillance video available?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And have you had an opportunity to review the surveillance video?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And is there something you believe of evidentiary value on that video?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. I would ask for permission at this time, Your Honor, to publish the surveillance video, which is marked as State's 124 and previously entered into evidence.
JUDGE HANKINSON: You may.
(off-the-record discussion.)
(Video with no audio played in open court.)
(off-the-record discussion.)
CRAIG ISOM: May I stand, Your Honor?
JUDGE HANKINSON: You may.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. So there is a blue circle around a black vehicle there. Could you tell us what is the importance of ~=that?
JUDGE HANKINSON: Don't stand in front of the jury.
CRAIG ISOM: I'm sorry. I'm just trying to get over to this point right here, if that's okay.
JUDGE HANKINSON: And kind of point that microphone at you, if you would.
CRAIG ISOM: Sorry, sir.
JUDGE HANKINSON: No problem.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: If you will stand here, you can face the jury and you can observe on this.
CRAIG ISOM: Oh, okay.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Is he blocking you?
JUROR: We've got screens.
JUDGE HANKINSON: what's that?
JUROR: We have screens.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Oh, okay. They've got screens in front of them. I didn't realize that.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. So if you're going to face that way, that's fine. Just make sure they can hear you.
All right. So the black car was circled there.
CRAIG ISOM: Can you put that back on there, please? I didn't see it.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Maybe.
CRAIG ISOM: Right there. Okay. This is a black --
MR. DECOSTE: Objection, improper opinion. The video speaks for itself.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
CRAIG ISOM: This is a black Honda Accord that was owned and registered to Daniel Markel. He's entering -- he's entering this road over here, which is village Square Boulevard. So he's entering the north part of Premier, Premier Health & Fitness.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And this is a surveillance camera that was mounted on top of the business?
CRAIG ISOM: Right. This camera is maintained and operated by Premier Health & Fitness.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And on what date and time did Mr. Markel enter the parking lot of Premier gym?
CRAIG ISOM: well, he's there, as the time stamp indicates, the 18th of July, which is a Friday, 2014. And the time stamp says, and it was verified, the time stamp is the actual time, to be 9:11 and a half, 37, as you can see on the time stamp in the frame.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Can you circle where the time stamp is just in case? It's a little hard to see.
CRAIG ISOM: Okay. I'm sorry. It's up here.
You see the car turning. This is the same car from another camera angle. This camera is pointing northwest. The black Honda had made the turn, made the left turn up at the end over here where the trees are. Now it's proceeding down the front drive. Makes a right-hand turn. The trees are somewhat blocking it, but you can see part of the car going in. He parks in the very front space, right there.
This is a green Prius, Toyota Prius car that came in from another entrance off of Maclay Boulevard, the main entrance to Premier.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: At what time did the Prius enter the parking lot?
CRAIG ISOM: As it indicates here, 9:12:34. So we're within seconds after Markel has parked his car, well within a minute.
Right there is the same car. The last slide or video was 9:12:34. This camera is picking it up 9:12:37, same car, right there.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And remind us where the victim's vehicle is.
CRAIG ISOM: And the victim's vehicle is still here. It hasn't moved.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And he hasn't gotten out of it yet?
CRAIG ISOM: He has not got out of his car yet. So Mr. Markel is parked there, just before 9:12 even, 9:57 [sic]. And now the Prius has entered from the main driveway entrance up here off Maclay Boulevard. And now the car is proceeding down the lane.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I'm going to back that up just a hair. I think it froze on me.
CRAIG ISOM: There is Mr. Markel getting out of his car. You'll see him again, if it plays through, passing by the American flag.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: In the red shirt?
CRAIG ISOM: Red shirt, black shorts. This is Dan Markel walking in the front doors. So he's parked his car. Now we're at 9:12 -- 9:13, excuse me.
This is another angle of him walking in. The doors are behind him. He's already gone through the doors.
Mr. Markel's car is still there. It's at 9:16. He's already entered the gym. This car here is the same Prius going the opposite direction back down in front of the gym. So that was 9:16:38.
MR. DECOSTE: Objection, Your Honor, narrative. I don't believe there's been a question for a while.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
CRAIG ISOM: 9:16:38. Now 9:16:48, he continued past the front of the gym and now he's going to the southern parking area.
This is the Prius again. Now he's traversing back, opposite direction, comes to a stop.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And what time is it now?
CRAIG ISOM: 10:38:40.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: So about an hour after Mr. Markel entered the gym?
CRAIG ISOM: A little over an hour. Markel is now exiting, going back out the front doors.
This is the same man, Mr. Markel, now exiting the front doors. That's Mr. Markel traversing -- walking back to his car.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Does he sit in his car for a while?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes, he does.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: How long?
CRAIG ISOM: Approximately two or three minutes. When he -- he's backing out here.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: what time is it that he's backing out?
CRAIG ISOM: 10:38 and 15 seconds. That's 10:38 a.m. on the 18th of July. Mr. Markel has backed out of his space, gone around this corner, and now he's exiting the same way he entered earlier this morning. This circle represents an activity in the back corner. And there is the Prius now following him out of the parking lot the same way that he went out.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: The Prius exits at 10:39?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: You may resume your seat. Thank you.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: May we have the lights back, Your Honor?
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: So what, if anything, were you able to learn about the suspect vehicle from -- actually, let me strike that, please.
I'm going to ask you some questions about the video itself. Did you have an opportunity to review the original footage that was used to compile these clips?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And were each of the camera angles that we viewed and the clips ongoing and running throughout the entire time that Mr. Markel was in the gym?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: So to view in realtime on the original footage all the different clips, like if we watched the whole little over an hour that he was in the gym from how many different camera angles? Four or five different camera angles?
CRAIG ISOM: well, there's the two on the inside that you saw. And then there's one, two, three -- at least four, possibly five, on the outside of the gym.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: So it would take us about seven hours to watch --
CRAIG ISOM: Absolutely.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: -- the entire thing?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: But that is available --
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: -- correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And has anything been added or deleted other than the circles that we made around the people and objects we were trying to draw attention to?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. Now, tell me what, if anything, you were able to discern about that vehicle from this surveillance ~video.
CRAIG ISOM: we surmised from looking at the video that we had at this time from the Premier gym that this car was obviously following Dan Markel in his Honda. we determined that it was probably a 2006 to 2009 Toyota Prius.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: what about the color?
CRAIG ISOM: The color was determined -- we researched and actually talked to Toyota Corporation representatives and the color was determined to be Silver Pine Mica.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. So both vehicles are seen at the end of that video leaving east on Village Square Boulevard towards Thomasville Road; is that correct?
CRAIG ISOM: That's correct.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And that was at 10:38 or 10:39 a.m.?
CRAIG ISOM: That's correct.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And our 911 call came in at what time?
CRAIG ISOM: 11:02 a.m.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Based on that time frame, did you have a theory as to what route Mr. Markel may have taken when he left the gym?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes, because the most direct route would be out to Thomasville Road at village Square, to Thomasville, south on Thomasville to get to his home on Trescott Drive.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And based on that theory, did you attempt to locate any additional surveillance that the victim and suspect may have been present on along that route?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes, we did.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: what businesses did you either attempt to collect or collect video from along that route?
CRAIG ISOM: From that route, there was the Sunoco Gas Station on Thomasville near -- I can't think of the name, it's near the flyover -- as well as the Shell Station there at Timberlane Road and Thomasville.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And you also tried the Circle K?
CRAIG ISOM: I think that's -- the Shell Circle K is the same location.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Envision Credit Union?
CRAIG ISOM: I believe there was an attempt at Envision Credit Union. From my understanding, other investigators checked all along that route.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And based along the route, someone had the idea to try to look at these cameras that are mounted on city buses; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes, yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And have you had an opportunity to review the State's exhibit in reference to the city bus footage that was captured?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Judge, at this time, I would ask to introduce into evidence the city bus footage, which was --
JUDGE HANKINSON: I think they're in evidence.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I'm sorry. I would ask to publish. It's State's 125.
JUDGE HANKINSON: And is this the one that Mr. Dietz has indicated was clarified?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Yes, sir.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Okay. You may publish.
After that, when you get a stopping point, Ms. Cappleman, we're probably due for a break.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Yes, Sir.
May we have the lights again, sir? And permission for the witness to step down with the pointer again?
JUDGE HANKINSON: You may.
Do y'all prefer the lights behind to be turned off? Or are you looking at the Tvs in front of you? I don't know. Let me just ask this: Anybody want the lights behind the screen turned off? Does that help anybody? Nobody? Okay.
(video with no audio played in open court.)
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: what are we looking at?
CRAIG ISOM: This is the city bus that is approaching Thomasville Road on Killearn Commerce Drive. Just for reference, there's a Regions Bank on the left-hand side of the road. That's the ~view we have here. And there is a Circle K Gas Station on the right-hand side.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And what date and time is this image taken from?
CRAIG ISOM: That was at the same date, July 18th, 2014, Friday. And the time stamp as shown on there indicates 10:44 and 31 seconds.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: what does the blue circle indicate?
CRAIG ISOM: The blue circle is the image of Markel's car southbound on Thomasville Road. So he has left village Square Boulevard and now he's south.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I don't know why it's doing that, I'm sorry. Let me back it up. Let me try that again.
what's the significance of the orange circle?
JUDGE HANKINSON: Keep your voice up, please, Ms. Cappleman.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: The significance of the orange circle?
CRAIG ISOM: This image is the Prius that was following Mr. Markel out of the Premier parking lot. And now it is southbound, roughly ten seconds behind Markel, according to the time stamp.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: what does this clip depict?
CRAIG ISOM: This is the same exact bus, the same bus that was stopped for that fare to put his bike on the front and that captured the two vehicles going by. This is the exact bus that has now caught up to that Prius at the stop light, Thomasville Road southbound at Metropolitan Boulevard.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: were you able to get the tag number from this image?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
(Pause. )
MS. CAPPLEMAN: what about this image?
CRAIG ISOM: This image over here with the orange circle is the same car the bus was just behind. The car has obviously changed lanes and now is in the left-hand turn lane on Thomasville Road to turn east onto Betton Road.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: what time is it?
CRAIG ISOM: This is at 10:51:52.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: will we be able to see the Prius making a left onto Betton?
CRAIG ISOM: There should be an angle from the side -- well, this could capture it, too. There it is. There's multiple cameras on the buses, but this image shows the Prius making the left-hand turn. And there is our friend with the bicycle taking it off.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. Now, we've gone to a different bus; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Right, this is Bus 707.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And at what time was this image taken?
CRAIG ISOM: This is at 10:55:18. This bus is northbound on Thomasville Road and it is stopped at the intersection of Thomasville and Armistead. Here is the Prius, now northbound.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. we're going to take another look at that same image. And this one is done in slow motion. I think we're going to have some circles here and I'm going to ask you to tell me what they indicate.
All right. There. what were you able to learn about the Prius from this clip that the bus captured?
CRAIG ISOM: All right. This circle right here is of the passenger side, outside -- passenger side rearview mirror on the outside of the car. It's black. The other mirror on this side is the same color as the car. And according to Toyota, they come, when they're new --
MR. ZANGENEH: Objection.
MR. DECOSTE: Objection, Judge, hearsay.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Sustained.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: So one of the mirrors was black?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. What next?
CRAIG ISOM: The item that's circled -- I think this thing is about done -- anyway, up here in the top center of the windshield appears to be an adhesive-type toll sticky -- toll-paying device, commonly known in Florida as a SunPass.
The other -- the last circle down at the bottom right is in the bumper area, the bumper cover. And that is a missing tow hook cover. It's a pop-out piece of plastic. It's gone, it's not -- it hasn't been replaced. But that hole is -- obviously, something is missing.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. what were you able to learn about the occupants from this particular clip?
CRAIG ISOM: The passenger in this car as it goes past is very animated, moving around, very excitable. He also appears to be wearing a white shirt.
MR. ZANGENEH: Objection, Judge, calls for speculation.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. Now is this clip the same bus that we just saw previously?
CRAIG ISOM: Same bus.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And we're still heading north on Thomasville?
CRAIG ISOM: North on Thomasville. The bus is going through the Armistead intersection.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Is that the last image the bus captures of the Prius?
CRAIG ISOM: It is.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And what direction was the Prius headed when it was last seen?
CRAIG ISOM: Northbound on Thomasville.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And would that be consistent with going towards the interstate?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes, Interstate 10.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: You can resume your seat.
Judge, did you want to take a recess?
JUDGE HANKINSON: Is this a good stopping point?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Yes. If you want to take a recess, now would be an okay time.
JUDGE HANKINSON: But you're not done with him?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I'm not done with this witness.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Okay. we'll take 15 minutes. we'll stay in session for just a moment. The jury may step out with the bailiff.
(Jury excused from the courtroom at 10:20 a.m.)
JUDGE HANKINSON: Mr. Isom, let the defense attorneys see whatever notes you have or materials you have with you.
we'll be in recess for 15 minutes.
(Recess taken from 10:20 a.m. to 10:35 a.m.)
JUDGE HANKINSON: Let's have the jury, please.
while we're waiting on them, I did note that briefly there was a TPD officer in uniform in the courtroom this morning. It was briefly. I had the bailiff go tell him to step out, but apparently he was a witness.
who was that, Ms. Cappleman?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Bill Brannon.
JUDGE HANKINSON: He was briefly in the courtroom. Is he going to be testifying today?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Yes, sir.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Okay. At some point in time, we need to take that up.
(Pause. )
(jury returned to the courtroom at 10:42 a.m.)
JUDGE HANKINSON: Everyone be seated, please.
You may resume, Ms. Cappleman.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Yes, Sir.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Mr. Isom, we just watched State's Exhibit 125, the video that was prepared for the jury to see the relevant images on the bus video from that day. Did you have access to the raw footage before the clips were made with the circles added?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes, I did.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And was anything other than the circles added or taken out from the raw footage?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I would -- have introduced into evidence State's Exhibit 173. Included in the raw footage -- I mean, you can watch the bus do its whole route on the raw footage; correct --
CRAIG ISOM: Right.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: -- if you want to?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I don't want to do that, but I want to publish a portion, if I may, to articulate -- you know, let the jury see if there's a difference.
(video with no audio played in open court.)
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: So is this the second bus that we observed earlier --
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: -- that's going to capture the Prius after the murder?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: You mentioned that you noticed a SunPass transponder on the front windshield of the suspect vehicle. Were any efforts made to collect additional information in reference to that SunPass transponder?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: who administers SunPass?
CRAIG ISOM: Florida Department of Transportation.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And what did you request regarding -- what, if anything, did you request regarding the SunPass transponder on that Prius?
CRAIG ISOM: well, I requested what ended up being a lot of information, but eventually got whittled down. But initially I was attempting to locate that car by a SunPass registration. And that's when I found out there is literally thousands of Toyota Priuses with SunPass transponders.
(Laughter. )
MS. CAPPLEMAN: So you were not able to pull the needle out of that particular haystack?
CRAIG ISOM: No, no, that was -- it was a huge amount.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And was any cell phone analysis attempted in this case?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And was it you or someone else who was responsible for analyzing the cell phone data that was collected?
CRAIG ISOM: That would be part of the technical operations unit, which would be Sergeant Chris Corbitt.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And as part -- I want to talk a little bit about the data that was collected that was later analyzed by Sergeant Corbitt. Did you make any efforts to try to locate any phones of interest that were in the area of Premier gym during the time that we see the suspect vehicle present there?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Tell us about that.
CRAIG ISOM: we had already obtained information on cell phone -- from the cell phone providers concerning wendi Adelson, members of her family, obviously Dan Markel. In doing research into that, we came up with no real -- obviously, none of those people, besides Markel and wendi Adelson, were in Tallahassee at the time.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And what people are you referencing?
MR. DECOSTE: Objection, speculation, move to strike.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
CRAIG ISOM: Repeat, please.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: what people are you referencing? You said none of those people other than wendi and Dan.
CRAIG ISOM: The Adelson family; Charlie Adelson, Donna Adelson, Harvey Adelson.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: So we collected phone records for those three people?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And what about the area of Premier gym, what was done there?
CRAIG ISOM: Premier gym and that area was ultimately -- the cell data for that was obtained by our department for all phones in the area at the time that Dan Markel was at Premier gym because our lead was, there's a Prius that's similar to what the reporting person for the actual homicide described and we have a Prius that's following him from Premier.
So we obtained all the phones in the -- the phone numbers in the area of Premier gym to cross-reference with the Adelson's phone records.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And how many phone numbers did that yield?
CRAIG ISOM: For which part? That were --
MS. CAPPLEMAN: That were in the area of Premier gym or being serviced by that cell tower that services that area.
CRAIG ISOM: Oh, I don't even know. I have no idea. A ton, a thousand -- thousands of phones.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And would the cross-referencing of what was resulted from that request about the phones in the area of Premier gym with the cell phone records provided in reference to the Adelsons and wendi and Dan Markel have been done by Sergeant Corbitt?
