Matt Murphy (4:05)

Well, that's one of the most tragic things. And tragedy is not the right word because he committed this right. Tragedy is when somebody gets hit by a bus. But with these little girls, seven and nine, and I think my fellow panel members probably had this experience, too, when it comes to little kids, you have to do what's called, qualify them. You have to establish that they can tell the truth from a lie. If you're going to call them to the stand, 7 and 9 is pretty clearly within that range. Witness wise, almost certainly you're going to call them. The question is when. And in the press conference, the state police spokeswoman said she characterized his statements as an admission more than a confession, which I thought was really interesting, meaning maybe he admitted being there, but maybe he's got some spin to it. And there's a lot of details that we still don't know. But number one, this is the first thing that I would do if I was the prosecutor. Of course, you want search warrants on his computers and you want to find out if there's anything indicating an interest possibly in the girls, whether there's robbery, whether there's some other. You're on a search for motive at this point. But the DA in this jurisdiction already announced he's going to seek the death penalty. And of course, this has death penalty written all over it. You've got two victims, which means the multiple murder aspect alone is a special circumstance In Arkansas, even if this was a robbery gone wrong, it is a special circumstance, meaning it's qualified for the death penalty. And then if it goes death, I think that maybe the best place, if you're going to call one of those girls, I think you call the older one and you do it in the penalty phase. And because the jury's already.

Phil Holloway (5:50)

What if they're an eyewitness, though? Right? So what if, what if you need them to be to come to court and to say, this is what I saw, this is what I heard. Because if he made an admission and not a full confession, maybe there's some gaps that need to be cleared up and maybe they're the only eyewitnesses.

Matt Murphy (6:06)

Yeah, that's right. And if it's. If you're talking about a nine year old, I wouldn't hesitate for a second in a case like this. I mean, it's something, it's brutal. But I don't think the testimony is going to be anything close to the trauma that they've already experienced in witnessing the slaughter of their two parents. Those are kind of my thoughts on it.

Phil Holloway (6:24)

Well, you mentioned the presser we've got. Let's go ahead and play SOT1. We got Colonel Mike Hager discussing that. This appears to be a completely random event. Let's just play SOT1 and then we'll talk about it on the other side.

Matt Murphy (6:39)

We have no reason to believe that there was any known association between our suspects and our victims. There's nothing to indicate that at all. It appears to be a completely random event.

Phil Holloway (6:56)

All right, Dave Aronberg, look, you were the state's attorney in, in Florida, you know, Palm beach camp for a long time. You know, we all know, a lot of our audience knows that prosecutors aren't required to prove motive. And recently in the Coburger case, we were all frustrated because we didn't know what the motive was. A lot of times, though, juries want to know what the motive is, right? So, Dave, if you're the prosecutor, what are you going to do to go back and see if there's some way that you can develop a motive on this case, or are we left with it being something completely random without any other explanation?

Dave Ehrenberg (7:34)

Bill, you're right that the elements of this charge do not require motive. But the jurors always want to know the why. And that was an issue in the Coburger case. Even though they had plenty of evidence against him, they had that guy dead to rights. I think the prosecutors were reluctant to go to trial, at least in part, because they couldn't figure out why he did it. And I think that's something prosecutors want to find out here. Why? Perhaps he's just a co worker type loner who is just a sociopath. After all, he's on this hiking trail dressed in all black, wearing a backpack. It looks premeditated to me. Looks like he had some planning here. Right, which would qualify him for the death penalty as a first degree murder charge. And. And it could be a aggravator. At least in Florida it's an aggravator when you have a cold, calculated killing. So all that's going to be used against him. But as far as the why, go back to what Matt said about looking through his phone and his searches, Internet searches, to try to see is there a connection at all? And if there's not a connection directly with this couple or the kids, maybe there's a reason why he stalked people at a park. Because there's now some evidence that he could be tied to another murder that is unsolved. The cold case in Vermont.

Phil Holloway (8:55)

Right.

Dave Ehrenberg (8:55)

Of a dean of the university there at Vermont State. So this could be a guy who's like Kohlberger, just some sociopath who wants to be a serial killer. And by the way, I don't know if you have it, but if you can show his mug shot. I've seen a lot of mug shots in my day. This rivals the Nick Nolte mugshot. This is. Yeah, look at that guy. I mean, guilty. That's what I would say if I was a jerk. I don't need to hear evidence guilty just by him.

