MK True Crime — Detailed Episode Summary

Episode Title: Adelson GUILTY On All Counts, Cardi B’s Legal Victory, New Murderous Mom Emerges
Podcast: MK True Crime
Host: Phil Holloway (with Dave Ehrenberg & Jonna Spielbore)
Release Date: September 5, 2025

Episode Overview

This episode breaks down three hot, headline-making legal cases:

1. The ongoing Donna Adelson “mother-in-law murder” trial in Florida, as the case nears verdict with explosive closing arguments.
2. The courthouse drama and brash victory of Cardi B, who prevailed in a civil suit filed by her former doctor’s office security guard.
3. The chilling Utah case of Corey Richards, a mother and children’s book author accused of murdering her husband—the same death that inspired her book.

All three hosts, drawing on experience in prosecution, criminal defense, and law enforcement, provide expert commentary, vivid analysis, and unfiltered reactions to courtroom antics. The episode also features highlights from entertaining and sometimes unbelievable trial testimony, closing arguments, listener Q&A, and the co-hosts’ signature rants.

1. The Donna Adelson Trial: “Mother-in-law Mastermind Murder”

Background & Setup (02:42–04:09)

• Donna Adelson is on trial in Leon County, Florida, accused of orchestrating a murder-for-hire plot to kill her former son-in-law, Dan Markel, after a protracted divorce and custody battle with her daughter, Wendy Adelson.
• Phil Holloway sets the stage: "We are nearing the end of the Donna Adelen trial, the so called mother in law mastermind murder trial currently underway in Leon County, Florida." (02:42)

The Defense’s (Weak?) Strategy (04:12–11:33)

Key Witness: Kristen Adamson (Wendy’s Divorce Lawyer)

• Adamson testifies the Adelson/Markel divorce was not highly contentious compared to other cases.
  • Kristen Adamson:
    “I wouldn't describe the divorce as particularly contentious... I think it was like any divorce where there were ups and downs... for the most part, we kind of settled it.” (05:02)
• Hosts and legal experts thoroughly doubt the effectiveness and credibility of this testimony.
  • Phil Holloway:
    “How are they supposed to be the ones who are the arbiters of what is and isn’t contentious?... It’s a subjective sort of descriptor.” (05:55)
  • Dave Ehrenberg:
    “Maybe to the garbage man, the trash doesn't smell. But to the resident who's not used to picking up trash... it reeks. Okay?” (06:38)
  • Jonna Spielbore:
    “I call bullshit... You don’t file motions over where your children are going to lay their little heads without it being contentious.” (08:40)

Sequestration Drama & Second "Expert" (11:33–14:56)

• Defense’s next expert (Linda Bailey) violates the rule of sequestration—she viewed another witness's testimony when she was supposed to remain outside the courtroom.
  • Judge:
    “There has been a second violation of the rule of sequestration by the defendant... Ms. Bailey should have not sat in the courtroom.” (11:33)
• The prosecutors express frustration:
  • Georgia Kaplan (prosecution):
    "I'd like them to stop violating the rule of sequestration. That would be the remedy I would seek." (12:36)
• Phil and Dave agree: Legal drama aside, the defense strategy is off. Bringing in legal experts to opine on the “normality” of divorce is weak:
  • Dave:
    “This shows the weakness of the defense.” (13:44)

Cross-Examination Fireworks (14:56–15:54)

• Georgia Kaplan shreds the “not-contentious” narrative on the stand:
  • “People's lives are impacted by the decisions that go on in court, which for you are routine... What is no big deal to us is a big deal to these litigants. Right?” (14:56–15:39)

The Defendant’s Dilemma: Testify or Stay Silent? (18:06–23:41)

• Donna spent weeks vacillating on whether to testify, despite having ample time.
  • Judge:
    “You had a whole lot of time. You had years. You had this entire trial.” (19:57, 24:08)
  • Dave:
    “Donna, with all of her hubris, wanted to testify... but cooler heads prevailed. Her lawyers won out.” (21:06)
• The moment she declines:
  • Judge:
    “What is your decision?...”
    Donna: “[At] this time I do not want to testify.” (22:59–23:19)
  • Jonna:
    “This would have been suicide by cross-examination.” (24:08)