CRAIG ISOM: That's correct.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And what I'm trying to get back to is how we narrowed down the SunPass.
So as a result of that analysis, did you get a better idea of when you thought that SunPass transponder would have passed through particular tollbooths?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes. The SunPass transponder activates, and there's a record that the Department of Transportation keeps showing this account -- it doesn't show a particular car, it shows that account -- having triggered a toll when it goes through one of the automated toll places.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Okay. But initially all you know is the Prius headed --
CRAIG ISOM: we knew --
MS. CAPPLEMAN: -- towards Thomasville?
CRAIG ISOM: Right. That there was a Prius heading towards Thomasville Road.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Down Thomasville Road toward the interstate; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Right.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Okay.
CRAIG ISOM: And so --
MS. CAPPLEMAN: But really the phone records, which we're going to hear from Sergeant Corbitt later, gave you a smaller window of when you think that that vehicle may have passed through the toll plazas; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Eventually, yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: So I want to talk about that more narrow window. which toll plazas did you suspect the Prius passed through?
CRAIG ISOM: Initially, the most direct --
MR. DECOSTE: Objection, hearsay.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled. A -- the most direct route, if there was any type of -- any type of connection to South Florida, would be the toll plaza at wildwood, Florida, which is 75, south of Ocala Road [sic]. We went through that. Once again, hundreds.
Until we got the actual phone number in question to track, we didn't know exactly which way they went and we didn't know if that was -- transponder -- SunPass transponder ~was even active.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Okay. But ultimately you have reason to look at the toll plazas at either end of Alligator Alley in South Florida; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct. On I-75 at -- near Naples on the west coast, and Fort Lauderdale on the east coast. I-75 traverses through there. And ultimately we determined that was the route that was taken. Instead of going straight up the spine of the state on the Turnpike, the travel was out west on 75 and then up the west coast and intersecting with I-10.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And how many toll plazas would you pass through if you took that route?
CRAIG ISOM: Just one either way.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And did you request -- again, in conjunction with the work of Sergeant Corbitt that we're going to hear more about later -- the toll records for specific toll plazas at specific times?
CRAIG ISOM: I did.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Could you tell us what those times were?
MR. DECOSTE: Objection, hearsay.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled. The question, as I understand, is what specific times and dates did he request. I'll overrule the hearsay objection.
(Pause. )
CRAIG ISOM: Would you like the leaving Miami or returning to Miami?
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Both, please. Let's start with leaving Miami, headed to Tallahassee.
CRAIG ISOM: The transponder registered activity --
MS. CAPPLEMAN: well, right now, I'm just --
MR. DECOSTE: Objection.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Sustain the hearsay objection. The question was: what did you request?
CRAIG ISOM: I requested toll activity for any type of Toyota Prius at the toll plaza in Broward County on I-75, which is also Alligator Alley, westbound. I requested that for July 16th in the afternoon.
And then I also requested the toll activity for a Toyota Prius on July 18th, 2014, once again in the afternoon/evening hours, at the opposite end of Alligator Alley at Naples. So that would be eastbound. You're only tolled one direction or the other.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And were you asking for: I'm looking for a transponder that fits both of these profiles. It was in the window on July 16th heading westbound and it was also in the window on July 18th heading eastbound?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes. So I was asking for: Is there a record of a vehicle that went through during these times, same vehicle both at the east end and the west end on these days, only one vehicle doing that.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And it has to be a Prius?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And how many transponder numbers resulted from that search?
CRAIG ISOM: Just one.
MR. DECOSTE: Objection, hearsay, move to strike.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And what year was the Prius that passed through those two tollbooths at those offered dates and times?
MR. ZANGENEH: Objection.
JUDGE HANKINSON: I'll sustain the hearsay objection at this point.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Okay. Was -- what was the transponder number that you were provided?
JUDGE HANKINSON: I'‘11 sustain the hearsay objection at this point.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Did you do anything with the transponder number that you were provided?
CRAIG ISOM: I requested from Florida Department of Transportation the customer information that subscribed to that transponder.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And upon receiving that information, did you learn that the transponder was assigned to a particular business?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And what business was that?
MR. ZANGENEH: Objection.
MR. DECOSTE: Objection, hearsay.
JUDGE HANKINSON: I'll sustain.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I'm going to show you State's Exhibit 127, a disc containing toll records with certification of authenticity.
Does this State's exhibit contain a fair and accurate copy of all the records you received from your SunPass toll record requests?
CRAIG ISOM: To the best of my knowledge, yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. Judge, at this time, I'd ask to move in evidence State's Exhibit 127.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Objection?
MR. DECOSTE: Hearsay, improper foundation.
JUDGE HANKINSON: There's a certificate of authenticity?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Yes, Your Honor.
JUDGE HANKINSON: That objection is overruled.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Is the item admitted?
JUDGE HANKINSON: They're admitted.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Thank you.
(State's Exhibit No. 127 received in evidence.)
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. So what business was the transponder in question assigned to?
CRAIG ISOM: It's a business in north Miami called Hybrid Rent-A-Car and it's also called Save Gas.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: what is the --
JUDGE HANKINSON: Called what? what was the second name?
CRAIG ISOM: Save Gas.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And what is the address of that business?
CRAIG ISOM: 11032 Biscayne Boulevard, Miami, Florida.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And have you had the opportunity to review any documentation collected from that business regarding the Prius in question?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I'm going to approach with what I've marked as State's Exhibit 82.
Are you familiar with that exhibit?
CRAIG ISOM: I am.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: How are you familiar with it?
CRAIG ISOM: This was -- this is the rental agreement for a Toyota Prius that is completed and shows the name of the renting customer as Luis Rivera.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And is this a fair and accurate copy of the documentation you were provided from this business regarding the rental of this Prius?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And this is the rental agreement which corresponds with the transponder number you received from the toll path -- tollbooth SunPass search?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. Judge, at this time, I would ask to move into evidence State's Exhibit 82.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Is there a certificate of authenticity?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Yes.
JUDGE HANKINSON: JI beg your pardon?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Yes, sir.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Either side wish to object?
MR. DECOSTE: Objection, hearsay, lack of business record foundation.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled. It will be admitted.
(State's Exhibit No. 82 received in evidence.)
MS. CAPPLEMAN: May we have the projector, please?
JUDGE HANKINSON: While he's doing that, maybe I'll explain to the jury a little bit what this conversation is about. There is a statutory procedure in Florida where if a business certifies that these are accurate business records and there's an affidavit to that effect, those records are admissible in court unless some specific objection is timely made before trial. So that's what we're talking about, certificate of authenticity. That's why these items have been admitted.
The idea is we don't want to have to bring in a custodian from every business that have records just to certify their records when there's really no dispute as to these records.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. Publishing State's Exhibit 82. This is the certification and/or declaration of authenticity. And you mentioned the person that rented the vehicle was who?
CRAIG ISOM: Luis Rivera.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And what address did Luis Rivera list?
CRAIG ISOM: The document shows Luis Rivera's address as 1805 Normandy Drive, No. 3, Miami Beach, Florida.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And this is the phone number that is listed for Mr. Rivera?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes, the phone number is below, (305)570-8153.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Okay. And what about this number up here listed as brother?
CRAIG ISOM: That was put at the top of the rental contract. It indicates the word brother. Below that is a phone number (786)372-5986.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And now are you able to tell us what year the Prius was that was associated with both the transponder in question and that relates to this rental agreement?
CRAIG ISOM: Right. The year indicated is a 2008 and that is correct by the State Highway -- Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles registration for that business that was obtained through the transponder and this contract.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And is that year of the vehicle consistent with what law enforcement suspected based on the surveillance images that were obtained in Tallahassee?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And what else do we know from this about the rental of this vehicle? when -- when was it rented?
CRAIG ISOM: It was checked out or rented on the 15th of July, 2014. And it was due back, according to this, on the 17th of July.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And how was it paid for?
CRAIG ISOM: Cash.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Do you get the special strobe effects on the monitors also?
JUROR: No.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: No, it's only for us.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Okay. we get that extra.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And was this document also provided with this exhibit?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes. The rental agency made a copy of the renter's driver's license.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And this is Luis Rivera?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And that same address is present on his driver's license?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I'm going to approach and show you what I've marked as State's Exhibit 128.
Do you recognize State's 128?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: How do you recognize it?
CRAIG ISOM: These are phone records from the two defendants.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. I want to specifically ask you about Luis Rivera. Did you request the phone records in reference to the (305)570-8153 number?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And that's the number that was listed on the rental contract and his driver's license?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And are those contained in State's Exhibit 128?
CRAIG ISOM: They should be.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And the phone number that's listed as brother on the rental agreement, (786)372-5986, did you do any additional work in reference -- or request any records in reference to that number?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes. We obtained records and were able to identify the user of that number.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I'll approach with State's Exhibit 129.
Have you reviewed State's 129?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And is it a fair and accurate copy of the records you received in reference to that 5986 number that was listed on the rental agreement as brother?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And were you able to identify the user of the phone number listed as brother?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: How were you able to do that?
CRAIG ISOM: The phone number that shows that the brother -- that's indicated as brother on the rental contract was determined through research on Facebook and other means that it was --
MR. ZANGENEH: Judge, I'm going to object. This is hearsay.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Sustained.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I'm showing you what I've marked as State's Exhibit 130.
Do you recognize State's 130?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: How do you recognize that exhibit?
CRAIG ISOM: This is -- should be information from a Facebook account.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: what Facebook account?
CRAIG ISOM: Tuto Dade.
MR. DECOSTE: Objection, hearsay.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Does the disc in State's Exhibit 130 contain a business record affidavit of authenticity for the Facebook of Tuto Dade?
CRAIG ISOM: My understanding is it does. It has "certification" ~=written on it.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And what is contained on that disc?
CRAIG ISOM: Images and dialogue on that Facebook page.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: who is Tuto Dade?
JUDGE HANKINSON: Spell that, if you would. Spell that. what is it, T-U-T?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: T-U-T-O, space, D-A-D-E.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Do that again, I'm sorry.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: T-U-T-O, space, D-A-D-E.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: who is Tuto Dade?
MR. ZANGENEH: Objection, Judge, calls for speculation.
JUDGE HANKINSON: well, there's no predicate. I'll sustain the objection.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And you mentioned that you used the Facebook records -- you used Facebook records to verify who the number is that belongs to the 5986 number on that rental contract that's listed as brother?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And when you used the Facebook records to verify that, did you use the Facebook records contained in State's Exhibit 130?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And was that phone number associated with the rental car contract listed as brother, ending in 5986, the phone number associated with the Facebook account on State's Exhibit 130?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And who is pictured as the owner --
MR. ZANGENEH: TI object.
JUDGE HANKINSON: I'‘11 sustain the hearsay objection to that, Ms. Cappleman. If you want to put these things in evidence, let's put them in evidence so we can talk about them because otherwise it's hearsay.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: State's Exhibit 128, you previously testified, was the phone records of the two defendants?
CRAIG ISOM: I'm sorry, that's not correct. This shows -- I was reading it wrong on the thing, but it shows that it's the phone records for Luis Rivera.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: That's 128?
CRAIG ISOM: 128, Luis Rivera phone records.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: State's Exhibit 129?
CRAIG ISOM: Exhibit 129 are phone records for Sigfredo Garcia.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I ask to move into evidence State's 128 and 129.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Do these have a certificate of authenticity?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Yes, Your Honor.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Do you all wish to be heard?
MR. ZANGENEH: No, Judge.
MR. DECOSTE: No, Your Honor.
JUDGE HANKINSON: 128 and 129 are admitted.
(State's Exhibit Nos. 128 and 129 received in evidence.)
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Does the Facebook account in State's Exhibit 130 have a business record certificate of authenticity?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: At this time, I'd ask to move into evidence State's Exhibit 130.
MR. ZANGENEH: Judge, I would object.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Is there a certificate of authenticity on that? I believe the witness said there was.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Yes, Your Honor.
MR. ZANGENEH: Judge, if I may lay my record.
JUDGE HANKINSON: we'll go sidebar.
MR. ZANGENEH: Yes, sir.
AT THE BENCH
MR. ZANGENEH: Yes, Judge. It's very common with social media that fraudulent or alternate accounts are made. I can go today and create a Facebook account with Mr. Padilla's phone number and call it Mauricio Dade and put up his pictures. That doesn't necessarily mean it came from me.
So barring the fact that the government doesn't have something like an IP address where they can link the specific postings to my client, then I would believe that it's speculative. There are -- there's nothing to guarantee -- they have nothing to guarantee that a third party created this Facebook account.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Do you wish to be heard?
MR. DECOSTE: Magbanua's only position is obviously there's a difference between authenticity and the business records certification for hearsay.
Specifically what's on a Facebook account, within each account there is going to be a whole bunch of hearsay because there's communications like text -- similar to text messages and e-mails through the Messenger. That would be hearsay. we can provide case law to the Court that we have.
JUDGE HANKINSON: I'm going to need to see the Facebook information. Do you have it printed out in some form where I can see it?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: We will need a moment to retrieve that, Judge. It's quite voluminous. I'm not sure if it's down here or not.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Well, so what information is it you're trying to get out of this Facebook account?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: That his -- the phone number listed on the rental car contract is the same number that's listed on the Facebook account.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Is that from the subscriber information of Facebook --
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Yes.
JUDGE HANKINSON: -- or what is the --
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Yes.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Show me what it is. This is from the Facebook?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Correct.
JUDGE HANKINSON: This is State's Exhibit 77?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Yes, sir.
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right. So I'll overrule the objection as to 77. But there may be objections to other contents in there.
MR. ZANGENEH: JI would -- I'm sorry. I didn't mean to interrupt you. I apologize, Your Honor. If I may?
JUDGE HANKINSON: You may.
MR. ZANGENEH: I'm going to object specifically to government's Exhibit 76. They picked a photograph which depicts my client wearing a white T-shirt, which is consistent with their position with regards to my client wearing a white T-shirt in the purported Prius.
There are clearly thousands of pictures that they could have picked from and they picked a photograph that shows my client in the same garb, which I believe would be improper and overly prejudicial and not as probative. They have a slew of other photographs that they could pick from and they picked one that is consistent with the clothing that he's wearing on the day in question.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Do you want to be heard further?
MR. DECOSTE: With respect to this exhibit, the photograph, if the State is going to enter in photographs of defendants, I just hope that the same would be allowed of us to enter in photographs of our client.
with respect to the other exhibit, which I believe is 77, if they have a business record certification, we withdraw our objection as to that.
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right. I'm going to admit 76 and 77. I'm not going to admit the whole account unless there's something in there that you can show me that is specifically relevant and not subject to hearsay -- hearsay inside the hearsay. All right?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Yes, Sir.
IN OPEN COURT
JUDGE HANKINSON: So I sustain the objection as to State's Exhibit 130; however, I admit State's Exhibits 76 and 77, subject to objection from Garcia.
(State's Exhibit Nos. 76 and 77 received in evidence. )
JUDGE HANKINSON: ~=BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. State's Exhibit 77, is this part of the return that you got from Facebook in reference to your subpoena for Tuto Dade's Facebook?
CRAIG ISOM: Your Honor, can I put this monitor up here in front of me?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I'll do it.
CRAIG ISOM: That's better.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Did you answer the question?
JUDGE HANKINSON: I don't believe there was an answer to the question.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Is this part of what you got from Facebook, part of the records you got from Facebook?
CRAIG ISOM: It is.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Okay. And is the phone number listed as brother on the rental agreement for the Prius shown on this document?
CRAIG ISOM: It is. Right there at the bottom where it says phone number underneath current city.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: 5986.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Ms. Cappleman, you're going to need to be a little better of record here. we're having a hard time hearing you. ~=BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. So what I want to know is we've got State's Exhibit 82, the rental car contract. It lists this number for brother ending in 5986. Is that number present on this Facebook record?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: It's listed as the phone number for the owner of this Facebook account; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And was there a photo of the owner of the Facebook account?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And were you able to identify the owner of the Facebook account from that photograph?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I'm showing State's Exhibit 76.
who is this a photograph of?
JUDGE HANKINSON: Can we turn it?
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Please answer.
CRAIG ISOM: Repeat because I couldn't hear you.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Oh, I'm sorry. who is this a photograph of?
CRAIG ISOM: Defendant Sigfredo Garcia.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I'm going to approach and show you what I've marked as State's Exhibit --
JUDGE HANKINSON: Do you want to put the monitor down? It's kind of hiding the jury so I'm not able to see.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: This is Exhibit 78.
Do you recognize State's 78?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes, I do.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: How do you recognize that exhibit?
CRAIG ISOM: This was obtained during the investigation. It's a pawnshop receipt from Miami, Florida.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And is that -- does the exhibit contain a business record affidavit of authenticity for the pawnshop ticket?
CRAIG ISOM: It does.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And does the pawnshop ticket contain the name of who it is that's pawning an item?
CRAIG ISOM: It does.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And who is that?