Phil Holloway (9:19)

Well, a lot of people like Coburger, right? A lot of people said Co Burger was just, you know, a weirdo. They weirded him out. They freaked. The barber who was cutting his hair said that she felt something was off about him. His eyes looked soulless. And we've got a that sot too. Let's go ahead and play that. This is the barber, Adriana Ruiz Avalos. Let's roll. Sock two. As soon as I saw him, something fell off about him. He looked pretty Scary. He didn't look like he was okay. He's. He was very timid. He would. He.

Adriana Ruiz Avalos (9:58)

He was always with his head down.

Phil Holloway (10:00)

Long hair covering his face. His eyes just looked sunken. Pretty, kind of like soulless is what I could describe. All right, well, clearly her opinions are not admissible in court. Now, what she saw and things that she observed might very well be. And she could be a witness. Like I said, this is a woman who watches true crime documentaries, and she said that she wanted to do her part to. To try to catch this guy if he was the one they were. They were looking for. But, you know, what do you. What do you do with. With this kind of information? How do you present to a jury that this guy just had a weird personality? Because as we'll see here in a minute, I don't want to jump too far ahead. We'll see that he had problems, at least as a school teacher in Texas. He had some. Let's just call it some strange behaviors that we're going to get to. But how do you present a witness like this who's got these feelings, and how do you try to sort of convey that to a jury? Let's start with you, Matt.

Matt Murphy (11:05)

Well, you know, and I know Dave has had this experience before, too. One of the fascinating things about serial killers is you often hear people say that about their eyes. My Andrew Erdialis case, I had every survivor that encountered that guy, I think, without exception, made some comment about the way his eyes looked, and he's gonna be there, so the jury's gonna see that. Now, I don't think this woman is necessarily a critical witness. One thing, just quick, funny side note, CNN ran a picture saying that he was still wearing his barber smock, his barber apron or whatever, which, of course, they took that off there in the barbershop. I thought that was kind of funny. No hack on cnn, they were trying to put it all together, but they removed the clothing, of course, for forensic testing as soon as he's arrested. But that thing about the eyes is. It is a really interesting feature about serial killers and about people. This soulless look. And, boy, that mug shot. I'm with Dave 100% on that. That thing is. I mean, one of the things about serial killers is oftentimes they are so. They're like chameleons and they blend in. That guy looks like a serial killer, you know, and I love that. Nick Nolte. Yeah, It's. It's got. It's got the same hair look. But of course, this guy is if he did it. And it sure sounds like he did. He's a, he is a real monster and he looks like one.

Phil Holloway (12:28)

And the other thing about serial killers is sometimes when they get arrested, maybe they've been active for a while and we just don't know it. And as Dave mentioned, you know, he's being looked at in connection with maybe some other stuff elsewhere. But there's always these, let's just say, odd things in their background. In fact, two years ago, before he was arrested in this case, he alarmed some teachers, excuse me, some parents about his teaching style at a Texas school. Let's go ahead and play sock three and we can talk about that on the other side.

Adriana Ruiz Avalos (13:02)

He started to talk to me about just things that a 10 year old might say that stuck out to him. You know, Mr. McGann, you know, loves to play tag at recess. He, he, he plays truth or dare with the girls, you know, and then I started hearing these things like he's, he's giving out candy. He, he gives candy out in class, but really it's for the girls. Or you know, he, he's bringing sonic drinks sometimes to special girls in the class. And, and these are the sort of things that started unrolling throughout the year that, that got our spidey senses up as par of girls who felt like their daughters were being groomed, who were in his class on a regular basis, went to the district. Some of these parents went to the school and the principal and the district and said, hey, there are inappropriate things happening in the classroom. A daughter sat in his lap in the classroom. A child overheard him speaking to a girl that he wished he could date her when her what age? These girls were 9 and 10.

Matt Murphy (14:15)

Oh my gosh.

Phil Holloway (14:18)

All right, so yeah. So here's what I want to know. All right, Based on that, is it possible that the girls were his target? Is that who he was initially after and the parents, you know, got in the way? Is that what's going on? I mean, these parents were talking in a group chat and they were alarmed by these special lunches where certain girls would remain in the classroom and you know, he, and encourage some girls to, to sit on his lap. I mean, you know, this is really, really creepy stuff. Now it may or may not be relevant to the trial of this case, to the issues that would be presented at trial. But Dave, talk to us about how prosecutors can and sometimes cannot use, let's just call it prior bad acts, things like it. Let's say you want to have the jury know what These parents just told us. But the rules of evidence might get in the way. What do you think?