Closing Arguments and The State’s Powerful Points (26:39–30:53)

• Prosecutor Georgia Kaplan evokes emotion, focuses on Markel as dedicated father, and hammers that the divorce was contentious to him, no matter what lawyers say.
  • Kaplan:
    “His downfall was brought about by the fact that his number one priority was maximizing his time with those little boys in the wake of a bitter divorce... Not contentious to whom? It was contentious to Dan Markell.” (26:59–27:36)
• Kaplan points to direct evidence:
  • Wiretapped call (“Does it involve me or other people? Well, probably both of us.”)
    “If anyone in that jury room wants to acquit her, make them tell you how that is not a confession.” (29:39–30:30)
• Dave Ehrenberg:
  “The strongest direct evidence is the license plate. Why did she have Danny Markell's license plate in her planner?” (28:03)
• The hosts agree the “run-of-the-mill divorce” defense has no weight:
  • Jonna: “That was a very powerful piece of her closing argument... If a jury is tuning out during closing, they probably already have an idea of what they're going to do in this case and it's just a matter of formality at this point.” (30:35)

TAKEAWAY

Verdict watch was underway as this episode recorded—hosts predict a conviction, and decisively critique the defense strategy, the witness antics, and Donna’s refusal to testify.

2. Cardi B’s Civil Trial — Victory and Courtroom Comedy

Case Background (32:43–33:36)

• Cardi B was facing a civil suit from her ex-security guard, alleging assault, battery, emotional distress, negligence, and false imprisonment after a verbal incident at her doctor’s office.

Trials & Testimony Highlights (34:15–41:46)

• Jonna:
  “This case should not have been brought... Some celebrities are now standing up and saying, I'd rather pay my lawyer than write a check for 2 cents on a frivolous case...” (38:57)
• The plaintiff describes a heated confrontation, claiming she was “body shamed” and threatened, but only a scratch as injury.
  • Plaintiff:
    "She started walling out. Like, this hit me... I'm looking at like, girl, I can't even hit you if I want to... I'm. You're bigger than me, and you're pregnant." (34:29–35:23)
• Jurors heard testimony about altercations, finger-pointing, and insults—but hosts note that no viable physical harm or actual damages were proven.
  • Dave:
    “The plaintiff sued for $24 million based on a scratch on her cheek, which she said needed surgery... but you have to show more.” (36:14)
  • “Cardi B plays into what is now being prized... authenticity. She is real, she is authentic, and she connected with the jury.” (41:46)

Funniest and Most Memorable Moments

• Examination about physical size—body-shaming turns into self-parody:
  • Phil:
    “So she's overweight, right? In your opinion.”
    Plaintiff: “No, I was calling her a...” (40:24–40:35)
• Silly courtroom questions:
  • “Yesterday you had black hair, short hair. Today it's blonde and long. Which one is your real hair?... They're wigs.” (42:15)
• Marker-throwing incident—Cardi B’s volatility versus provocation is played for laughs:
  • Cardi B fan: “I still love you even though you just threw some stuff at me.” (43:12)

TAKEAWAY

Hosts mock the suit’s premise and predictably celebrate Cardi B’s “authentic” and entertaining courtroom presence: The jury delivers a lightning-fast defense verdict.

3. Utah’s “Murderous Mom” Case: Corey Richards

Setup (45:46–46:43)

• Corey Richards, mother of three, stands accused in the upcoming “murder-by-poisoning” trial after her husband’s 2024 death.
• Post-mortem, she authored and promoted a children’s book about grief, discussing her loss on TV:
  • Corey Richards:
    “So my husband passed away unexpectedly last year... my kids and I kind of wrote this book on the different emotions and grieving processes that we've experienced...” (46:47)

The Charges and Alleged Evidence (47:28–49:49)

• Prosecutors say she poisoned her husband with fentanyl, tried and failed previously (e.g., poisoning sandwiches), and performed damning Google searches such as “how much is a lethal dose of fentanyl?” and "How long do life insurance companies take to pay?” on burner phones.
  • Dave Ehrenberg:
    “[Searched for] what is a lethal dose of fentanyl... very normal stuff for an innocent person.” (48:13)