CRAIG ISOM: Sigfredo Garcia.
MR. ZANGENEH: Objection, Judge.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Your legal objection?
MR. ZANGENEH: It's hearsay.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Is there a phone number associated with Sigfredo Garcia present on the pawnticket? Just yes or no.
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. Judge, at this time, I would ask to move into evidence State's Exhibit 78.
JUDGE HANKINSON: TI thought that's what you had already done, but, anyway.
Do you wish to be heard?
MR. ZANGENEH: No, Judge.
MR. DECOSTE: No, Your Honor.
JUDGE HANKINSON: It will be admitted.
(State's Exhibit No. 78 received in evidence.)
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: what is the phone number associated with Mr. Garcia on the pawnshop ticket?
CRAIG ISOM: (786) 372-5986.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And when was this document created? when was the item pawned?
CRAIG ISOM: 15th of October, 2013.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Point that microphone back at you, please, sir.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Did either Luis Rivera, the renter on the Prius contract, or Sigfredo Garcia, the man listed as brother on the contract, did either of them have any connection to Dan Markel?
CRAIG ISOM: No, we could find --
MR. ZANGENEH: Objection, Judge, calls for speculation.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Sustained.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. Did Sigfredo Garcia have a mother of his children?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And who was that?
CRAIG ISOM: The defendant, Katherine Magbanua.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And was Ms. Magbanua also in a relationship with somebody in the Adelson family?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: who was that?
CRAIG ISOM: wendi Adelson's brother, Charlie Adelson.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Did you also request phone records from wendi Adelson?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes. For her phone?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Yes.
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I'm showing you State's Exhibit 131.
Is that a fair and accurate copy of the information you received in response to your request for wendi Adelson's cell phone information?
CRAIG ISOM: It is.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And what phone number is associated with wendi Adelson?
CRAIG ISOM: (954)803-0079.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And how do you know that that number is associated with Ms. Adelson?
CRAIG ISOM: She provided it. And she allowed her phone to be downloaded and verified the phone number that she provided.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: were you also provided with the address that wendi Adelson was residing at around the time of the homicide?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And what address was that?
CRAIG ISOM: 3303 Aqua Ridge Drive.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Is there a city?
CRAIG ISOM: Tallahassee, Florida.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. Judge, at this time, I would ask to move into evidence State's 131, the disc with the phone records related to wendi Adelson.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Is there an objection?
MR. ZANGENEH: No objection from Mr. Garcia.
MR. DECOSTE: Objection, hearsay.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
(State's Exhibit No. 131 received in evidence.)
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I'm going to approach with some additional discs. I'm showing you State's Exhibit 132.
Do you recognize State's 132?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And how do you recognize that exhibit?
CRAIG ISOM: It shows the Donna Adelson phone records.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And what phone number is associated with Donna Adelson?
CRAIG ISOM: (954) 396-0997.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And how do we know that these records -- or that phone number is associated with Donna Adelson?
CRAIG ISOM: It came from a contact list in wendi Adelson's phone.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And is State's Exhibit 132 a fair and accurate copy of the records you got, including a business record certificate of authenticity?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Judge, at this time, I'd ask to move into evidence State's 132.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Is there objection?
MR. ZANGENEH: Not from Mr. Garcia, Your Honor.
MR. DECOSTE: No objection.
JUDGE HANKINSON: It will be admitted.
(State's Exhibit No. 132 received in evidence.)
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: were you able to determine the address that Donna Adelson was residing at around the time of the homicide?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: what was that?
CRAIG ISOM: 9909 Northwest 14th Court, Coral Springs, Florida.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Is she married?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: what is her husband's name?
CRAIG ISOM: Harvey Adelson.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I'm showing you State's Exhibit 134.
Do you recognize this exhibit?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: How do you recognize it?
CRAIG ISOM: These are phone records for Harvey Adelson's cellular phone.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And does that exhibit contain a fair and accurate copy of Harvey Adelson's phone records, along with a certificate of authenticity?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Judge, I'd ask to move into evidence State's 134.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Objection?
MR. ZANGENEH: None from Mr. Garcia, Judge.
MR. DECOSTE: No objection.
JUDGE HANKINSON: It will be admitted.
(State's Exhibit No. 134 received in evidence.)
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And is this phone number registered in Mr. Harvey Adelson's name?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And is Mr. Adelson -- or at the time of the homicide, was Mr. Harvey Adelson residing at the same residence with Donna Adelson that you previously named?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I show you State's Exhibit 133.
Do you recognize 133?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: How do you recognize it?
CRAIG ISOM: These are phone records for wendi Adelson's brother Charlie Adelson's cellular phone.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: what is the number associated with Charlie Adelson?
CRAIG ISOM: (954) 254-9223.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Does this disc contain a fair and accurate copy of all of Mr. Adelson's records in response to your subpoena, as well as a certificate of authenticity?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Judge, at this time, I'd ask to move into evidence State's 133.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Any objection?
MR. ZANGENEH: Not from Mr. Garcia.
MR. DECOSTE: No objection.
JUDGE HANKINSON: It will be admitted.
(State's Exhibit No. 133 received in evidence.)
JUDGE HANKINSON: I don't know whether it was intended, but I don't think we heard a number for Harvey Adelson. Maybe you didn't intend to do so. That was 134.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: would you please list the number for Mr. Harvey Adelson?
CRAIG ISOM: (954)980-9032.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: In reference to Charlie Adelson's number ending in 9223, is that phone number registered in the name of Charlie Adelson?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And is that phone number in wendi's contact information as Charlie with a contact photo?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: were you able to determine what address Charlie Adelson was residing at around the time of the homicide?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And what is that?
CRAIG ISOM: 2518 whale Harbor Lane, Fort Lauderdale, Florida.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I next want to show you State's Exhibit 135.
Do you recognize State's 135?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: How do you recognize it?
CRAIG ISOM: These are phone records for the cell phone of Katherine Magbanua.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And what phone number are those records associated with?
CRAIG ISOM: (786) 564-1312.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And does that disc contain a fair and accurate copy of the records for Ms. Magbanua, provided pursuant to your request and subpoena, as well as a certificate of authenticity?
CRAIG ISOM: It does.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. Judge, at this time, I'd ask to move in evidence State's 135.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Any objection?
MR. ZANGENEH: None from Mr. Garcia.
MR. DECOSTE: No objection.
JUDGE HANKINSON: It will be admitted.
(State's Exhibit No. 135 received in evidence.)
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Last I'd like to offer 137.
Do you recognize 137?
CRAIG ISOM: I do.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And how do you recognize that?
CRAIG ISOM: These are phone records for the cell phone of Danny Markel.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And what number was associated with Dan Markel?
CRAIG ISOM: I have to find that one.
(Pause. )
CRAIG ISOM: I don't have his phone number available. I know it's a 202 area code and it ends in 8200.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Okay. If I said it, would you be able to say yes or no?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes, I'll be able to say yes or no.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: (202) 276-8200.
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Judge, at this time, I would ask to move into evidence State's 137, which does contain a certificate of authenticity.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Objection?
MR. ZANGENEH: I apologize, Your Honor, I couldn't hear whose phone number this is.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Dan Markel.
MR. ZANGENEH: No objection.
MR. DECOSTE: No objection.
JUDGE HANKINSON: It will be admitted.
(State's Exhibit No. 137 received in evidence.)
MS. CAPPLEMAN: May have I moment, please, Your Honor?
JUDGE HANKINSON: You may.
(Attorneys confer.)
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I'm approaching you with State's Exhibit 4.
Do you recognize State's 4?
CRAIG ISOM: I do.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: How do you recognize it?
CRAIG ISOM: These are still images of the Toyota Prius passing -- or in the next lane of the bus that is northbound on Thomasville Road at Armistead.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And is it a fair and accurate still image taken from that bus video that we viewed earlier?
CRAIG ISOM: Both are, yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Judge, at this time, I'd ask to move into evidence State's 4.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Any objection?
MR. ZANGENEH: Can I confer with counsel for a second, Judge?
JUDGE HANKINSON: You may.
(Attorneys confer.)
MR. ZANGENEH: Judge, I believe since they have entered into evidence the video that it would be cumulative. And the best evidence is the video.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Magbanua?
MR. DECOSTE: No objection, Your Honor.
JUDGE HANKINSON: It will be admitted.
(State's Exhibit No. 4 received in evidence.)
MS. CAPPLEMAN: May I publish?
JUDGE HANKINSON: You may.
(Photos shown to the jury.)
MS. CAPPLEMAN: No further questions at this time, Your Honor.
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right. Cross, Garcia.
MR. ZANGENEH: Yes, Judge.
If the government can help me get the -- since they're using their computer, if I can get their assistance in setting up the surveillance videos. Are they already --
(Attorneys confer.)
MR. DECOSTE: Your Honor, while they do that, and given that there is a chance I may cross before lunch, does Your Honor mind if I start setting up?
JUDGE HANKINSON: Setting up what?
MR. DECOSTE: An easel and a demonstrative. I'm afraid of the electronics so I'm going old school with some demonstratives.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Not something that's visible to the jury at this point.
MR. DECOSTE: No, no.
JUDGE HANKINSON: You may.
(Pause. )
JUDGE HANKINSON: Are you ready, Mr. Zangeneh?
MR. ZANGENEH: Yes, Judge.
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right. Everybody have a seat, please.
MR. ZANGENEH: Thank you, Judge. And when I need the next set of videos, with the Court's indulgence, they will help me set them up.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Proceed.
MR. ZANGENEH: Thank you, Judge.
CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. ZANGENEH:
MR. ZANGENEH: Good afternoon.
CRAIG ISOM: Good afternoon.
MR. ZANGENEH: Good afternoon, Detective.
So let me ask you a few quick questions with regards to the initial surveillance video that we saw from Premier Fitness.
MR. ZANGENEH: What we have here -- is there a microphone here, Judge, or am I speaking loud enough?
JUDGE HANKINSON: Just keep your voice up.
MR. ZANGENEH: Yes, sir.
BY MR. ZANGENEH:
MR. ZANGENEH: Is there -- there are multiple cameras on top of the establishment; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: On top of the roof of Premier, yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: Yeah, that's what I mean. So this is kind of how ~+we're getting an aerial view and that's what's depicted on the screen; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And as we indicated -- or as you indicated, at 9:11, 36 seconds -- let me go back to the beginning.
That car right there, it's your position that that's Dan Markel's vehicle; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MR. ZANGENEH: And as the video moves forward -- now let's go back to that. what time specifically did that car pull in? what time does it say?
CRAIG ISOM: It says 9:11:36.
MR. ZANGENEH: And based on your investigation in this case, is that time stamp an accurate reflection of the time that took place that morning?
CRAIG ISOM: Based on the fact that when the video was recovered from Premier, it was validated that the time on the camera system was accurate with the current time at the time.
MR. ZANGENEH: So what we see next, there's Mr. Markel's car; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And the next image that we see when we get there, I believe that's Mr. Markel's car again; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And it seems that it appears that he's driving to find a parking spot to go to the gym; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And he pulls into his parking spot at almost 9:12 on the dot; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: Now you indicated that he entered into the Premier parking lot through what entrance?
CRAIG ISOM: The side entrance of village Square Boulevard.
MR. ZANGENEH: And the video is next going to show at 9:12 and 34 seconds; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And how far is the distance from the initial entrance that you just described that Dan Markel entered into the Premier parking lot versus the other entrance?
CRAIG ISOM: The distance you're asking me?
MR. ZANGENEH: Correct. Like, so what I'm asking you is this: Mr. Markel came in the entrance that you just described; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: Okay. And so this Prius is not coming in through the same entrance; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MR. ZANGENEH: There's another entrance?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MR. ZANGENEH: How far is the initial entrance from this entrance?
CRAIG ISOM: I would say approximately 250 feet.
MR. ZANGENEH: And then that vehicle drives and then enters like the main parking lot area; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: where kyou saw that turning is the overhang for the entrance doors.
MR. ZANGENEH: There you go, that's right.
So now what we have here is it appears 37 seconds later that that vehicle is perpendicular to what Mr. Markel is parked; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: The cars are positioned perpendicular, yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: Correct.
So this is where Mr. Markel's car is; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And that's a Prius?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MR. ZANGENEH: The Prius was the target of your investigation; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MR. ZANGENEH: So you'll agree with me that based on the aerial views, it's impossible to delineate who is actually inside those vehicles; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: There's no way of knowing.
MR. ZANGENEH: Absolutely not.
we will go ahead and push play here. The Prius drives, parks up some distance away, but in the same parking lot; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And there you see Mr. Markel getting out of his vehicle. Is that correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: Now that car coming down, that's not the same car as we saw going up there before; correct? The white car in front?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct, it is not the same car.
MR. ZANGENEH: And then we have some footage here of Mr. Markel entering Premier gym. There he is; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: Now during this time, the Prius is still in the parking lot?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: Do you see if it moves?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: Can you see -- with the other cameras or whatever angles, can you see who is in the vehicle?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. ZANGENEH: At any point, do you lose sight of the Prius?
CRAIG ISOM: In between camera angles with trees, yes. When it's parked up in the far northwest corner where he emerged when Markel was leaving, we didn't have footage of where exactly it was parked up in that corner.
MR. ZANGENEH: And how long would you say he was parked up in that corner?
CRAIG ISOM: I don't recall the time, how much time.
MR. ZANGENEH: I'm not going to hold you to a specific amount of minutes. Was it a minute? Ten minutes? was it the duration of the time that Mr. Markel was working out?
CRAIG ISOM: No, the -- if I may?
MR. ZANGENEH: of course.
CRAIG ISOM: The Prius came back past the front of the business and went to the south end and backed into a space and occupied that area for at least ten minutes.
MR. ZANGENEH: So we would be able to kind of give a timeline because we'll be able to see the Prius coming back down; right?
CRAIG ISOM: I believe so, yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: So we saw Mr. Markel go into the gym -- let's go ahead and get the exact time here. Let me get the exact time.
MR. ZANGENEH: Sorry, Judge. Make sure I've got it right. There we go.
BY MR. ZANGENEH:
MR. ZANGENEH: So at 9:12, the Prius goes and parks in an area of Premier gym that you do not have surveillance footage to determine what happens; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MR. ZANGENEH: Once again, for the record, we're showing the same video of Mr. Markel at 9:12:45 get out of his vehicle and walk towards the entrance of Premier; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MR. ZANGENEH: And about ten seconds ago, we lost visual of the silver-colored Prius?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MR. ZANGENEH: For the record, at 9:13 and 18 seconds, Mr. Markel enters Premier; correct, sir?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And a different view of Mr. Markel, an overhead view of him entering two seconds later; right, Detective?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: Thank you, sir.
So here we go. Detective Isom, is that the Prius? Is this the subject Prius?
CRAIG ISOM: I believe so. That's approaching back, coming back down.
MR. ZANGENEH: And the designated time shows it's 9:16 and 20 seconds, sir?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: So about -- let's see, three-and-a-half minutes have expired where the Prius is in the area, but there's no surveillance capturing it; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And during this time, can you state with specificity to the members of the jury what transpired in that portion of the parking lot?
CRAIG ISOM: In that three minutes, no.
MR. ZANGENEH: There's no surveillance footage. So you wouldn't be able to tell the members of this jury whether or not a drug transaction took place in the parking lot of Premier?
CRAIG ISOM: No, I would not.
MR. ZANGENEH: You wouldn't be able to tell the members of this jury if another car parked alongside the silver Prius and a drug transaction --
JUDGE HANKINSON: Are you talking to the witness or the jury --
MR. ZANGENEH: I apologize.
JUDGE HANKINSON: -- Mr. Zangeneh?
MR. ZANGENEH: I'm sorry, Judge.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Come on, let's --
BY MR. ZANGENEH:
MR. ZANGENEH: You can't tell the members of this jury if during that three-and-a-half-minute period a drug transaction took place in that portion of where the Prius was parked; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: That's correct, I cannot tell that.
MR. ZANGENEH: So you can't tell the members of this jury whether or not another vehicle pulled up next to the Prius where a drug transaction with any kind of drug was conducted; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MR. ZANGENEH: So here we go at 9:16.
And, also, at that point you can't tell if somebody exited the Prius; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MR. ZANGENEH: So if one person was in the Prius to begin with and another person got in, or vice-versa, you wouldn't be able to testify with regards to that?
CRAIG ISOM: That's correct.
MR. ZANGENEH: Could I get the assistance to go -- I'm sorry, Judge. At this point, I need to go to the bus surveillance. I believe it's 125.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: Thank you, yes.
(Pause. )
MR. ZANGENEH: While he's doing this, Judge, can I inquire of some questions not associated with the footage to the detective so we can kind of keep this moving?
JUDGE HANKINSON: Sure.
BY MR. ZANGENEH:
MR. ZANGENEH: Detective, I apologize. You indicated you had a long, storied career as a law enforcement officer here in Tallahassee; is that correct?