Dave Ehrenberg (15:13)

You can't show that since someone did something in the past that they must have committed this crime. It's called propensity evidence. You can't show propensity evidence, but if you can bring it in in another way, like through motive, it can come in. So perhaps that's the prosecutor's theory of the case, is that he's obsessed with little girls, and the girls were the target, and they have evidence of motive by his actions as a teacher. And you have to convince a judge to let it in. But motive, pattern MO that could be admissible here. But just by showing that he did it because he had prior bad acts, that alone is not enough to be admissible. But I think they've got enough evidence here. I mean, they've got the girls as witnesses. They've got people who found him to be creepy, and they saw him walking with all black and the backpack in the middle of a national forest. I mean, that is weird behavior. And apparently it got lots of other evidence against him. So I think they got him. But, yes, again, it goes back to the why. And if you can show why he did it, you are really much closer to a conviction.

Phil Holloway (16:23)

All right, Matt, what do you. Matt, what do you think about my theory that maybe. Maybe the children, the daughters were the intended victims? And also, what do you think about whether the DA might be able to bring in some of this, let's just call it allegations of bad behavior when he was teaching in Texas? What do you think?

Matt Murphy (16:42)

So Dave's absolutely right. Number one, there's a. And it goes back hundreds of years where this. This idea of propensity evidence is generally inadmissible. So, like, if you're a bank robber and there's a bank rob down the street, you don't. You don't get to convict that guy simply because he's done it before.

Phil Holloway (17:00)

Okay?

Matt Murphy (17:01)

But certain states have addressed this. California being one of them, passed evidence code section 1108 about 20 years ago. And when I did this, I did sex crimes for four years before I went into the Homstead Unit. And in California, believe it or not, for all the craziness that we've got in that, in that state, you are actually allowed to bring in prior sex acts and prior convictions and prior uncharged conduct. So it may potentially depending on the law in the state of Idaho. And Dave's 100% right here. He nailed it. That is the law. That's common Law that's everywhere. But certain jurisdictions have tried to address that because in certain crimes, especially sex crimes, I think that the law and society, we've all kind of started to catch up to the idea that these guys are a little bit different. And that's why I really would love to see what they find on his computers. Because if there's child pornography on there, and I'm totally spitballing here, we don't know, they might just have a theory that they're able to introduce it and that, that could, that could change things. Not in the guilt phase. And again, Dave's 100% spot on guilt phase wise doesn't sound like they're going to need it. But that little girl, that nine year old I think is going to be able to fill in a lot of the lot of the blanks, answer a lot of those questions in the penalty phase. That's where it could be incredibly valuable if he's trying to get a little girl he's done for in the state of Arkansas, if they really speak.

Phil Holloway (18:28)

Speaking of that penalty phase, I hope we don't wind up with Coburger with a lot of unknowns and no motive known and things like that. And look for taking these parents away from these kids. In my opinion, I think that that ought to qualify for the death penalty. But we'll leave it there for this particular block. And when we come back, Adam Schiff is officially being investigated now by the Department of Justice. The I think it's The Maryland Attorney. U.S. attorney, if I'm not mistaken, is investigating Senator Adam Schiff from California for mortgage fraud. Stay tuned.

Jack Campbell (19:03)

More and more Americans are prioritizing their health and getting back in shape. But diet and cardio alone are not enough. If you really want to build muscle and burn fat, you have to do strength training. That's why I want to tell you about Don and the team at Jacked Up Fitness. Their all in one home gyms are already best in class. And their all new X series elevates home fitness to a whole new level. The Jacked Up Power Rack X Treme lets you do hundreds of exercises, basically everything you used to do at the gym, all from the comfort of your own spare room or garage. It features a completely upgraded cable crossover system. And if you're new to strength training, they offer a free Get Jacked up program that is full body video workouts. Simply press play and follow along. So no more excuses. It's time to take control of your fitness. Go to getjackedup.com and sign up for their free training program. And when you're ready to purchase your own jacked up Power Rack Xtreme, use my promo code MK to save yourself 10% at checkout. That's getjackedup.com code MK at checkout.