Defense Analysis

• Multiple financial and fraud counts are mixed with the murder—defense will have to separate financial motive from actual murder.
  • Jonna:
    “A defense attorney is going to have to say... it's a big leap to go from being financially poor... to killing your husband and father of your three kids, who you love so dearly.” (49:49)

4. Listener Q&A and “Closing Arguments”

Adelson Fallout & Prosecution Predictions (51:20–52:53)

• Will more Adelsons be charged?
  Dave predicts that if Donna is convicted, Wendy Adelson will be charged next—possibly even Harvey, but his advanced age and minor role make this less likely.
  • “If Harvey is not charged, then I think he will not be charged at all... Although I think he was involved... he was a minor player.” (51:20)

Defense’s Trial Performance Critiqued (52:53)

• Listener Sonya: "Is it normal for what appears to be chaos and lack of preparedness by the defense?”
  Phil admits the presentation seemed disorganized and underwhelming, echoing the YouTube chat sentiment.

Cold Case Teaser (54:14–55:31)

• Jonna previews a 1992 Springfield, Missouri vanishing of three women (“The Springfield Three”)—a case ripe for future deep-dives: “Literally nobody has seen them since.”

Host Rants / “Closing Arguments” (56:07–62:05)

1. Dave Ehrenberg:
   Firmly predicts a guilty verdict for Donna Adelson:
   “There is no chance that Donna Adelson will be found not guilty... the mountain of evidence is there.” (56:07)
2. Phil Holloway:
   Highlights the legal significance of “advanced DNA” allowed in the Gilgo Beach case:
   “This ruling is significant because prosecutors can use this non-traditional DNA evidence, combining it with cell phone data that will link [Heuerman] to the crime scene.” (57:41)
3. Jonna Spielbore:
   Humorously campaigns for harsher penalties for “disturbing the peace”—namely, her own by new, rowdy neighbors:
   “I propose we elevate disturbing the peace to an offense with a punishment more in line with the level of pain it inflicts... punishable by... yeah, death.” (59:28)

Notable Quotes & Moments with Timestamps

• Dave Ehrenberg:
  “Maybe to the garbage man, the trash doesn't smell. But to the resident who's not used to picking up trash... it reeks.” (06:38)
• Jonna Spielbore:
  “I call bullshit.” (08:40)
• Georgia Kaplan (Prosecution):
  “If anyone in that jury room wants to acquit her, make them tell you how that is not a confession.” (30:15)
• On Cardi B’s authenticity:
  “She is real, she is authentic, and she connected with the jury.” (41:46)

Key Timestamps

• [04:59–05:55] — Defense witness claims the Adelson divorce “not contentious”
• [11:33–12:48] — Sequestration violation and judge’s ruling
• [14:56–15:54] — Cross-examination fireworks over emotional impact of divorce
• [19:42–23:41] — Donna’s indecision about testifying; final refusal
• [26:39–27:36] — Kaplan’s closing: Dan Markel’s perspective, not lawyers’, matters
• [29:39–30:30] — Kaplan on wiretap “confession”
• [33:36–39:41] — Cardi B lawsuit play-by-play and host reactions
• [46:47–48:13] — Corey Richards case: on-air book pitch & evidence review
• [56:07–57:41] — Dave’s rant: Adelson conviction “no chance” to avoid

Tone, Style & Delivery

Throughout, the hosts blend incisive legal breakdowns with lively, sometimes irreverent banter. The tone ranges from deeply analytical (breaking down evidence and trial tactics) to self-aware and comedic—most evident during the Cardi B and closing argument segments.

Summary Takeaways

• Donna Adelson’s Defense Flounders: The effort to minimize the volatility of the Markel divorce badly misses the mark with jurors and panelists alike; circumstantial and direct evidence against her is overwhelming.
• Cardi B Triumphs in Court: Her case is a master class in fighting frivolous celebrity lawsuits, with her wit and authenticity delighting even the judges and jury.
• Corey Richards’ Case Looms: Her murder trial is set to be a true media spectacle—a true-crime author who may have written her own confession.

Listener mailbags and comic rants round out a highly engaging, thorough true crime episode, leaving listeners fully up-to-date on three of the most notorious cases in the country.