CRAIG ISOM: I don't remember those words, but I did -- was here for quite some time as a law enforcement officer.
MR. ZANGENEH: Almost three decades, sir?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And during that time, you indicated that you did violent crime investigations?
CRAIG ISOM: At the end of my career, yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And about how long of a time period did you conduct those types of investigations?
CRAIG ISOM: Eight-and-a-half years.
MR. ZANGENEH: Were you ever involved in any narcotic-related investigations?
CRAIG ISOM: Some, not in an in-depth realm.
MR. ZANGENEH: with regard to your investigation with regards to violent crimes, did you ever investigate violent crimes committed by gang members?
CRAIG ISOM: The gang member part is -- is --
MR. ZANGENEH: Is there a different unit that does that?
CRAIG ISOM: we have -- we have -- yeah, we have a gang -- we had, I don't know if it's still there, we had gang investigating people. we had a gang unit.
MR. ZANGENEH: And would that -- given the fact that you had a gang unit, Detective Isom, that suggests that there is a gang presence in this area?
CRAIG ISOM: To a certain extent, but it's rather small compared to other places, to my understanding.
MR. ZANGENEH: well, since you said that, it seems like you have an understanding of the size of the gang presence here; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: I just know it was loose knit and it was -- there wasn't a whole lot of organization to it.
MR. ZANGENEH: well, would that suggest that there are other neighboring areas that have more strong knit gang organizations like Jacksonville or other neighboring areas, maybe Panama City?
CRAIG ISOM: I wouldn't know about those.
MR. ZANGENEH: Judge, can I have one minute to confer with counsel?
(Attorneys confer.)
BY MR. ZANGENEH:
MR. ZANGENEH: Did you ever work in unison with the gang unit in your career?
CRAIG ISOM: I've asked them for intelligence on people that they had more knowledge of than I did.
MR. ZANGENEH: Let me go ahead and direct your attention back to the screen. So right here we have a Star Metro camera from Bus 0505; is that correct, sir?
CRAIG ISOM: I have it as 505.
MR. ZANGENEH: 505, correct. And so give me the intersection right here again?
CRAIG ISOM: That's Killearn Commerce Drive.
MR. ZANGENEH: And you've got to help me out here because I'm unfamiliar with that specific area. which one is which? If you could use -- do you have the pointer, sir? Go ahead and show me which one is which road?
CRAIG ISOM: The bus is approaching Thomasville Road.
MR. ZANGENEH: Okay. And you'll agree with me that Thomasville Road is one of the more heavily populated -- or heavily traveled roads in this area?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes, it's a major artery.
MR. ZANGENEH: Major road, okay. And so at 10:44 and 30 seconds, we see the following.
(Video with no audio played in open court.)
BY MR. ZANGENEH:
MR. ZANGENEH: Now, that car right there, it's your position that that is Dan Markel's vehicle; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: Are there any identifying factors that you can point out to that vehicle?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. ZANGENEH: Can you read the license plate from this angle?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. ZANGENEH: Can you see Mr. Markel in the vehicle?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. ZANGENEH: It is simply a car that fits the description, same color, potentially same make and model; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MR. ZANGENEH: There we go. I'll go ahead and take this back a little bit. I'm sorry. All right. Sorry.
Now the original time that you see the car that you believe is a Honda Accord, what time was that; do you recall?
CRAIG ISOM: I think it was 10:44. I don't remember the seconds amount.
MR. ZANGENEH: Let's go back. That's 10:44 and 31 seconds here; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct, yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And we'll let it run.
(Pause. )
MR. ZANGENEH: That appears to be ten seconds; correct, sir?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And if you recall -- I'm sorry. If you recall, during the second bus surveillance that we had, Bus 707 I believe it is, there was that one picture which I believe the government showed a still of it. Do you recall that?
CRAIG ISOM: Next to the bus?
MR. ZANGENEH: Yes, sir.
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And you remember on direct examination the prosecution paused it and you were able to -- there was a video that had three circles on it; do you recall that?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And in those three circles, there were three identifying factors that you used to suggest that this was a unique Prius that you could be able to identify; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And one was a transponder; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: One was the passenger side mirror?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And the last was something on the front bumper, I believe on the driver's side; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MR. ZANGENEH: Okay. In this video, can you see any of those three --
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. ZANGENEH: -- markers?
So can you tell me with specificity, based on your identifying factors that you did with the 707 footage, that that Prius is the same Prius as the one in the 707 footage?
CRAIG ISOM: Can I say that these vehicles are the exact same car?
MR. ZANGENEH: Correct.
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. ZANGENEH: So here we are several minutes later; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And the bus is approaching another Prius; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And you'll agree with me that this Prius is stopped at an intersection -- and this is still on Thomasville Road, sir?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes, sir.
MR. ZANGENEH: And it's stopped at a stop sign; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Stop light, yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: I'm sorry, stop light. I apologize. It's stopped at a stop light and it's the first car that's at that intersection; is that correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MR. ZANGENEH: And it's the government's theory that the people in the Prius were following the people -- the person in the Honda Accord; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MR. ZANGENEH: And we'll go ahead and stop there.
Can you make any -- any of the three identifying factors that we discussed before, can you identify any of those with this footage?
CRAIG ISOM: Not from this angle.
MR. ZANGENEH: Correct. It would be impossible to see the transponder because it's the back of the vehicle; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And also you can't see the front of the vehicle where on the bumper it would have that identifying marker; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And, more importantly, it's impossible, even though it's a great angle, you can't see the license plate; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MR. ZANGENEH: At some point, you were able to determine what the license plate was; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And you weren't able to enhance this video to show whether or not this is the same vehicle; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Unfortunately, we tried all types of remedies for that, but, no, it was not able to be enhanced.
MR. ZANGENEH: Now, this Toyota Prius has pretty dark tints on it; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: Do you know what level or degree of tints that they had?
CRAIG ISOM: On this car?
MR. ZANGENEH: Yes.
CRAIG ISOM: No.
(Attorneys confer.)
BY MR. ZANGENEH:
MR. ZANGENEH: we just saw -- we just see coming up here --.
(Pause. )
(Attorneys confer.)
BY MR. ZANGENEH:
MR. ZANGENEH: During this time period, do you see any other Priuses?
CRAIG ISOM: There will be one in the right-hand lane eventually.
MR. ZANGENEH: And what color is it?
CRAIG ISOM: I don't recall the color.
MR. ZANGENEH: Is that it?
CRAIG ISOM: Yeah, that's the one I recall that I've seen numerous times.
MR. ZANGENEH: About how many Priuses when you were doing -- are you able to tell the members of this jury roughly how many Priuses are located or how many registered owners there are of Priuses here in South Florida -- I mean, in North Florida?
CRAIG ISOM: I don't recall other than just there's thousands. I had no idea there was that many.
MR. ZANGENEH: So now we go to -- we have video surveillance of the bus again. And then I'll ask the same question. Based on the footage here, do you see any of the three identifying factors in the Prius in the left-hand lane?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. ZANGENEH: Now this is a different bus; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct, this is 707.
MR. ZANGENEH: And this is the bus and the angle that you were able to make your delineations of the three identifying factors; is that correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
JUDGE HANKINSON: when you get to a stopping point, Mr. Zangeneh, I expect the jury is about ready for lunch.
MR. ZANGENEH: Sure. I can stop right now, Judge. I'm done with my analysis of the surveillance.
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right. why don't we take a lunch break. Why don't we plan to be back and ready to go at 1:15. Just leave your notes where they are. Have a good lunch.
Either side need anything?
MR. DECOSTE: Yes, Your Honor. Can we make a request outside of the presence of the jury?
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right. Y'all can step out with the bailiff.
(Jury excused from the courtroom at 12:03 p.m.)
JUDGE HANKINSON: Yes, Mr. DeCoste?
Everybody be seated, please.
MR. DECOSTE: Yes, Your Honor, thank you.
with respect to the depositions for this afternoon, we're on board for 4:00. I believe that the State Attorney's Office has secured a room and both father and son Collins is going to be coming in.
I've made a request to the State Attorney's Office, I'm hoping that the Court would entertain a possible order, because that would allow us to avoid any prejudice -- or it would allow us to mitigate some prejudice by getting prepared as quickly as possible. It appears that both of the Collinses are going to breach attorney-client privilege. I assume that somebody has contacted Luis Rivera to make sure that he is on board with that.
But the secondary thing, too, is that they bring their file. I don't know if the Court would sign an order for him to bring his file or if the State would do a subpoena duces tecum to have him bring that in. My hope is to get through it today and then we can move quickly into it next week.
JUDGE HANKINSON: I think the Collinses will cooperate with us.
would you ask them to bring their file, please, Ms. Cappleman?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I did, Judge, and they agreed.
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right. And we do need to deal with the attorney-client privilege issue on Mr. Rivera. Have you discussed that?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Yes, sir. The Collinses are meeting with their client at the Leon County Jail prior to the deposition.
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right. That should take care of those issues.
MR. DECOSTE: Thank you.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Seems like somebody fiddled with the volume on the break. The volume is -- I don't know if somebody increased the volume. It's reaching kind of a reverberation. Nobody -- I don't know. It seems like it increased during the break time.
All right, 1:15.
MR. ZANGENEH: Thank you, Judge.
(Luncheon recess taken from 12:05 p.m. to 1:16 p.m.)
JUDGE HANKINSON: Be seated, please, folks.
Let's have the jury, please.
(jury returned to the courtroom at 1:16 p.m.)
JUDGE HANKINSON: Everybody be seated.
You may proceed, Mr. Zangeneh.
MR. ZANGENEH: Thank you, Judge.
May it please the Court, the government, Cocounsel.
BY MR. ZANGENEH:
MR. ZANGENEH: Okay. Detective, do you remember the government showing you what was exhibit -- listed as State's Exhibit 82, which is a copy of the Hybrid Auto Rental Center contract?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: If I may?
JUDGE HANKINSON: You may.
BY MR. ZANGENEH:
MR. ZANGENEH: There we go. Okay. Now you'll agree with me that in the top left-hand portion where -- let me go in a little bit here. Okay.
Can you see that, --
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: -- Detective?
MR. ZANGENEH: Is it on the monitors, everybody?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Yes.
BY MR. ZANGENEH:
MR. ZANGENEH: So you were able to obtain this document from the actual auto rental center; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: Okay. And in the top left-hand portion, the renter is Luis Rivera; is that correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And he provided his home address, his date of birth -- I'm sorry, not his date of birth, but his home address and his phone number on there; is that correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: Now, there's a portion for an additional driver, which suggests that if he was to rent this car and the company wanted to know if another person would be driving it, that's the portion that he would fill out. would you agree with me?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes, there is a place for an additional driver license number, et cetera.
MR. ZANGENEH: And it's blank?
CRAIG ISOM: It is blank.
MR. ZANGENEH: Now, we heard references made back to something written in pen that says the word brother and then a phone number that you have asserted belongs to Sigfredo Garcia; is that correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: Do you know if -- well, let me ask it this way. Do you know what conversations were had between Luis Rivera and the person that was working at Hybrid Auto Center prior to this being drafted on the document?
CRAIG ISOM: I do not.
MR. ZANGENEH: Did you attempt to inquire from the person that worked at Hybrid Auto Rental as to what conversation took place to elicit this -- this information?
CRAIG ISOM: I did not.
MR. ZANGENEH: Did you ask?
CRAIG ISOM: I did not.
MR. ZANGENEH: And here we have on the same exhibit a photograph of Luis Rivera's driver's license; is that correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: Do you see a picture of Sigfredo Garcia's driver's license on this piece of paper?
CRAIG ISOM: I do not.
MR. ZANGENEH: But it does say, friend's number with Luis; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Can you push it up a little bit?
MR. ZANGENEH: Can you see it?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And that's the number that's the same number as on the front page; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: Do you know if this was -- if there was any questions with regards to insurance, as to whether or not Mr. Rivera had insurance that elicited this response?
CRAIG ISOM: I do not.
MR. ZANGENEH: Do you know if the person from the rental -- car rental place asked if there was a second phone number that they could contact Mr. Rivera with and he gave this number?
CRAIG ISOM: I do not.
MR. ZANGENEH: And this document indicated that they were supposed to return the vehicle on what day?
CRAIG ISOM: July 17th.
MR. ZANGENEH: were you part of the team that arrested Sigfredo Garcia?
CRAIG ISOM: I was present. I had no involvement in his actual physical arrest.
MR. ZANGENEH: when they arrested Sigfredo Garcia, he had two phones on him; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: I don't recall two phones.
MR. ZANGENEH: You don't recall two phones?
CRAIG ISOM: I do not.
MR. ZANGENEH: Do you know who would have impounded his phones?
CRAIG ISOM: Most likely Hallandale Beach.
MR. ZANGENEH: And it's your testimony today that you don't recall a second cell phone being part of the --
JUDGE HANKINSON: He said that once, or twice actually, Mr. Zangeneh. Move on.
will you put the microphone a little bit more in front of you?
MR. ZANGENEH: Yes, sir, I'm sorry.
BY MR. ZANGENEH:
MR. ZANGENEH: Luis Rivera was already in federal custody when the arrest warrant was issued for Luis Rivera; is that correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And were you able to ascertain through your law enforcement connections how many cell phones Luis Rivera had when he was arrested?
CRAIG ISOM: I don't recall. I don't remember that coming up.
MR. ZANGENEH: Do you know what a burner phone is?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: Can you describe to the members of the jury what a burner phone is?
CRAIG ISOM: A burner phone is a secondary phone that's typically carried by people for nefarious reasons. And it's to keep their primary phone clean of any type of criminal activity.
MR. ZANGENEH: And in your experience -- or in the vast amount of experience, almost three decades of experience that you had as a law enforcement officer, would you agree with me that people that are professional criminals, like members of gangs, carry multiple phones?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes, most of the time.
MR. ZANGENEH: And you'll agree with me -- now I know you indicated that you don't recall if there was a second phone, but you'll agree with me that the only phone that your office, along with this investigation, pulled information from was the number that we saw on that car rental document? For Sigfredo Garcia?
JUDGE HANKINSON: Rephrase that.
MR. ZANGENEH: Sure, no problem.
BY MR. ZANGENEH:
MR. ZANGENEH: The only phone that you guys pulled records of and determined activity for Sigfredo Garcia was the one phone number that was listed on that car rental agreement?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And if it comes out that there's a second phone --
JUDGE HANKINSON: That's not a proper question, I can tell from the start, Mr. Zangeneh.
MR. ZANGENEH: Let me ask it this way.
MR. DECOSTE: May I adjust the light on that? It's pointing right at us.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Okay, sure, sure.
BY MR. ZANGENEH:
MR. ZANGENEH: Let me ask it this way: If someone is known to have multiple phones in this type of investigation, would you have wanted to track both phones in your investigation?
CRAIG ISOM: If we had knowledge of more than one phone, yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And just to confirm, the only phones that were tracked in this investigation was one phone for Sigfredo Garcia; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And one phone for Luis Rivera; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: During your investigation, did you find or locate a phone call between the number associated with Sigfredo Garcia and the number associated with Harvey Adelson?
JUDGE HANKINSON: What was the second name, I'm sorry?
MR. ZANGENEH: No problem.
BY MR. ZANGENEH:
MR. ZANGENEH: Did you find, during your investigation, any phone calls -- well, let me start it this way.
You have the phone records; correct, Detective?
CRAIG ISOM: we had them, yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And you've done your due diligence and put yourself in a situation where you could educate these members of the jury with regards to the data on those cell phones?
CRAIG ISOM: To an extent, yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: The best you can?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And you'll agree with me that communication between Sigfredo Garcia and any member of the Adelson family would be relevant in this case?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: So let me ask this: From the time you started your investigation, which I would assume backtracked six to eight months before the actual homicide?
CRAIG ISOM: I don't believe it was that far back. I believe it was -- as far as the phone --
MR. ZANGENEH: Yes, sir.
CRAIG ISOM: -- data? The first of May, first of May.
MR. ZANGENEH: May, okay. So we've got May, June and then the homicide occurred in July, correct, mid-July?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: were you able to find any phone calls between Sigfredo Garcia and wendi Adelson?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. ZANGENEH: In addition to phone calls, did you look to see if there was any text messages or any kind of whatsApps or any kind of electronic communication? Did you do that, sir?
CRAIG ISOM: we did that. I'm talking collectively, investigation-wise.
MR. ZANGENEH: And as the lead detective, if there would have been an observation of that kind of communication, would you have been put on notice?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: So in addition to phone calls, did you find any other communication whatsoever between Sigfredo Garcia and wendi Adelson? Phone calls, text messages, anything in any way, shape or form?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. ZANGENEH: what about Sigfredo Garcia and the same -- TI don't want to keep going over all the details, but Sigfredo Garcia and Donna Adelson in any way, shape or form?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. ZANGENEH: Sigfredo Garcia and Charlie Adelson in any way, shape or form?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. ZANGENEH: And we do know that there was a substantial amount of communication between Sigfredo Garcia and Katie Magbanua because they have a child in common, correct, anda relationship?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: what about communication between Sigfredo Garcia and Harvey Adelson?