Phil Holloway (20:07)

And now Senator Adam Schiff is being investigated for alleged mortgage fraud after the DOJ received criminal referrals. So let me just sort of set the stage here of what's going on with Adam Schiff. Right. He's the senator in California. He's one of the two. And of course he was a congressman before that. So he's been in Washington a long time. When folks go to Washington, they need a place to stay. So what does he do? He buys a house. He buys a house in Maryland. He refinances it a couple of times because the interest rate was over 5%. Nothing wrong with having a second house. Nothing wrong with refinancing to get a better interest rate. But there is something wrong with claiming something is your primary residence when it in fact is not. Because he also has a condo back in California and that condo is, you know, he's required to be a resident of the state of California to be, you know, their senator. And also because he claimed that condo was his primary residence, he gets a financial benefit there. I think it was a savings of upwards of $7,000 in like a homestead exemption because that was his primary residence. But he tells the, the banks that the Maryland house is his primary residence. Why? Because you get better loan terms when you have a primary residence. Because if you have two places to live and you got two mortgages, let's say, let's say you fall on hard times where you get booted out of office and you lose your six figure salary, the first mortgage that you aren't going to pay is going to be your second home. You're going to pay the mortgage on the house where you lay your head at night. And that's why this matter. It's against the law. It's a crime. Marilyn Mosby, who used to be the prosecutor in Baltimore, Freddie Gray, she was prosecuted by the Department of Justice and she was convicted. Other people are. It happens under all administrations. This is actually a fairly routine type of case. So I want to go ahead and bring our panel back in. Dave, Matt, you guys have been following this story. To me, I think this is an open and shut case of mortgage fraud. Dave, what do you think?

Dave Ehrenberg (22:23)

I'm not there yet, my friend. Now, if you're going to compare it to Marilyn Mosby's case, keep in mind, Marilyn Mosby's conviction for mortgage fraud was overturned on appeal. There's a jury instruction issue, but it was overturned. Now, as far as Adam Schiff, because he has been such a critic of President Trump and because it is President Trump's DOJ that has gone after him. If I were his defense lawyers, if he is charged, I would look into a claim of selective prosecution. So I would want to know how many other members of Congress who have two homes who have ever been prosecuted for this. Plus, are there people outside of Congress who have been prosecuted for this when it comes to homes that are used for business, meaning not second homes for vacation, not temporary part time homes, but he actually had a home, Maryland, because that's where he was in fact, apparently most of the time. So is that different? Is that normally prosecuted? If you're in a similar situation, if you can show me all that, then yes, if he is charged, that's bad for him. But because of the politics here, I do want more information as to whether they're just picking on a guy, whether this is normal in similar cases in other professions. And I would say this not just as a commentator, but especially as his defense lawyer, because you know, they're going to dig into this.

Phil Holloway (23:45)

Oh, are you his defense lawyer? No, you're not.

Dave Ehrenberg (23:49)

If I were.

Phil Holloway (23:50)

If I know, yeah, I know you're not. I was just teasing, you know. Matt, what do you make of this? Because, you know, I think some of Dave's points are kind of valid, but I do also believe that the Department of Justice under Republican administrations, under Democrat administrations, you know, this is a common crime. This happens a lot. Right. And so to maintain the integrity of the lending markets, the Department of Justice, when there's a federal nexus like there is when you got Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and all that involved, they do take this seriously and they do prosecute people for it. So, Matt, is this selective prosecution?

Matt Murphy (24:30)

Well, we, we don't really know yet. Of course, a lot of Democrats who support him would say that it's a, it's a witch hunt and it's retaliation for his criticism of President Trump. This strikes me very similar to the Letitia James case who's the Attorney General of New York who actually civilly prosecuted Donald Trump for loan fraud. So one of the, and of course, look, he is, it has, he hasn't been charged yet. So it's, this is presumption of innocence plus.

Phil Holloway (25:01)

Right.

Matt Murphy (25:01)

But one of the really interesting issues for me on this one, and I was going to kick this One, back to the panel. Adam Schiff was famously censured by the House of Representatives for dishonesty, dishonesty and conduct unbecoming a member of the House for his involvement in what is now commonly referred to as the Russia hoax, the Russia collusion hoax. And he was on the, he was the tip of the spear on that for the Democrats at the time. So there are a lot of political motivations to go after him. But my question to the panel, and I don't know the answer to this, when you're talking about moral turpitude and if the case were to actually proceed to trial, is that something that would be admissible, like a conviction for petty theft for the audience or any crime of moral turpitude where somebody's convicted that's admissible to impeach their testimony, their credibility, should they testify? Okay, so I don't know the answer to that. I think it's, I've never encountered a witness that was centered by the House of Representatives for dishonesty.

