9.Defense Rests
14 linesMS. KAWASS: No, Your Honor. The defense rests.
JUDGE WHEELER: All right. The defense has rested.
Does the State have any rebuttal witnesses?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: No, Your Honor.
JUDGE WHEELER: Okay. So that completes the testimony portion of the case. Okay. I apologize for keeping you so late, but I think you understand the importance of getting this done today. So I hope you bear with me.
So tomorrow when we reconvene, we will start with the jury instructions and then closing arguments. Okay. That will be done all in the morning. I expect that what we will do is -- that will be done by lunchtime. The Court will provide lunch to you, and you will go back at noontime and start your deliberations at that time. Okay.
So that's what I'm expecting, absent anything that is out of my control, or anything that I don't know up to this point. But that's what we're expecting for tomorrow. Okay. Everyone, I don't want to hold you any longer. Have a great evening. No talking about the case with anyone else. You can leave your pads right here on your chairs. And we'll see you-all tomorrow morning at 8:30. we'll start promptly after that. Okay. Thank you.
(Jury exits.)
JUDGE WHEELER: All right. Jury is out of the courtroom. The door is closed. You may be seated. Both the State and the defense have now rested. And would you like to bring any motions on behalf of the defense?
MS. KAWASS: Yes, Your Honor. At this time the defense would like to renew all previous motions and objections. And now make our second motion for judgment of acquittal.
JUDGE WHEELER: Okay.
MS. KAWASS: Even in the light taken most favorable to the State, the State -- I think the standard is now that no reasonable juror could find Ms. Magbanua guilty beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt. Now that this kind of does change, Judge, a little bit. And we've also had evidence from Ms. Magbanua, I would rely on the same arguments I made as to the elements of all three charges. In that all of the case is circumstantial but for the evidence of Luis Rivera.
And now that Ms. Magbanua has taken the stand and explained everything as it relates to the circumstantial evidence in this case, and she's been consistent since day one. That weakens the evidence against -- that the State has as it relates to the circumstantial evidence. And then now all you have left to evaluate is still Luis Rivera.
Same argument, Judge. All we have in front of us is Luis Rivera, who admittedly says, I don't know anything about this, I don't know who did the hiring, I don't know anything. It's only Garcia is telling me that Katie is the one doing the middle. There's no evidence that she knew what in the middle was for. was it -- if you believe him and he says, Oh, she was in the middle hiring us for this, Luis Rivera himself said, I thought I was going to commit a robbery. And elements say that you have to have intended the crime to be committed.
There's no evidence that Ms. Magbanua conspired with anyone to have a murder committed. Mr. Rivera was not able to give any information as to who it was in the Adelson family that this was done through. Ms. Magbanua didn't do anything to assist. There's no evidence that the paperwork with Dan Markel's face on it didn't come directly from Charles Adelson.
Mr. Rivera never said that that information came from Ms. Magbanua. It actually came from Mr. Garcia. And the only evidence they have is supposedly her, the next day, being picked up by Sigfredo and going to the house. And their own witnesses say that she didn't know what was in the bag. Even believing that that took place, there is no evidence to establish that Ms. Magbanua knew there was money in the bag or that this was money for any criminal activity.
So, in addition to all the cases that I cited earlier, Judge, from my first JOA, this is the additional argument that I'm making for the second JOA.
JUDGE WHEELER: Thank you, Ms. Kawass.
MS. KAWASS: Thank you, Judge.
JUDGE WHEELER: Ms. Cappleman.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I'll rely on my previous arguments, Your Honor.
JUDGE WHEELER: All right. The second motion for judgment of acquittal is denied. There is sufficient evidence for a reasonable juror to find the defendant guilty on all three charges. There's certainly sufficient evidence for this to go to the jury. And for my reasons also stated previously, the motion is denied.
All right. Can we take a look at the jury instructions now? I think we can get through these pretty efficiently so that we can have them ready to go when we bring the jury back tomorrow.
So who's going to handle this on behalf of the State?