CRAIG ISOM: There was one communication event.
MR. ZANGENEH: Do you have the specifics with regards to that call?
CRAIG ISOM: It was on July 1st of 2014. So it would be 17 days --
MR. ZANGENEH: If you want -- I'm sorry. Detective, if you want to get the exact -- all the exact information, I'll let you recall that -- I'll let you get that information to refresh your recollection.
(Pause. )
(Attorneys confer.)
CRAIG ISOM: I have it.
BY MR. ZANGENEH:
MR. ZANGENEH: It was on July 1st, 2014, sir?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And can you tell the members of the jury what time that phone call was made?
CRAIG ISOM: July 1st, 2014, at 5:20 p.m., Eastern Time.
MR. ZANGENEH: 5:20, sir?
CRAIG ISOM: 5:20 p.m.
MR. ZANGENEH: P.M. And that went to Harvey Adelson's personal cell phone?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: Are you aware or do you know if the Adelson Dental Institute, if you call their number after 5:00, if it forwards directly to Harvey Adelson's cell phone?
CRAIG ISOM: I'm not aware of that.
MR. ZANGENEH: If that took place in this case, would that record show that?
CRAIG ISOM: To my knowledge of phone records, it just shows the connection to this number, to his cell phone number.
MR. ZANGENEH: what I'm asking you is do you know if Sigfredo Garcia called the Adelson Institute, the dental institute, after 5:00 p.m. when their offices are closed, if the forwarded call -- if the call was forwarded to Harvey Adelson's cell phone, would you be able to determine if the original call went to the dental institute or to Harvey Adelson's cell phone?
CRAIG ISOM: I'm not knowledgable enough about that.
MR. ZANGENEH: How long was the phone call?
CRAIG ISOM: It was a short duration. My understanding is that there was -- the phone call went through and it most likely +went to voice mail.
MR. ZANGENEH: Is there any way for you to determine if a voice mail was left?
CRAIG ISOM: Not to my knowledge.
MR. ZANGENEH: Are there any calls back from Harvey Adelson's cell phone to Sigfredo Garcia after July 1st, 2014?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. ZANGENEH: During your investigation -- I know that you indicated that you attempted to talk to certain members of the Adelson family; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: Was Harvey Adelson one of the people that you attempted to talk to?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: would the contents or the purpose -- would one of your questions have been: Did Sigfredo Garcia leave you a message on your voice mail?
CRAIG ISOM: My attempt to interview Mr. and mrs. Adelson was prior to this -- prior to having this knowledge.
MR. ZANGENEH: And when you gained this knowledge, they had already in essence indicated that they didn't wish to speak to you?
CRAIG ISOM: They didn't indicate anything. They just never contacted me. And the next thing I know, they're on their way back to South Florida the next day.
MR. ZANGENEH: well, that's kind of what I inferred. I guess their actions spoke louder than words; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Apparently.
MR. ZANGENEH: The government showed you a Facebook business record for Tuto Dade; correct? Government's Exhibit 77?
CRAIG ISOM: Okay, yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: Is Facebook -- does Facebook have the ability to track their mobile users, to your knowledge?
CRAIG ISOM: I have no idea.
MR. ZANGENEH: Did you inquire if Facebook has the ability to track their users?
CRAIG ISOM: I did not.
MR. ZANGENEH: At any point, did you read the contract that you have to make with Facebook when you agree to be a participant as a member of Facebook?
CRAIG ISOM: NO.
MR. ZANGENEH: Give me one second, Judge.
JUDGE HANKINSON: You may.
(Defendant confers with counsel.)
MR. ZANGENEH: I have no further questions of this witness. I reserve the right to recall him, as I know the government will be recalling him as well.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Magbanua.
MR. DECOSTE: Thank you, Your Honor.
CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: I want to bring your attention back to July 18th, 2014. The shooting happens, you're brought on to the case; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: You testified that the call went in around 11:00 to 911?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Now as the lead investigator on this case, correct me if I'm wrong, it would be your goal to keep it quiet; meaning, that it's not going to go out to the media for two different reasons. Am I correct so far that you'd want to keep it quiet?
CRAIG ISOM: The actual homicide? Keep the homicide quiet?
MR. DECOSTE: Correct.
CRAIG ISOM: That's impossible these days. I wouldn't even attempt to think that would happen.
MR. DECOSTE: There's a shooting on Trescott Drive. You want to make sure that loved ones don't find out through the media; right?
CRAIG ISOM: we'd want to get to them as soon as possible, yes.
MR. DECOSTE: It's also important for you, for your investigation, that it remain quiet?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: You testified how later that day you went to Mozaik, you found wendi Adelson. You then brought her to the station and interviewed her; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: And you were the one that informed her that Dan Markel had been shot?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: And that he may not make it?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Prior to that, that information wasn't shared with any family members or any media outlets?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MR. DECOSTE: And, in fact, during that interview, she was communicating with other people. People were calling her, but nobody appeared to know anything about what had happened at + the house?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: I'm correct on that; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: And it wasn't until late afternoon, early evening that word finally got out about what happened on Trescott Drive; am I correct in that?
CRAIG ISOM: I don't know when it got out. I was too busy to even know. But eventually it did, yes.
MR. DECOSTE: But it definitely wasn't around 12:00, 1:00, 2:00 that the information was widely known about the shooting on Trescott Drive?
CRAIG ISOM: To my knowledge, no, not that early.
MR. DECOSTE: And again, you were the lead investigator?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: I want to turn your attention now to the big book that we have. I'll block this so I don't blind myself.
Investigator, I'm handing you State's 75. How many pages is that again?
CRAIG ISOM: 575, if I remember correctly.
MR. DECOSTE: Does any one of those pages talk about Katherine Magbanua being involved in a conspiracy to kill Dan Markel?
CRAIG ISOM: In this book?
MR. DECOSTE: Correct.
CRAIG ISOM: Can you repeat the question, please?
MR. DECOSTE: Is there anything in there about Katherine Magbanua being involved in the death of Dan Markel?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. DECOSTE: Correct me if I'm wrong, the paperwork in that book spans from roughly September of 2012 all the way up until July of 2014; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: I just want to make sure that a big piece of evidence doesn't talk about my client at all. I just want to make sure that that's clear. That's clear; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes, because to my understanding, this is all prior to the homicide.
MR. DECOSTE: Didn't you testify on direct examination how there were pleadings that were filed right before the homicide, but how that hearing never happened because of the homicide?
CRAIG ISOM: correct.
MR. DECOSTE: And that's in that book; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: So that would be right before the homicide?
CRAIG ISOM: Up until --
MR. DECOSTE: July of 2000 --
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MR. DECOSTE: Let's talk about your theory in this case.
(Exhibit shown to the State Attorney.)
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: You know what this is?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: This is a diagram that was put together by the Tallahassee Police Department during the investigation; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: And you know that because you were the lead investigator on the investigation?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MR. DECOSTE: And it fairly and accurately -- or it's in the same or substantially the same condition it was when you last saw it?
CRAIG ISOM: It appears.
MR. DECOSTE: I'm going to use this as a demonstrative.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Is there an objection?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: No, sir.
JUDGE HANKINSON: ATI right.
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: Investigator, if you could, explain to the jury what this is.
CRAIG ISOM: These are individual photos of parties associated in this case.
CRAIG ISOM: May I stand?
JUDGE HANKINSON: You may.
MR. ZANGENEH: Judge, may I stand over there?
JUDGE HANKINSON: You may.
CRAIG ISOM: In the upper --
JUDGE HANKINSON: You can use the pointer.
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: I can be your pointer. You can tell me what to point to.
CRAIG ISOM: Upper left-hand corner is a photograph of wendi Adelson. To the right of her, the next picture over is her mother Donna Adelson. One more over, the next one over is a photograph of wendi's brother, Charlie Adelson. All the way over to the far right is a photograph of Harvey Adelson, her father.
The larger photo down on the left is Daniel Markel, the victim in this case. The next photo to the upper right of him is Sigfredo Garcia, defendant in this case. Next photo over to the right is codefendant Katherine Magbanua. And then the bottom photograph is Luis Rivera.
MR. DECOSTE: Try to see if I can make sense of this. You can take a seat.
I'm handing you eight photographs. Take a look at those.
CRAIG ISOM: (witness complies.)
MR. DECOSTE: You know what those are; right?
CRAIG ISOM: They look like the same images that were on the board.
MR. DECOSTE: And, again, the purpose of the questioning here is I'm trying to find your working theory of the case during your investigation; okay?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: who is that?
CRAIG ISOM: Daniel Markel.
MR. DECOSTE: And Daniel Markel was married to who?
CRAIG ISOM: wendi Adelson.
MR. DECOSTE: Now, do you believe that Wendi Adelson was involved?
CRAIG ISOM: Do I believe that she --
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I'm going to object, Judge, as to his opinion.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Let's go sidebar, please.
AT THE BENCH
JUDGE HANKINSON: If you're going to start asking him his opinion of who is guilty of these charges, I think Mr. Zangeneh is going to have some problem when he starts expressing his opinion that his client is guilty and you have may have a problem when he expresses an opinion that your client is guilty. And I just think we're going down a road you don't want to travel, truthfully.
MR. DECOSTE: Definitely don't want to go down that road, but the purpose of the questioning here is to get into his theory because that dictated how he investigated the case. I can ask it without asking his opinion.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Right. We don't need to -- I don't think we need to get into the investigator's opinion on who he thinks is guilty of these crimes. Because if he does, I'm going to let the State explore it fully and explain why he thinks whoever it is he has an opinion on, why he thinks they're guilty. I don't think you want to go down there.
MR. DECOSTE: Withdrawn.
IN OPEN COURT
JUDGE HANKINSON: You may proceed.
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: Dan Markel was married to Wendi Adelson --
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: -- is that correct?
Now wendi's father is who?
CRAIG ISOM: Harvey Adelson.
MR. DECOSTE: Is this Harvey Adelson?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: And who is Harvey married to?
CRAIG ISOM: Donna Adelson.
MR. DECOSTE: Can you see this from there?
CRAIG ISOM: That is her.
MR. DECOSTE: Do they have any other children?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Was one of them Charles Adelson?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Is this Charles Adelson?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Now, your belief is that the way that Charles Adelson gets all the way around to Dan Markel is through Katherine Magbanua; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: And the connection that's made is in between Sigfredo Garcia and Charles Adelson through Katherine Magbanua; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: And then Sigfredo Garcia has his longtime friend, Luis Rivera?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: Judge, I'm going to object to the characterization of longtime friend. There's no facts in evidence at this point to substantiate that relationship.
JUDGE HANKINSON: I'll sustain the objection. The jury will disregard the last comment.
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: where are these four people right now?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Objection, relevance.
JUDGE HANKINSON: I'‘11 sustain the objection as to where they are.
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: Has Charles Adelson ever been arrested?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Objection.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: I'll ask it again. Has Charles Adelson ever been arrested in association to this case?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. DECOSTE: what about Donna Adelson?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. DECOSTE: Harvey Adelson?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. DECOSTE: wendi Adelson?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. DECOSTE: They remain free?
CRAIG ISOM: To my knowledge.
JUDGE HANKINSON: The question?
Go ahead, move on.
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: AS an investigator, or when you were an investigator, would you agree with me that it was your job to objectively investigate a case?
CRAIG ISOM: Absolutely.
MR. DECOSTE: And present all of that objective evidence over to the State Attorney's Office to make their decisions?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: And you did that in this case?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Change gears, talk about police reports.
It is normal for an investigator to put together reports while they're investigating a case; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: In fact, you have a stack of them in front of you?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Now you did that during this case, you drafted reports; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Comprehensive reports?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: In fact, around September of 2014, you did about a 31-page report?
CRAIG ISOM: That would be --
MR. DECOSTE: September 30th?
CRAIG ISOM: -- I have -- of which year? Excuse me?
MR. DECOSTE: 2014.
Let me withdraw the previous question and ask you this one. Did you draft a report in September of 2014?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. DECOSTE: One brief moment, Your Honor.
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: Let's move forward to 2016. Did you draft a report July of 2016?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: A 31-page report?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Laying out your theory of the case?
CRAIG ISOM: I believe that is in that supplemental report that I completed.
MR. DECOSTE: Do you not remember?
CRAIG ISOM: I remember the theory. I just don't know which document it was in.
MR. DECOSTE: So my question is do you not remember whether it's in that report?
Because my next question would be if you have it in front of you, take a look. Let us know if taking a look at it would refresh your recollection and I'll ask you the question again.
(Pause. )
CRAIG ISOM: I don't see it in that particular report, but if you're inquiring about the theory of the murder, I do have a document in front of me that shows that.
MR. DECOSTE: I'm talking about the report that you have from July 12th, 2016. Is Katherine Magbanua mentioned in that 31-page report multiple times?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes, she is mentioned.
MR. DECOSTE: As being the conduit between the Adelson family and Sigfredo and Luis Rivera; right?
CRAIG ISOM: I don't see that particular statement in this report, but it has been mentioned before. I just don't know which document it's in.
MR. DECOSTE: Fair enough.
So in other reports, in PC affidavits --
CRAIG ISOM: Sure.
MR. DECOSTE: -- which, correct me if I'm wrong, are probable cause affidavits?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MR. DECOSTE: That it's explained in there that the Tallahassee Police Department's view was that Katherine Magbanua was a -- and is this is my -- a conduit?
CRAIG ISOM: Sure.
MR. DECOSTE: Now as an investigator, you know that these reports are then sent over to the State Attorney's Office and should anybody be arrested are given over to the defense as discovery; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: These reports and this information that you have were drafted, again, summer, early fall of 2016, when you began drafting them?
CRAIG ISOM: Okay. Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Do you agree, yes?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes, that's when they were drafted.
MR. DECOSTE: Let's turn now to Luis Rivera. Luis Rivera was arrested middle of 2016; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: He was looking at the death penalty?
CRAIG ISOM: I'm not familiar with that part of it.
MR. DECOSTE: You had no idea whether he was looking at the death penalty or not?
CRAIG ISOM: No idea.
MR. DECOSTE: He was arrested for first degree murder?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: You've dealt with murder cases before?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: You know that first degree murder carries with it the potential for the death penalty?
CRAIG ISOM: Potential, yes.
MR. DECOSTE: would it surprise you to learn -- withdrawn.
JUDGE HANKINSON: That's not an appropriate question, Mr. DeCoste.
MR. DECOSTE: Withdrawn.
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: Mr. Rivera eventually cooperates; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: On September 30th of 2016, yourself, somebody from the Federal Bureau of Investigation and others sit down with Luis Rivera and get his testimony; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: The following day, I'm forgetting if there's 31 days in September, but on October 1st, which I think is the following day, Ms. Magbanua is arrested?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: You have no way of knowing whether Luis Rivera was just regurgitating what you had written in your reports as to what you thought the theory of the case was; right?
CRAIG ISOM: I have no way of knowing what he had access to at that point.
MR. DECOSTE: You had written a report; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: You know that those reports are handed over in discovery; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: No way for you to know whether he's telling the truth or not?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. DECOSTE: Speaking of his words, on October 4th, a few days later -- so, again, you meet with him on September 30th. The following day, Ms. Magbanua is arrested. And then on October 4th, you sit down with him again. It's yourself, Special Agent Patrick Sanford of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and others sit down with him, and his attorney, at the Jefferson County Jail --
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: -- is that right?
And you guys do a couple-hour-long recorded statement with him; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: But you had met with him on September 30th.
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: That was the first time that you went through this big interview with him; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: But you didn't record it?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. DECOSTE: But you could have?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: In fact, you had a camera on you that day?
CRAIG ISOM: I believe so, yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Correct me if I'm wrong, right after that, you got into a van with Luis Rivera and he drove you around Tallahassee and you recorded him taking you around Tallahassee?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: You could have recorded him.
CRAIG ISOM: In the --
MR. DECOSTE: On September 30th when you had the first interview with him, you could have recorded him?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MR. DECOSTE: In fact, you don't even need his permission to do it?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MR. DECOSTE: Because you're law enforcement, you have the right to surreptitiously record somebody?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: we have no way here in this courtroom today to view Luis's words, Luis Rivera's words on September 30th and point out the inconsistencies with his other statements; do we?
CRAIG ISOM: Not to my knowledge.
MR. DECOSTE: Because we don't have a recording?
CRAIG ISOM: I documented it in a report but, no, there is no recording of the first interview with him on September 30th.
MR. DECOSTE: You didn't take it down like a court reporter here, did you, word for word?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. DECOSTE: No.
You gave your opinion of what you thought he was saying?
CRAIG ISOM: No, I stated the facts as I knew them, not an opinion, per se.
MR. DECOSTE: And at that point in time when you were talking to him, you already had a theory that you believed applied to this case; right?