Phil Holloway (25:57)

This is a case of first impression on many fronts. Look, a spokesperson for Schiff has said the lenders who provided the mortgages for both homes were well aware of then representative shifts, congressional service and his intended year round use of both homes, neither of which were vacation homes. Look, speaking of his credibility, I have no reason to doubt that that statement is correct. I mean, he's going to use both of these places, you know, throughout the year at various times, maybe roughly equally or maybe a little bit not. But the statement doesn't really talk about him declaring one of them as his primary residence. We've got some sound on this. Let's play SOT5, which is Adam Schiff, where he's claiming California as his primary residence.

Matt Murphy (26:49)

I think just about every member of Congress has a residence in their state and a residence back in D.C. since we're in session much of the week and people make a family decision decision where they're going to have their kids and. But our principal residence, our primary residence is in California. It always has been and always will be.

Phil Holloway (27:06)

And so, you know, we talk about what's admissible against people in court. Well, prior statements, out of court statements or inconsistent statements are, I mean, if he, if he said under oath on a mortgage application that Maryland was his primary residence and he's, you know, he's there he is stating that California is his primary residence, which I guess he's got to say, because if he says that he's no longer a resident of California, maybe he loses his seat out there. I don't know. But we know that that statement, let's just say hypothetically, he's prosecuted Dave. We know that statements like that could surely be used against him, right?

Dave Ehrenberg (27:44)

Yeah. It's not hearsay because it's a statement by a party opponent. It's a statement by the defendant if he is charged. And also, Phil, thank you as the host for moving on from Matt's question, which stumped us all on the first episode. Matt, you gotta clear those with us. Man, that's a tough law school question. Whether censure could be used in a court of law against him while he's a defendant. The answer to the question, if he takes a stand, it could be used to impeach him. But as far as being used as evidence against him, if he doesn't, I don't know. I don't think anyone knows. And hopefully maybe the viewers can.

Phil Holloway (28:17)

I think, I think it can. I think. I think if you prosecute him and you got these documents. Because that's the evidence, right? The documents that he signed that said, look, this is my primary residence, so give me the lower interest rate, you know, the jury can see that. And I think you can authenticate that. That video, I think it's relevant. I think it's. I think it's evidence and direct. It's directly on point, Bill.

Dave Ehrenberg (28:39)

I'm not talking about the video. The video is admissible. I agree with you on that. I'm talking about evidence of the censure.

Phil Holloway (28:45)

I think the censure is not coming in. I would. Look, it's a great law school question, great academic question. It's a fun thing for us. I don't think the censure, though, the rules of evidence don't say anything about censures being admissible. It talks about convictions and things like that. I don't think that would rise to the level of something that would be admissible. It would be fun to see it, but I don't think it's ever going to happen. Last thoughts, guys?

Matt Murphy (29:10)

Yeah, well, I knew I was going to be the people way smarter than me today. I could not figure that out. I thought that was an interesting angle. And of course, there, that defense that you just mentioned, you know, that where they're saying, hey, look, he was distinguishing that between a. A residence and a vacation home. And I don't know, I mean, look, we've all seen videos of Adam Schiff saying nobody's above the law. We've seen about a thousand of those during the, you know, the Russian collusion investigation. And all that. So he's presumed innocent. I think this has a, a long way to go and I'm kind of with, I'm with Dave on that one. I, I really need to hear more, you know, and that's a completely apolitical opinion there. I really, as a lawyer, I'd want to, I want to hear more and see what else they got.

