Day 6 - October 4, 2019

DeCoste completed his cross of TPD cell-site analyst Corbitt, pressing on undocumented tower-failure and traffic-overload variables, surfacing a Magbanua-to-Charlie iMessage asking whether Garcia had called Charlie's phone, and closing by establishing that Magbanua — unlike Garcia and Rivera — did not abandon her phone after the murder.

Norris used redirect to address defense attacks on the cell-site evidence, admitted the speeding ticket showing Garcia driving the rented Nissan, explained the Sprint time-zone convention, reviewed June 5 and July 17 Garcia-Magbanua communications, and mapped July 19 travel. The 1:51 and 1:52 p.m. July 17 calls were outbound from Magbanua and did not answer whether Garcia called her before noon.

Norris completed redirect by establishing three unsuccessful attempts from Magbanua's handset to a number Rivera had identified as his old line, admitting a more readable version of the Charlie Adelson iCloud chat, and eliciting Corbitt's interpretation that Garcia lacked Adelson's number.

Garcia's counsel used a narrow recross to minimize the traffic citation, show that app-based communications would not appear in call-detail records, and offer an alternative reading of the iCloud chat. Corbitt did not testify that Rivera and Adelson actually used an unrecorded channel.

Jurors asked Christopher Corbitt three questions after recall redirect: whether Charlie Adelson deleted messages beyond Magbanua's, whether investigators plotted Anthony Ortiz's phone on July 19, and whether cell records covered the second Comfort rental exchange on June 3.

Forensic accountant Mary Hull reviewed financial records for Garcia, Rivera, Magbanua, and the Adelson family, describing post-murder vehicle purchases, Rivera's changed cash-withdrawal pattern, Magbanua's cash deposits, a Lexus title with no matching payment found, and Adelson Institute checks signed by Donna Adelson.

Hull documented expenses Charlie Adelson paid for Magbanua, including travel and a Mazda repair, and presented an unexplained $4,400 cash balance for breast augmentation whose source she could not trace in Magbanua's accounts. She also described an August 2014 cash-deposit peak and Adelson Institute payroll records.

Garcia's counsel Zangeneh challenged forensic accountant Hull's post-murder vehicle analysis by establishing the 1984 Monte Carlo resold a year later for $600, pointing to Hull's failure to obtain purchase prices or contact sellers, exposing the investigation's limited scope, and closing with Hull's confirmation that no large Adelson cash withdrawal appeared in June–July 2014 or in 2016.

DeCoste challenged Hull's financial analysis with a bank-record check labeled "Cash Tips / Fate," her inability to assign Magbanua's cash deposits to a particular source, and the limits of the records supplied to her.

DeCoste completed his cross of forensic accountant Mary Hull by introducing Magbanua's September 2014 texts to Charlie Adelson expressing enthusiasm about starting work, then pressing Hull on the absence of nightclub employment records and eliciting her concession that additional information would change her analysis.

Norris used redirect to address the Monte Carlo resale price, evidence suggesting stacks of Adelson cash, the sparse Institute response, a specified nightclub-income hypothetical, the timing of Institute checks ending after Garcia's arrest, and dental-context messages.

DeCoste used a brief recross to undermine Norris's redirect on State's Exhibit 184, eliciting Hull's concession that she could not establish the context of the 'excited to start' text or rule out that subsequent phone calls shifted the conversation back to dental scheduling.

Retired FBI agent Oscar Jimenez testified about the April 2016 'bump' operation in which he approached Donna Adelson in South Beach, handing her a flyer about the Markel murder bearing a covert phone number and $5,000 demand; body cam and surveillance footage were published to the jury, followed by an April 28 call recording to the Adelson Institute — and Jimenez's disclosure that Charlie Adelson called back that same covert number.

Zangeneh challenged Jimenez's gang-specific knowledge and the bump's design, and established that Garcia was free and could have been wiretapped. Jimenez did not know whose phones had Title III coverage, so the cross did not establish that investigators chose not to wiretap Garcia.

DeCoste showed that the planned bump named "Katie" and "Tuto" twice each and elicited Jimenez's understanding that the FBI made no photocopy of the flyer. Jimenez agreed the encounter was controlled to an extent; he did not testify that every detail was scripted.