CRAIG ISOM: I had a theory. It could have been broken up, but it wasn't after I talked to him.
MR. DECOSTE: I'm sorry, what's that?
CRAIG ISOM: Nothing changed after I talked to him. Nothing changed as far as the theory, as you mentioned earlier.
MR. DECOSTE: You've seen his other statements; right? You were there on October 4th?
CRAIG ISOM: Right.
MR. DECOSTE: when he gave grossly different facts.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Objection. Is this impeachment of a witness that has not testified?
JUDGE HANKINSON: Let's go sidebar, please.
AT THE BENCH
JUDGE HANKINSON: MS. Cappleman?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I guess it's improper impeachment or a relevance objection at this point. with no testimony before the jury from Mr. Rivera, I don't think we can impeach him with inconsistencies.
MR. DECOSTE: We can recall him to impeach Luis Rivera. we have the report from September 30th which shows that there was testimony that was grossly different. The witness kind of put me in a position by saying that it was in line.
JUDGE HANKINSON: well, at this point it's hearsay without an exception. I understand if Mr. Rivera testifies and his testimony is different than what was said before, there is an exception, but at this point it's simply hearsay.
All right?
MR. DECOSTE: Yes.
IN OPEN COURT +BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: October 1st, yourself and Special Agent Patrick Sanford go to South Florida; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: You're there to arrest Ms. Magbanua?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: But you're not alone; right?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. DECOSTE: Yourself and about ten to 15 other law enforcement went to go arrest her; right?
CRAIG ISOM: I don't recall the number. They were already there when we got there. Sanford and I were riding together in the same car.
MR. DECOSTE: would it refresh your recollection to take a look at your deposition to know how many people were present for her arrest?
CRAIG ISOM: I don't know how many people were present.
MR. DECOSTE: would it refresh your recollection --
CRAIG ISOM: Sure.
MR. DECOSTE: -- to take a look at your depo?
(Attorneys confer.)
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: If you could read Lines 4 through 10 and let me know if that helps your memory.
CRAIG ISOM: (Witness complies.) Okay.
MR. DECOSTE: Does that help your memory?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Ten to 15?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Now those ten to 15 law enforcement, they were in multiple cars; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Guns drawn; right?
CRAIG ISOM: I don't remember guns drawn.
MR. DECOSTE: would it refresh your recollection to take a look at your depo again?
CRAIG ISOM: Of course.
(Attorneys confer.)
MR. ZANGENEH: Mr. DeCoste, can you give us that page and line citation?
MR. DECOSTE: Page 73, Lines 17 through 19.
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: If you'd take a look at Lines 17 through 19. Let me know if that helps your memory.
CRAIG ISOM: (Witness complies.) Okay.
MR. DECOSTE: Does that help your memory?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Guns are drawn; right?
CRAIG ISOM: There were some guns drawn, yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Ten to 15 law enforcement descending on Ms. Magbanua, this woman; right?
CRAIG ISOM: She was the target of the arrest, yes.
MR. DECOSTE: So scared she urinated herself.
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: The reason why you and Special Agent Patrick Sanford were in South Florida was you were hoping she would cooperate; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Objection.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled. It's not a timely objection.
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: You were hoping she'd cooperate?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Asked and answered.
JUDGE HANKINSON: I'll sustain the objection at this point.
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: If she were to have cooperated --
JUDGE HANKINSON: I sustained the objection.
MR. DECOSTE: Your Honor, if we can go sidebar?
JUDGE HANKINSON: We don't need to go sidebar. Move on.
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: Part of your theory eventually comes to life when Luis Rivera flips; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Violent gang leader; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: You hesitated there.
CRAIG ISOM: I don't recall at what level or -- I know he was --
MR. DECOSTE: well, Investigator Isom, you believe he's involved in a murder; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: That would be violent; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: You also believe that he's in a gang; right?
CRAIG ISOM: From the accounts that I read, yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Violent gang leader?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Before Luis Rivera gave his testimony, you agree with me that there was not enough. That the consensus between your department and this office was that there was not enough to arrest Ms. Magbanua?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Objection, calls for an opinion, improper question.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Sustained.
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: Before Luis Rivera cooperated, was Ms. Magbanua arrested?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. DECOSTE: How many hours after he cooperated was she arrested? Twenty-four, give or take?
CRAIG ISOM: within 24.
MR. DECOSTE: Now you believe that there was other evidence against Ms. Magbanua; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: That you say that you objectively investigated?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: But isn't it true that you left this circumstantial evidence, arguably inculpatory, by not investigating it?
CRAIG ISOM: I'm not sure what you're talking about.
MR. DECOSTE: During the course of your investigation, you go to a medical office in South Florida in the hopes of getting medical records for Ms. Magbanua; right?
CRAIG ISOM: For Ms. Magbanua.
MR. DECOSTE: Eventually -- I think that was a question. For Ms. Magbanua?
CRAIG ISOM: I want to clarify your question to me. I'm saying I'm getting -- you're asking me about medical records pertaining to her?
MR. DECOSTE: Let me re-ask the question.
You were trying to get medical records for a breast augmentation that she had; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: You eventually get those records?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: You find out that it was paid for in part between a debit card for a small portion and cash; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Objection, hearsay.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: Do you need me to re-ask the question?
JUDGE HANKINSON: He answered it, move on.
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: No evidence that it ties to anybody else in your theory; right?
CRAIG ISOM: The medical records that we've obtained?
MR. DECOSTE: No, the fact that she paid cash for a breast augmentation.
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MR. DECOSTE: But to you it fit your theory; right?
CRAIG ISOM: One piece, yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Let's go to the next piece that you think is there.
During the course of your investigation, you find out that she's driving around in a Lexus; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: And in your reports and in the probable cause affidavit, you just have that it's the Adelsons' Lexus; right?
CRAIG ISOM: I think there was more language than that, but, yes, that's close enough.
MR. DECOSTE: Now it fits your theory if she's driving around in the Adelsons' Lexus. It fits your theory that she's somehow involved in this; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: It doesn't fit your theory, though, if what it actually was that she bought an old, beat-up Lexus froma friend for $1,700; right?
CRAIG ISOM: If that -- I'm not sure what the question is in there. I'm trying to --
MR. DECOSTE: we'll come back to that one.
what year was the car?
CRAIG ISOM: 2001.
MR. DECOSTE: So in 2014 it was a 13-year-old car?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Right?
Now, you told me you objectively investigated this case. How many miles were on the car?
CRAIG ISOM: I don't know.
MR. DECOSTE: You would agree with me that the amount of miles on a vehicle would dictate the price?
CRAIG ISOM: It would have a factor in dictating the price, yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Because the engine inside of a car is sort of like a heart inside of a person; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Old engine may not have much time left. Right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Now, you never did anything investigation-wise of going out, finding the Lexus, determining what kind of condition it was in; right?
CRAIG ISOM: I took the make, model, year of the car, generic options, I don't recall what they were, what --
MR. DECOSTE: I'm not asking you --
JUDGE HANKINSON: Don't interrupt him.
Finish your answer.
CRAIG ISOM: And I used that on -- for -- to determine what the car's value was.
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: And that's where I'm going to -- I'm not asking you for the value of the vehicle found through online sources. All right.
what I'm asking you is did you ever find out the condition of the vehicle? Had it ever been in any accidents?
CRAIG ISOM: I don't recall.
MR. DECOSTE: Did you ever subpoena any records to find out if it had ever been in an accident?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. DECOSTE: You would agree with me that a car with multiple accidents could affect the value?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: No pictures were ever taken of the car for us to be able to show this jury what kind of car it is; right?
CRAIG ISOM: I don't have any photographs of the car.
MR. DECOSTE: You're just here to say it was a Lexus; right?
CRAIG ISOM: I'm here to say that there was a 2001 Lexus LS430, four-door sedan, black in color, that on surveillance video appeared to be in good condition.
MR. DECOSTE: Thirteen-years old, 160,000 miles; right?
CRAIG ISOM: I don't know what the mileage was. I know -- the years is inarguable, yes, 13-years old.
MR. DECOSTE: During the course of your investigation, you do try to get a title to the vehicle, though; right?
CRAIG ISOM: I think we were tracking the ownership of it. I'm not quite --
MR. DECOSTE: You wanted to see if it tied to the Adelsons?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MR. DECOSTE: And you get that title; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
(Exhibit shown to the State Attorney.)
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: Investigator, you know what that is; right?
JUDGE HANKINSON: Does this have an exhibit number of some sort on it?
MR. DECOSTE: Just laying foundation, Your Honor.
JUDGE HANKINSON: when you show something to the witness, we want to have an exhibit number, if it's something that he's going to be referring to.
MR. DECOSTE: Sure.
JUDGE HANKINSON: We're about due for a break anyway. Let's take ten minutes. Let the jury step out. After lunch sometimes it's a little hard. Ten minutes.
Either side need anything?
MR. ZANGENEH: No, Judge, not from Mr. Garcia.
JUDGE HANKINSON: ATI right.
(Recess taken from 2:14 p.m. to 2:26 p.m.)
JUDGE HANKINSON: Let's have the jury, please.
(jury returned to the courtroom at 2:27 p.m.)
JUDGE HANKINSON: Everybody be seated, please.
You may proceed.
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: I'm handing you what's been premarked for identification as Defense 1. You know what that is; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: That's the title that you looked at during the course of your investigation?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: And you know that that's the title that you looked at during the course of the investigation because it's the same make and model of the vehicle and because of the previous owner and the new owner at that time; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: And that's in the same or substantially the same condition it was in the last time you saw it?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Defense moves into evidence what's been premarked as Defense Exhibit 1 as Defense 1.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Any objection?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Yes, sir. I have a general objection to the defense entering evidence during my case.
JUDGE HANKINSON: I'll admit Defense Exhibit 1. I take it there's no specific objection.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: No, sir.
JUDGE HANKINSON: we'll admit Defense 1. I guess we need to make it Magbanua's Defense 1. I guess they would be separate.
COURT CLERK: Yes, sir, that's what I did.
(Defendant Magbanua's Exhibit No. 1 received in evidence.)
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: Investigator, can you see that?
CRAIG ISOM: Yeah, I think so, yeah.
MR. DECOSTE: Correct me if I'm wrong, right here it says that $1,700 was paid for the vehicle?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: So the only evidence that you have on this Lexus is that it was a legitimate purchase; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: The breast surgery, the car. There was some cash involved there; right?
JUDGE HANKINSON: That wasn't a very clear question, Mr. DeCoste.
MR. DECOSTE: I'll reask it and I'll reask it witha microphone.
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: Again, the breast augmentation, paid for in cash. The vehicle, you don't know if it was paid for in cash or not; right?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. DECOSTE: One of the pieces of evidence that you believed that you had against Ms. Magbanua was the presence of cash around the time of 2014 and 2015; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Cash deposits, yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Correct. And the cash for the breast surgery; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Lead Investigator on the case, you can't say to this jury that you know where that cash came from; right?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. DECOSTE: You can't say that because you didn't investigate it; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Investigate what? I'm not sure what the question is. I didn't --
MR. DECOSTE: The source of -- I'm sorry, you can finish.
CRAIG ISOM: No, please repeat the question.
MR. DECOSTE: You didn't investigate the possible source of the cash; right?
CRAIG ISOM: No. Cash is very hard to trace.
MR. DECOSTE: Unexplained cash would be good for your theory; right?
CRAIG ISOM: It fits. I didn't have this theory and then tried to make it fit like a square peg in a round hole. That's not the case.
MR. DECOSTE: Let's talk about that, your investigation on this. You learned during the course of your investigation that Ms. Magbanua, during 2014 and going into 2015, was working at nightclubs; right?
CRAIG ISOM: I don't remember the timeline, but I know she did work some -- from other witnesses, that she had worked in nightclubs.
MR. DECOSTE: In 2014?
CRAIG ISOM: You said into 2015 and I don't recall that part. I knew in 2014, part of 2014 she did, reportedly, work in some type of nightclub.
MR. DECOSTE: And you would agree with me that somebody working in a nightclub, doing VIP bottle service, may get paid in cash tips; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Of course you investigated this; right?
CRAIG ISOM: No, I have no way of knowing where. I couldn't find any employment records for where she was. I checked wage and hour. There was no -- nothing showed that she was employed at a particular establishment.
MR. DECOSTE: You learned that she was working at Hollywood Live; right?
CRAIG ISOM: I was told she was working at Hollywood Live. There's no documentation to prove she was employed at Hollywood Live.
MR. DECOSTE: You never subpoenaed any documentation?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. DECOSTE: You never went to Hollywood Live?
CRAIG ISOM: I did not.
MR. DECOSTE: Never spoke to owners, managers?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. DECOSTE: Other coworkers?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. DECOSTE: You also learned that she moved from this small] nightclub to a larger nightclub called Fate and that she was also working there; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Once again, reported that that's where she was. Nothing to substantiate that. No -- no employment information available through the State wage and hour.
MR. DECOSTE: Isn't this willful ignorance to not go and investigate it and just assume, well, there's nothing in front of us so we'll assume that she didn't work there?
CRAIG ISOM: I checked for wage and hour, through the State. There was nothing that indicated that she worked at either one of those establishments.
MR. DECOSTE: You know that she's working a job getting cash tips; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Once again, reportedly, she works at these type of establishments. And, yes, I know that there's a lot of cash that gets floated around. But as far as a minimum wage or anything along that lines, nothing.
MR. DECOSTE: Never went to either nightclub?
CRAIG ISOM: I did not.
MR. DECOSTE: Never spoke to any owners?
CRAIG ISOM: I did not.
MR. DECOSTE: Never spoke to any managers?
CRAIG ISOM: I did not.
MR. DECOSTE: And in your words, not doing that was an oversight?
CRAIG ISOM: I never said it was an oversight.
MR. DECOSTE: would it -- do you not remember if you ever said it was an oversight?
CRAIG ISOM: I don't recall saying that it was an oversight.
(Off-the-record discussion.)
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: would it help you to take a look at your deposition?
CRAIG ISOM: Sure.
MR. DECOSTE: If you would, please read Lines 3 through 18. Let me know if that helps you.
CRAIG ISOM: (Witness complies.) Okay.
MR. DECOSTE: Not going to those clubs was an oversight; right?
CRAIG ISOM: My answer to your question in deposition was: It was just an oversight, if you want to call it that.
MR. DECOSTE: Okay. Next piece, paychecks from the Adelson Institute. You remember that; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Now, your belief is that these checks were just given to her for having been involved in a murder, but that she wasn't actually working there; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Actually, I didn't know where they were stemming from because they had the same amount all the time. I just was curious to find out what she actually did for that compensation.
MR. DECOSTE: Let's talk about what you did to find that out. You Jearned during the course of your investigation that her job was to communicate with patients at the Adelson Institute; right?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. DECOSTE: Do you not remember?
CRAIG ISOM: I don't remember.
MR. DECOSTE: would it help you to take a look at your deposition?
CRAIG ISOM: Sure.
MR. DECOSTE: Page 117, Lines 4 through 7.
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: Please take a look at Lines 4 through 7. Let me know if it helps you.
CRAIG ISOM: (Witness complies.) Okay.
MR. DECOSTE: Communicate with patients?
CRAIG ISOM: That's what it sounded like from conversations that I overheard.
MR. DECOSTE: I'm asking you. You learned during the course of your investigation that her job at the Adelson Institute was to communicate with patients; right?
CRAIG ISOM: I'm saying that I heard secondhand, through a conversation that hasn't been entered I'm sure yet into this court, but it sounded like there was -- that she had some type of communication with patients.
MR. DECOSTE: Did you subpoena patient records from the Adelson Institute --
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. DECOSTE: -- so that you could communicate with patients and find out?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. DECOSTE: what about going down to the Adelson Institute and waiting for patients to come out and talk to them and ask them: Have you ever spoken to Katherine Magbanua?
CRAIG ISOM: I did not ask any patients that, only employees that were at the institute when -- at the office when we delivered the subpoena.
MR. DECOSTE: You also during the course -- before your retirement, the Tallahassee Police Department receives all of Charles Adelson's iCloud data; right?
CRAIG ISOM: My understanding is yes.
MR. DECOSTE: You reviewed that?
CRAIG ISOM: I don't recall reviewing it.
MR. DECOSTE: But you had also heard that there was communications with patients in his phone; right?
CRAIG ISOM: No, I do not know that.
MR. DECOSTE: No evidence that it was improper payments for work not done; right? Do you understand my question?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. DECOSTE: You don't have any evidence that Katherine Magbanua was not actually working at the Adelson Institute, earning every penny she was paid, communicating with patients; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MR. DECOSTE: Let's go back to Luis Rivera. September 30th, October 4th, he gives you his story; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Now part of that, you and your colleagues ask him where the murder weapon is; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: That's important in a murder case, the murder weapon. Right?
CRAIG ISOM: It's nice to have.
MR. DECOSTE: Don't have it in this case?
CRAIG ISOM: Not in this case, no.
MR. DECOSTE: A few attempts were made to find it?