Phil Holloway (29:54)

Well, I'll tell you what's not apolitical. The president's weighed in on Truth Social. I think we have, we have that Truth Social post from President Trump. We can go ahead and show that. We've got Donald Trump saying, I have always suspected shifty Adam Schiff was a scam artist. And now I learned that Fannie Mae's financial crimes division have concluded that Adam Schiff has engaged in a sustained pattern of possible mortgage fraud. Adam Schiff said his primary residence was in Maryland. To get a cheaper mortgage and rip off America when he must live in California because he was a congressman from California. I always knew Adam Schiff was a crook. The fraud began with the refinance of his Maryland property on February 6, 2009 and continued through multiple transactions until the Maryland property was correctly designated as a second home in October of 2020. Mortgage fraud is very serious and crooked. Adam Schiff. Now a senator needs to be brought to justice. All right. That's what the president has to say. We'll see how it all plays out. Look, coming up, we are going to move on to the Donna Adelson trial. This is the so called mastermind murder plot, right? She's supposedly the matriarch mastermind of this murder for hire. Her lawyer is responding to rumors of a plea deal and new revelations on the shooter who killed four people last week in a Manhattan high rise. Stay with us.

Jack Campbell (31:30)

We talk a lot on this show about personal freedom. Well, part of that is owning your privacy. And let me tell you, if you have ever googled your name and found your home address, your phone number or even your income floating around, it is not a coincidence that data is bought and sold by data brokers without your consent. This is why I want to tell you about Incogni. It's a service that fights back on your behalf. Incogni contacts those shady sites and gets your personal data removed automatically. No forms, no emails. They handle the back and forth with these brokers and they just update you through their simple dashboard. It can really be a relief if you care about your privacy and want fewer spam calls, junk emails and less risk of identity theft. Consider this step and Right now, you can get 60% off an annual plan@incogni.com Megan. Use the code Megan when you check out to get your discount of up to 60% off. That's huge. 60. Okay. It's spelled I N C-O-G-N-I I N C-O-G dash N-I dot com Megan. Use that code Megan on checkout and take back control of your data with Incogni.

Phil Holloway (32:41)

All right, our next topic is the Donna Adelson case, set for trial coming up later this month in Tallahassee, Florida. This is being called the matriarch mastermind case because Donna Adelson is a mother of someone who's already been convicted of killing her son in law. And there's a lot of background here. This is actually a very complicated case, but fortunately, Dave Aronberg knows all about it. Of course, he's a longtime prosecutor in the state of Florida. And Dave, as I understand it, you actually knew the victim in the case. So why don't you tell us what's happened up to this point and what this case is all about.

Dave Ehrenberg (33:23)

Yeah, thanks, Phil. This one is personal to me because I was friends with Danny Markell. He was an FSU law professor, and I knew him when I was a state senator in Tallahassee. He was a great guy. And he had a marriage to Wendy and the marriage dissolved and there was a fight over the two kids. And Wendy wanted the kids back in south Florida. Wendy is from south Florida and she has parents and she has a brother down in south Florida. Now, Tallahassee is about a seven hour drive from where they live in Broward. And so she wanted them down there. Danny Markell was doing very well as an FSU law professor, wanted the kids to stay in Tallahassee. And the mother in law here, Donna Adelson, was getting very upset. And she told Wendy that you need to do whatever it takes essentially to get those kids back down here. Like for example, you should threaten to have the kids convert to Catholicism, Christianity because the kids are Jewish and Danny was a religious Jew. And so she was saying you should do whatever he takes. In fact, dress them up in Nazi clothes and say that's what's gonna happen unless they go and move to south Florida. And then they offered to bribe Danny Markell, pay him a million dollars to have the kids move to south Florida. Danny said no to all this stuff. And then he found out that the mother in law, Donna, was badmouthing him, trashing him in front of the kids, in front of his kids. And so Danny moved the court to have supervised visitation so that Donna Adelson, the mother in law, could not have unsupervised visitation with the kids. And after that, they decided the Adelsons to put a plan into action. And that would be to get hitmen to kill Danny Markell. And how do we know that? Because two hitmen went up to Danny's door in Tallahassee and killed him. Shot him to death. And one of the hitmen flipped. And the two hitmen were convicted. One was sentenced to life in prison. The other one got seven years in addition to sentence because he was the one who flipped.

Phil Holloway (35:34)

Let me ask. Can I ask you a real quick question? Not to cut you off? These hitmen, right? Weren't they gang affiliated? And weren't. And. And wasn't one of these hitman the baby daddy of. I guess it's Charlie, which is Donna's son, the. The dentist, I guess, period. Donna's in Miami. That was his girlfriend at the time. But these hitmen were connected to her. And weren't they connected to some kind of a gang?