CRAIG ISOM: One more time on the question?
MR. DECOSTE: A few attempts were made to find it; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Three, four times?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Now, Luis Rivera was actually there when the gun was disposed of; right?
CRAIG ISOM: According to his testimony, yes.
MR. DECOSTE: But he was never able to give you the location?
CRAIG ISOM: He provided possible locations, but a firearm was never recovered at those locations.
MR. DECOSTE: Possibly he didn't want you to find it?
CRAIG ISOM: very possible.
MR. DECOSTE: Now at some point, he draws you a picture of the bridge where he believes that it was disposed of; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes, he did a hand drawing.
(Exhibit shown to State Attorney.)
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: I'm handing you what's been premarked as Defense 2.
You know what that is; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: That's a drawing done by Luis Rivera?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: And you know that that's a drawing because you were in the room on October 4th when he handed it over to you?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: And that's in the same or substantially the same condition it was in the last time you saw it?
CRAIG ISOM: It looks like a copy; but other than that, it's fine.
MR. DECOSTE: Defense moves in what's been premarked as Defense 2.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Any specific objection?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Nothing other than the general objection, Judge.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Nothing other than the timing of it? Is that what you said?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Yes, sir.
JUDGE HANKINSON: I'll admit Exhibit 2 for Magbanua.
(Defendant Magbanua's Exhibit No. 2 received in evidence.)
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: was this originally written in crayon?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Objection, argumentative.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Was that a real question?
MR. DECOSTE: I'1Il withdraw it, Your Honor.
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: Investigator, this is a guy who, in exchange for seven years for a murder that he's involved in and helping you try to find the murder weapon, this is what he draws for you; right?
CRAIG ISOM: During the October 4th interview, he voluntarily supplied this, stating that he drew it the night before. He was not asked for this, he voluntarily provided it.
MR. DECOSTE: And, again, we're talking about Luis Rivera?
CRAIG ISOM: That's correct.
MR. DECOSTE: Grown man?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Change gears a little bit. Juan Marcos Vega. Did you ever do any investigation into Juan Marcos Vega?
Let me withdraw that question.
You never investigated Juan Marcos Vega; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MR. DECOSTE: You were never even given that name.
CRAIG ISOM: I don't readily recall the name.
MR. DECOSTE: Last topic. Talk about evidence of innocence.
Luis Rivera and Sigfredo Garcia are arrested May of 2016; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Lots of media; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: You would agree with me that this is one of the biggest media cases in Tallahassee history?
CRAIG ISOM: One of, yes.
MR. DECOSTE: And that media has gone beyond Leon County, all over the State, all over the country.
CRAIG ISOM: From my understanding, yes.
MR. DECOSTE: And all that media talked about Katherine Magbanua; right?
CRAIG ISOM: I think everybody was talking about it, from my understanding.
MR. DECOSTE: She didn't flee; right?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. DECOSTE: Probable cause affidavits. And, again, those are -- that's what you write to get a warrant signed by a judge to arrest somebody; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Probable cause affidavits for Katherine Magbanua were leaked to the media; right?
CRAIG ISOM: My understanding was yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Summer of 2016.
CRAIG ISOM: I don't recall the time, but I do know that there was some type of -- from some -- someplace there was some type of press release or leak, however you want to call it.
MR. DECOSTE: For first degree murder?
CRAIG ISOM: That's the charge, yes.
MR. DECOSTE: She doesn't flee.
Do you understand the question?
CRAIG ISOM: She doesn't flee? You're asking me did she flee?
MR. DECOSTE: She didn't flee; right?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. DECOSTE: Sometime after that, a television show called 20/20, avery popular television show, did a special on this case; right?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I object to relevance.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Sustained.
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: Investigator, you would agree with me that your theory that Ms. Magbanua was the conduit was that you have no communication in between Charles Adelson and the people who took Dan Markel's life; right?
CRAIG ISOM: That's one part of it.
MR. DECOSTE: Was it not that during this investigation it became evident that a conspiracy likely existed between one or more members of the Adelson family and the current defendants Sigfredo Garcia and Luis Rivera, and that it must have gone through Katherine Magbanua since there is no evidence directly linking Garcia and Rivera to any of the Adelsons?
CRAIG ISOM: That sounds accurate.
MR. DECOSTE: That sounds like your words; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: So if during this trial we're able to establish that there is communication in between those parties, then you would agree with me that Katherine Magbanua was not involved; right?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. DECOSTE: Nothing further, Judge.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Redirect.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: So we do have the one call from Sigfredo Garcia to Harvey Adelson; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: So your theory of the case is not entirely dependent on, you know, whether we can establish that there's no communication whatsoever between anyone that didn't funnel through Katherine Magbanua?
MR. ZANGENEH: Judge, I'm going to object to the characterization as communication.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I mean, there's other parts to this case other than did every single piece of communication funnel through her?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. So, for example, we've got a wiretap that we're going to talk about later; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And part of our -- your decision to make an arrest had to do with what was her conduct on that wiretap; yes?
MR. ZANGENEH: Objection, Judge. These are leading questions.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
CRAIG ISOM: That's correct.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And we've got phone records putting her in the middle of it; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Financial evidence putting her in the middle of it?
MR. DECOSTE: Your Honor, outside of the scope of direct and cross-examination. I never talked about --
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
MR. DECOSTE: -- any of this.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And the defense says she was working at a bottle club. If she was working at a bottle club, was she doing it in July of 2014, the month that Dan Markel was killed?
CRAIG ISOM: It does not appear so from what I understood.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: In fact, witness testimony suggests that she was not at the bottle club then.
MR. ZANGENEH: Objection, hearsay.
MR. DECOSTE: Objection.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Sustained.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Do you have any evidence to indicate she was working at a bottle club the month Dan Markel died?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: But if she was, she had the best month of her life, didn't she --
MR. ZANGENEH: Objection, counsel testifying.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: -- because she deposited --
MR. DECOSTE: Same objection.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Stop, Ms. Cappleman.
All right. Y'all settle down, all right. we're going to be polite here. If you have a legal objection, state your legal objection.
Finish your question, Ms. Cappleman, and then 1I'11 hear your legal objection.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: The month Dan Markel died, Katherine Magbanua deposited significantly more cash than any other month that we looked at surrounding the time of the homicide. would you agree with that, Detective?
MR. DECOSTE: Objection, leading; outside of the scope of both direct and cross-examination.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
CRAIG ISOM: That is correct.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Did she report any cash income on her tax returns from working at the bottle club?
MR. ZANGENEH: Objection, Judge, uncharged crime.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
CRAIG ISOM: There was nothing reported that I saw.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Do you have any financial information to indicate that Katherine Magbanua paid $1,700 for that black Lexus?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Do you have reason to believe that black Lexus was worth significantly more than $1,700?
MR. DECOSTE: Objection, hearsay, personal knowledge, improper opinion.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
CRAIG ISOM: Please repeat it.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Do you have reason to believe that that black Lexus was worth significantly more than $1,700?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Do you have evidence to suggest that the black Lexus was not in crappy condition, that, in fact, it was in pristine condition?
CRAIG ISOM: I understand that there is conversation or communication regarding a lot of expense put into the car. But as I said before, I did a generic check. I did not know the condition of the car. I did not know the exact mileage. I put a mileage amount based on how many years and average years -- average miles per year of driving. So just a generic check of the value of the car.
MR. ZANGENEH: Judge, I would object to his answer as being speculative.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
MR. DECOSTE: I would object to hearsay to him linking --
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
MR. DECOSTE: -- to any sort of website to find out the value of the vehicle. There's many --
JUDGE HANKINSON: Let's go sidebar, please.
AT THE BENCH
JUDGE HANKINSON: So let me just be clear, Mr. DeCoste. You specifically put in play his subjective belief about his investigation, what he did in his investigation, what he believed about his investigation, and his theory of the investigation. Therefore, I'm going to let the State inquire what he did. You've put it in dispute. I'm going to allow her to pursue it. You have opened the door to that and we're going to allow it. All right?
We can proceed.
MR. DECOSTE: Can I state something on the record?
JUDGE HANKINSON: You may.
MR. DECOSTE: Just a further objection.
So my objection is specifically I believe what this witness is going to answer is that he went onto Edmunds or Kelly Blue Book value to determine the value of the vehicle. That I objected to on direct examination, Your Honor sustained it.
My objection is just to that, to him putting in and finding the value of a vehicle because there are so many different parameters. Number one, is it a re-seller? Is it an individual seller? The condition of the vehicle, the mileage on the vehicle, all of those things, but most importantly, different outlets have different pricings for vehicles so I don't think that it's reliable --
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I don't want to interrupt, but I'm not going to ask him --
MR. DECOSTE: Okay. Then we're fine.
JUDGE HANKINSON: well, but let's be clear. You put in dispute his state of mind. So anything that goes to his state of mind, whether it be based upon hearsay or not, is admissible. All right?
we'll proceed.
IN OPEN COURT
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Do you have any evidence that Ms. Magbanua had any contact, via phone or otherwise, with any patients of the Adelson Institute?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And there was a period of time -- a significant period of time that law enforcement was listening to her phone calls; yes?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Do you have any evidence that Katherine Magbanua ever was physically present at the Adelson Institute?
CRAIG ISOM: None.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: But she began receiving paychecks from the Adelson Institute two months after the homicide?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And you asked the employees there what it was that ~=she did?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And as you sit here today, you cannot tell this jury what it was, if anything, that she did to earn that money?
MR. DECOSTE: Objection, hearsay.
JUDGE HANKINSON: TI beg your pardon?
MR. DECOSTE: Objection, hearsay.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
CRAIG ISOM: They did not have any type of -- I did not obtain any type of job classification or responsibilities from the employees at the office that I went to.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Did you request a copy of her employment file?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Did you receive that?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. Did you receive any documentation from the Adelson Institute?
CRAIG ISOM: I received a listing of checks paid to Katherine Magbanua by the Adelson Institute.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: was there an application for her applying for a position there?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: was there any kind of tax documentation?
CRAIG ISOM: I did not receive that, no.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: was there any type of description of her duties or the position that she was hired to do?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: May I have a moment to confer?
(Attorneys confer.)
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Nothing further.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Any juror have a question of this witness? write your question down. we'll go sidebar.
AT THE BENCH
JUDGE HANKINSON: So the first question is, I'll rephrase it just a little bit, but whether you can see the black side mirror in the Premier video.
Either side have objection to that?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: No objection.
MR. DECOSTE: No position.
MR. ZANGENEH: So they're asking if in the Premier video --
JUDGE HANKINSON: Can you tell from the Premier video about whether it has a black side mirror or not?
MR. ZANGENEH: That's fine.
JUDGE HANKINSON: What time -- date and time was rental car actually returned? Is there objection to that?
MR. ZANGENEH: Yes, Judge.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: There's going to be another witness --
JUDGE HANKINSON: What's that?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: There's going to be another witness that can speak to that.
JUDGE HANKINSON: The question is a little confusing, but I guess he wants to know were there other recordings of Luis Rivera after the -- I guess when they went looking for the weapon, was that recorded and were there other recordings of Luis Rivera.
So I think I'd just ask: Are there recorded interviews; and, if so, when?
Anybody have a problem with that?
MR. ZANGENEH: NO, Judge.
MR. DECOSTE: Can I ask, did the juror ask “after” or just say, are there any other recordings?
JUDGE HANKINSON: well, it's three questions really. It's fairly confused. It says: 9/30/16, driving with Luis Rivera, question, recorded, question, after Jefferson County jail interview, question. So I think I'll just ask a broader question, unless you have an objection.
MR. ZANGENEH: No objection.
MR. DECOSTE: I would prefer the original question he's asking, if the van ride after the interview with Jefferson County was recorded. And the answer is it was. So on 9/30 they did record the van ride.
JUDGE HANKINSON: I'm going to ask it the way I indicated.
what agency -- he referred to a wage and hour report and they want to know what agency he sought that information from.
Anybody have objection?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: No, Your Honor.
MR. ZANGENEH: No, not from Mr. Garcia.
MR. DECOSTE: No.
JUDGE HANKINSON: One of the jurors apparently has observed a sticker on the back of the Prius on the right-hand side and the question is whether that was ever identified.
Either side have objection to that?
MR. DECOSTE: No position.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: No objection.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Why was the interview with Rivera not taped or recorded? That's the question. why was the first interview not recorded?
Anybody have objection?
MR. ZANGENEH: Not from Garcia.
MR. DECOSTE: If I can have a brief moment, Your Honor.
(Attorneys confer.)
MR. DECOSTE: Never liking "why" questions for a witness, would the Court allow an opportunity for us to ask those questions?
JUDGE HANKINSON: To what?
MR. DECOSTE: For us to cross him on the answer to the question?
JUDGE HANKINSON: Well, all times when we have juror questions, the attorneys get follow-up.
MR. DECOSTE: Great.
JUDGE HANKINSON: So you will always have follow-up.
MR. DECOSTE: Thank you.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Do you have an objection?
MR. DECOSTE: No.
JUDGE HANKINSON: This juror wants to know whether they ever actually saw the Prius to confirm those identifying characteristics or the rental company confirmed the three things that he's referring to.
Either side have objection to that?
MR. DECOSTE: No objection.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: TI don't have an objection.
MR. ZANGENEH: No objection.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Those are the questions.
IN OPEN COURT
JUDGE HANKINSON: So what we'll do, I'll ask the questions that have been approved of the witness. He'll answer those, and then I'll allow the attorneys to follow-up. So that's how we'll do as to questions.
You had mentioned some identifying characteristics of the Prius. I believe you listed three -- three things. Were you ever able to actually confirm those actually on the car or from some other source after the fact?
CRAIG ISOM: Can I answer freely?
JUDGE HANKINSON: Yeah, certainly.
CRAIG ISOM: The subsequent investigation found that by the time we had tracked the car down to the hybrid rental place, they had sold the car. The car had been sold to a locksmith company in Miami. The car was tracked down, but it had already been painted. I believe both mirrors had been replaced. Of course, it has a new SunPass because there's a lot of tolls down there in the Miami area. So it had been changed.
But the tag and the vehicle identification number matched what was provided through the SunPass records of the Florida Department of Transportation.
JUDGE HANKINSON: In talking about some of those things in the Premier video, I think we talked about the Premier video, can you tell whether you have this black side mirror in that video?
CRAIG ISOM: The one image, if y'all recall, that I felt like was the best side image of the right side of the car was where the other -- they stop and -- the car stops and another car starts to back out and they almost collide. I mean, it was very close, I thought. That's the best image. And if you play with the tinting of how much color is on the screen, it's apparent that that mirror on the side is black, as opposed to the other mirror which is the same color as the rest of the car.
JUDGE HANKINSON: One of the jurors apparently was of the belief that they had seen a sticker on the back right-hand side of the Prius. Do you remember seeing anything like that?
CRAIG ISOM: I don't recall that. The only -- the best image, I would think, would be when the bus was directly behind the car at the stop light on Thomasville at Metropolitan. I don't recall any stickers on the bumper area or anyplace on the backside.
JUDGE HANKINSON: If, by chance, there is, that was never identified?
CRAIG ISOM: NO.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Okay. And why was it that the first interview with Mr. Rivera was not recorded?
CRAIG ISOM: The State Attorney's Office -- it was determined by the State Attorney that the first interview that we did on the 30th, because it had a lot to do with what possible sentence Rivera would get for his cooperation, that was decided that it would not be recorded.
It was -- it was monitored. I do recall it was monitored by members of the State Attorney's Office but it was -- in other words, the camera is on but it's not being recorded.
JUDGE HANKINSON: And subsequent to that, what discussions with Mr. Rivera were recorded?
CRAIG ISOM: That took place -- actually there's -- we went to interview him initially at the Coleman Federal Prison in Central Florida. That was recorded. There was another recording --
JUDGE HANKINSON: That was before September 30th?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes, that was in May. That was in May.
JUDGE HANKINSON: And then after this one that we're talking about?
CRAIG ISOM: well, I was going in order.
JUDGE HANKINSON: That's good.
CRAIG ISOM: There was one then. There was one several days later at Coleman again, very brief. It was almost over with as soon as it started. And then the recording happened on October 4th.
JUDGE HANKINSON: And what about when you were driving around with Mr. Rivera? I think you said you went out with him on September 30th?
CRAIG ISOM: September 30th, we -- he directed us, myself and other agency members, to the route that he and Garcia took. And he showed us how he got to the house and he pointed out different things. There is recordings during that time. It's on a body camera that I was supplied with at the -- before we started.
And I was told when we started, don't wear the batteries out. So you'll probably -- I'm assuming you'll see that sometime. There will be segments that are important that is recorded, him in the van and what he's talking about. And then it's turned off in between lag time.
JUDGE HANKINSON: And you made reference to wage and hour information. what were you referring to?
CRAIG ISOM: The State, and forgive me, I believe it's the state of financial -- I think it's the State finance department. I probably butchered that.
But, anyway, they keep track of everyone's -- you know, if you're employed by any entity in the state, and they take out Social Security tax, Social Security, anything like that, it is reported to this agency. And it's very common for law enforcement, when seeking employment for someone, to contact that agency and it shows -- gives a printout where the people were working, what quarters of the year they worked at different places. And that's what I was referring to. we didn't --
JUDGE HANKINSON: You're not 100 percent sure the name of the agency?
CRAIG ISOM: Hold on a second, I'll pull it up. It's the Florida Department of Financial Services. And it just simply verifies -- it simply shows employee wage information print. So if you worked in the 4th quarter of 2014, it shows where you worked in that quarter; multiple jobs, whatever. The first quarter of 2015, it shows where you were working there, if you were employed. Not cash, but, you know, you have -- you were on the payroll.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Ms. Cappleman.
FURTHER EXAMINATION
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Is it common procedure when an inmate wants to cooperate and give information in a criminal case not to record the first interview?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And is there anything unusual or unethical about the way that the first proffer was handled in this case?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And you were present for that?
CRAIG ISOM: I was.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And was the idea to get the basics of what it was that Mr. Rivera had to say and then have an opportunity to check it out before we made a decision whether we were interested?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes, because you don't know what a defendant is going to say and you want to be able to verify as much as possible. I mean, you just can't take a person's word for it.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: we have to compare it with the other evidence in the case?
CRAIG ISOM: Correct.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. So if, for example, Mr. Rivera would have said, I wasn't there, I've never been to Tallahassee, I don't know what you're talking about, that would have been a pretty short meeting?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And at any time during that proffer or any of the interviews that you were present for, did I or any member of my office or law enforcement suggest to Mr. Rivera in any way what it was that he should be saying?
MR. ZANGENEH: Objection, Judge, improper bolstering.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
CRAIG ISOM: Not to my knowledge.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Did anybody, me or any member of my team or law enforcement, suggest to Mr. Rivera's lawyers at any time what it was that Mr. Rivera should or needed to say?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: No further questions.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Garcia.
MR. ZANGENEH: Yes, sir.
FURTHER EXAMINATION
BY MR. ZANGENEH:
MR. ZANGENEH: Detective, I'll try to keep it brief. Following up on what Ms. Cappleman said about whether or not she personally influenced Luis Rivera's testimony or whether she personally influenced, or anyone from the State Attorney's Office personally influenced or attempted to influence the Collinses, which were his attorneys; correct? Do you remember her just talking about that?
CRAIG ISOM: I remember.
MR. ZANGENEH: Now, this meeting, the initial interview was September 30th?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And Mr. Rivera was arrested on what day? May something?
CRAIG ISOM: He was at the federal prison down by Orlando. I think it was the 27th, I believe.
MR. ZANGENEH: Of May?
CRAIG ISOM: I believe it was the 27th of May.
MR. ZANGENEH: And on September 30th, at that time the prosecution had released the initial discovery in this case?
CRAIG ISOM: On what date, sir?
MR. ZANGENEH: By the time, or -- on or before September 30th when you had met with Luis Rivera, the prosecution had provided his lawyers as well as our team, and not Mr. DeCoste because you guys hadn't arrested -- or wait a minute, had you? Yeah, you hadn't.
You guys had released the discovery in the case; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: I don't know when it was released.
MR. ZANGENEH: The probable cause affidavit, which we've gone over, which Mr. DeCoste went over with you, that had been released outlining the government's theory of the case?
CRAIG ISOM: I believe so by September -- by September 30th, yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: So would it be a safe assumption to make that Mr. Collins, the attorney for Luis Rivera, had done his due diligence and gone over the initial probable cause affidavit on a first degree murder with his client before you met with him?
CRAIG ISOM: I'm not an attorney. I'm assuming that would be prudent.
MR. ZANGENEH: Now, Ms. Cappleman said that one of the things that she wanted to do and the reason why -- one of the reasons why the interview wasn't recorded was they wanted to gauge the veracity of the witness; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: Now, during the direct examination, you indicated that you did two interviews of Luis Rivera, one in May of 2014 at Coleman Federal Correctional facility; is that correct? I'm sorry, 2016. I apologize. May of 2016?
CRAIG ISOM: There was actually two. I don't recall the -- around the 27th. I believe there was two interviews.
MR. ZANGENEH: Of Mr. Rivera?
CRAIG ISOM: Of Rivera.
MR. ZANGENEH: while he was in federal custody?
CRAIG ISOM: At Coleman, yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: You were personally there?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And would it be a fair assessment to summarize that he denied any involvement?
CRAIG ISOM: He recalled -- he recalled --
MR. ZANGENEH: Hold on.
CRAIG ISOM: -- eventually he recalled -- go ahead.
MR. ZANGENEH: I'm sorry.
Did he give you a confession in his May interview?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. ZANGENEH: No.
Did he distance himself and pretty much say, I had nothing to do with it?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: June, July, August, September. Four short months later, his story changes; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: Yeah. Substantially?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And on September 30th, when you have your first interaction with him, it's not memorialized on surveillance; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. ZANGENEH: And one of the reasons, what I just heard for the first time, was that there were plea negotiations that were going on between the government and Luis Rivera during this interview?
CRAIG ISOM: I have no -- I don't have any knowledge of that.
MR. ZANGENEH: were you present when the government was in plea negotiations with one of the Collinses during that interview?
CRAIG ISOM: On the 30th?
MR. ZANGENEH: Yes, sir.
CRAIG ISOM: I wasn't in a room where there was any plea negotiations. I was never present for any plea negotiations.
MR. ZANGENEH: were you aware that plea negotiations were going on?
CRAIG ISOM: I was notified on the 29th of September that Rivera and his attorneys agreed to a cooperative proffered interview the following day, on the 30th. That's what I did, I went there on the 30th.
MR. ZANGENEH: And before that date, would it be fair to say that no specific term of imprisonment had been agreed to?
CRAIG ISOM: I don't have any Knowledge of any term or -- I didn't know what his sentence was going to be or any type of that, anything like that.
MR. ZANGENEH: Did the State Attorney's Office consult with you with regard to the factors of the deal you guys gave Luis Rivera?
CRAIG ISOM: Can you specify what you're talking about, "factors"?
MR. ZANGENEH: Sure, no problem.
Did the State Attorney come up to you and go, Detective Isom, are you okay with seven more years after he does his federal sentence --
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. ZANGENEH: -- if he cooperates?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. ZANGENEH: In the October 4th interview, you were there; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And it was all recorded on video?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: Was there any portion of communication between law enforcement and Luis Rivera and/or his attorney that wasn't memorialized on that day?
CRAIG ISOM: Between who now?
MR. ZANGENEH: Between law enforcement and either -- well, let's start it like this. was there any portion of that day where there's interaction between law enforcement and Luis Rivera that wasn't memorialized on camera?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Judge, I'm going to object as getting far afield of the limited purpose of this inquiry.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
CRAIG ISOM: TI don't recall anything outside of -- I don't recall any contact with Defendant Rivera outside of the room where the recording was taking place.
BY MR. ZANGENEH:
MR. ZANGENEH: Was there occasion on that day, on October 4th, where you had communications with Luis Rivera's attorney, chuck Collins, and you were discussing Luis Rivera's testimony before the cameras turned on?
JUDGE HANKINSON: I'‘'11 sustain the objection. That's outside the scope of the jury questions. Move on.
MR. ZANGENEH: Give me one second, Judge.
(Attorneys confer.)
BY MR. ZANGENEH:
MR. ZANGENEH: Detective Isom, do you recall whether or not the body camera that you wore on September 30th was an Axon camera? Do you know the kind of body cameras you guys wear?
CRAIG ISOM: No, I was never assigned a camera. I had no -- that was my only time ever using a body camera. I didn't wear it. I held it in my hand. That was what was available that was portable. That's what we decided to use from leaving Jefferson County Jail.
MR. ZANGENEH: The purpose of --
CRAIG ISOM: I don't know the brand or -- I just knew -- I knew how to turn it off. And I was reminded several times, turn it off or you'll have dead batteries.
MR. ZANGENEH: Thank you. I'm sorry, I didn't mean to cut you -- are you finished, sir?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And the purpose of this -- how long was your car ride with Luis Rivera that day?
CRAIG ISOM: On which day?
MR. ZANGENEH: when you guys went looking for where he -- he told you he had disposed of the gun; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: He actually said that Garcia had disposed of it.
MR. ZANGENEH: of course he did, but --
JUDGE HANKINSON: Mr. Zangeneh.
MR. ZANGENEH: I apologize, Judge. I withdraw that statement.
JUDGE HANKINSON: The jury will disregard the defense attorney's comments.
BY MR. ZANGENEH:
MR. ZANGENEH: So the purpose of the ride that you took with Luis Rivera was to attempt to locate the firearm used in the murder of Dan Markel?
CRAIG ISOM: I want to clarify. The second -- the second time -- we took Rivera in the van on the 30th, after his unrecorded proffered interview to show us which route he took. Part of that was to confirm what he was saying. we knew from the video surveillance some of that route that they took. He actually showed us something that we didn't know, that I didn't know, during that ride. That was the first ride that was recorded on the 30th.
MR. ZANGENEH: well, Detective, what did he show you that you = didn't know?
CRAIG ISOM: He showed us where he parked at one point, on the day before the actual homicide.
MR. ZANGENEH: And where was that?
CRAIG ISOM: Guyte McCord Park.
MR. ZANGENEH: Spell that for me.
CRAIG ISOM: I believe the first name is G -- oh, boy, G-U-Y-T-E. And the last is M-C, capital C-O-R-D. It's on Armistead Road. If you turn on Armistead, you can get to the Markel residence from a back route instead of going all the way down to Betton dike the Prius did.
MR. ZANGENEH: Is that through the wooded area?
CRAIG ISOM: well, it's -- you just turn left on -- if you're going south on Thomasville, you just turn left on Armistead. And there's a park there where people can walk. There's a walking path --
MR. ZANGENEH: Yeah, I'm familiar.
CRAIG ISOM: -- that goes behind the houses along Trescott.
MR. ZANGENEH: So what I'm talking about, and I appreciate you educating me --
CRAIG ISOM: Just wanted to verify for the jury that there's more than one ride with a recording device.
MR. ZANGENEH: well, I appreciate you doing that.
what I'm talking about is the ride you guys took to attempt to locate the firearm that was used in this homicide.
CRAIG ISOM: Okay.
MR. ZANGENEH: Okay? Now, the homicide happened at around 11:00 a.m.; correct?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And it's about a six, six-and-a-half-hour drive, maybe seven hours back to Miami?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Objection, outside the scope.
JUDGE HANKINSON: I'‘'11 let you ask a question or two, but let's get to something that relates to the juror questions, Mr. Zangeneh.
MR. ZANGENEH: Of course.
BY MR. ZANGENEH:
MR. ZANGENEH: You were looking for the firearm. Did you ever find +a firearm during your search?
JUDGE HANKINSON: That's outside the scope of what was asked. Recordings; that's what we're talking about, Mr. Zangeneh. Do you have a question about the recordings?
MR. ZANGENEH: Judge, I'll reserve the right to recall Detective Isom another time. Thank you.
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right. Thank you.
Mr. DeCoste.
MR. DECOSTE: Real briefly, Your Honor.
FURTHER EXAMINATION
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: Just a few more questions. You were asked about earnings summaries. Earnings summaries I think it was that were asked about?
JUDGE HANKINSON: Wage and hour summary.
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: That was from Ms. Magbanua; right?
CRAIG ISOM: I think the question from the jury was what department compiles wage and hours. That's my recollection.
MR. DECOSTE: And, of course, you subpoenaed that stuff; right?
CRAIG ISOM: I don't recall if we subpoenaed it or just requested it. I don't recall.
MR. DECOSTE: Now, a subpoena puts a legal requirement on the person that's served or the entity that's served to give it over to you; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: No subpoena.
CRAIG ISOM: I don't -- I don't know if we had to subpoena them or not.
MR. DECOSTE: Let's go now to Luis Rivera. 5/27/2016. May 27th, 2016 you go and meet with him for the first time with Special Agent Patrick Sanford.
CRAIG ISOM: Okay.
MR. DECOSTE: He denies ever being in Tallahassee in his life; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Initially he did. He eventually admits to being in Tallahassee.
MR. DECOSTE: On a later date.
CRAIG ISOM: On a later date?
MR. DECOSTE: You met with him on 5/27/2016.
CRAIG ISOM: There was two interviews. The first one is where he provided that. The second one was very short and he invoked.
MR. DECOSTE: Let me give you the dates and then I'll ask the question.
He's incarcerated in South Florida and you go and meet with him on May 27th, 2016, and again on June 3rd, 2016. In neither of those meetings did he confess to being involved in the murder of Dan Markel; right?
CRAIG ISOM: He did not confess to be -- to being involved in the murder of Dan Markel.
MR. DECOSTE: Fast-forward, September 30th, 2016. You have the meeting with him. This is after he's decided to cooperate and you go meet with him in Jefferson County; right?
CRAIG ISOM: September 30th.
MR. DECOSTE: Now --
CRAIG ISOM: September 30th?
MR. DECOSTE: Yeah.
CRAIG ISOM: Thank you. Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Now you said that you were told not to use the camera too much because you'd wear out the battery?
CRAIG ISOM: On the van ride, yes.
MR. DECOSTE: And you had the camera on you, you could have recorded on September 30th, but there was a concern about the battery life; right?
CRAIG ISOM: The body camera with the battery came up after -- we had the -- the jail has their own video system. we don't need a little body camera. I needed something portable for the van ride and that's what was provided to me.
MR. DECOSTE: what I'm asking you for is you had the means with which to record him in that meeting. And I'm asking you about the battery because, as you said during my cross-examination, this is the biggest case in Tallahassee history. Nobody could grab some extra batteries, record that interview?
CRAIG ISOM: The interview in the jail --
MR. DECOSTE: Yeah.
CRAIG ISOM: -- was decided by the State Attorney's Office that it was not going to be recorded.
MR. DECOSTE: So let's go into that. You worked for Tallahassee Police Department; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: That is not the Leon County State Attorney's Office. You're your own entity; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: You don't have to answer to them?
CRAIG ISOM: well, sometimes you do.
MR. DECOSTE: Legally you do not have to answer to them; right?
CRAIG ISOM: No, legally I do not.
MR. DECOSTE: You could have recorded that if you wanted to?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Now, you wrote a report about that interview with Luis Rivera; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Dated December 6th, 2016; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Okay, yes.
MR. DECOSTE: So a little over two months you spend drafting this report talking about what he said in that interview room; right?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Now, a moment ago you said that, well, the reason why it wasn't recorded is because it talked about a deal and, you know, the State Attorney's Office, what they want us to do -- you gave an explanation to the jury. None of that's in your report; is it?
CRAIG ISOM: I don't know. I'd have to read it. Do you want me to read this whole thing or --
MR. DECOSTE: Please.
CRAIG ISOM: It will take a while.
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right. we'll take ten minutes. Let the jury step out.
(Recess taken from 3:25 p.m. to 3:35 p.m.)
JUDGE HANKINSON: Let's have the jury, please.
(jury returned to the courtroom at 3:35 p.m.)
JUDGE HANKINSON: Everybody be seated, please.
Resume, Mr. DeCoste.
MR. DECOSTE: Yes, Your Honor. Only a few more questions.
JUDGE HANKINSON: why don't you re-ask your question, make sure we remember what you asked.
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: I had asked you about the reasoning why -- strike that.
So you had given an explanation as to why the September 30th interview was not recorded. Then I asked you if that's anywhere in the report that you wrote about what happened on September 30th. This is a report that was written about two months after the interview. And you wanted to take a look at the six-page or maybe about --
JUDGE HANKINSON: Let's get to a question, Mr. DeCoste, please.
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: Did you take a look at your report?
CRAIG ISOM: Yes, I did.
MR. DECOSTE: Anything in there as to the reason why it wasn't recorded?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. DECOSTE: Anything about any deals or anything like that?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. DECOSTE: Anything about the fact that the State wanted you to get a basis first?
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. DECOSTE: A basis --
CRAIG ISOM: No.
MR. DECOSTE: You understood what I meant by basis; right?
CRAIG ISOM: well, after it sunk in a little bit.
MR. DECOSTE: All right. The last line, the last topic, the ~=—ibasis.
You're telling this jury that the State wanted you to go in there and find out what he had; right?
CRAIG ISOM: They wanted to get his testimony to try to verify as much as possible to see if he was going to cooperate and be a witness for the prosecution.
MR. DECOSTE: Isn't it true that a month and a half before that, Ms. Cappleman on August 8th went and met with him herself to get that information?
CRAIG ISOM: I'm not aware of that.
MR. DECOSTE: Nothing further.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Redirect.
FURTHER EXAMINATION
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Have I had any -- I don't even know what to say to that.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: NO questions.
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right. You can step down. You remain under the rule.
Call your next witness.