Dave Ehrenberg (36:01)

Well, the Adelsons didn't know hitmen. And it took police a while to figure out the connection between these hitmen. One of them was involved with the latin king's gang, a very violent gang. And the Adelsons. The Adelsons had this thriving dental practice in south Florida. They were making bank. And then they found a connection. Charlie Adelson, Wendy's brother, Danny's brother in law. He was a smooth operator in south Florida. He drove a Lamborghini with a license plate that said maestro. He was making money dating shotgirls, traveling to Thailand to do God knows what over there. And he was the kind of guy involved with steroids and other drugs, living the high life. And he had this girlfriend, Katie McBanowa, who's a shot girl at a club. And she had a baby daddy who was the hitman. And that's the connection. So then Katie was charged. She was the conduit, the shotgirl. And she had to go through two trials. The first trial was 11 to 1. Hung jury, one juror holdout. They tried her again, convicted. She's now in jail, life in prison. Then they went after Charlie step by step. That's the brother in law. And they got him convicted, life in prison. Now they're going after the mother in law, Donna. Her day of reckoning is upon us. And everyone is asking, what about Wendy? Well, they have not charged Wendy yet, But I think that that is probably going to come if and when Donna is convicted.

Phil Holloway (37:20)

Well, we want to talk about that because Wendy, Matt Murphy, Wendy was a witness for the prosecution in I guess all of the criminal trials that have taken place because you got the two, got the two hitmen, you got the shotgirl, you got the brother in law that have all been convicted. And I think she testified for the prosecution under some type of grant of immunity. So Matt, how does that complicate things as we try to look forward to this trial?

Matt Murphy (37:50)

So she was given what's called use immunity. In other words, she's immunized for the statements that she says in, in court, on the stands. They can't use those statements against her, but they can use anything else that they find during the course of the investigation. And one of the most fascinating things about Charlie Adelson's trial was the testimony of Wendy's ex boyfriend, this guy who came in and he has an incredible story about how she, the day of the murder, Wendy is talking about, hey, you know, when are you, when are you leaving for this trip? Because he had some sort of a business trip that he was leaving that would have taken him right by the murder scene and he decided to leave the night before. And right after the murder he gets a knock on the door by the police and. And Wendy Adelson's friend essentially pointed her finger at him as a potential suspect. And all of that goes into what Dave is talking about. Like they just might. I mean they have considered her what's called an uncharged co conspirator the entire time. But it's, you know, you need the evidence. It can be obvious, people can suspect, they can know in their heart. But as prosecutors, you know, we've gotta have the actual, the evidence to convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. And certainly there for Charlie, he went down. Certainly there for both hitmen. The woman that was the conduit and with Donna Adelson, you know, she's got a built in defense. Here it's known as accessory after the fact. What I predict, and I'm sure Dave's way ahead of me on this one, her defense is going to come in and say yep, she did all that stuff, she made payments, but it was only after the murder and she didn't know what Charlie was up to and, and she tried to help him once it was done. I think that's going to be some version of what we're going to hear defense wise. And it's a pretty big sentencing difference in the state of Florida between first degree Murder or being a co conspirator on that and an accessory after the fact.

Phil Holloway (39:44)

Yeah. And there's so many twists and turns that the evidence as I understand it to be against the matriarch Donna Adelson is circumstantial. But some of the circumstances are pretty compelling. And we're going to continue to cover this here on MK True Crime. But on Megyn Kelly's show the other day we were talking about some of this and I think there was a video, right. The Donna Adelson tried to leave to go to Thailand. Not Thailand, Vietnam. She had a one way ticket to Vietnam. And Vietnam has no extradition treaty with the United States. So she and her husband were boarding a flight when they were arrested by the FBI literally in the jetway to get on the airplane almost a year ago now in Miami. But prior to that there was this phone call where Adel Donna Adelson was on a jail call talking to her incarcerated son Charlie, who's convicted of paying these hitmen right through the shotgirl as the conduit. And he hangs up the phone. But the call doesn't exactly disconnect. And so she's unaware of this. But the conversations that she's having to other people in the room with her are being recorded. And she makes statements about looking for countries that don't have extradition treaties and all sorts of things. Now that could be proof that she's involved from the beginning all the way through the end. But it also could be consistent with a defense of being maybe an accessory after the fact. It's going to be very, very fascinating. But here in recent days there's been rumors of a potential plea deal. You know how we had the Coburger case and at the very last minute there was a plea deal. Well, a lot of times that happens on the eve of trial. So to spe that brings people to the negotiating people. So there was some talk that the DA might offer Donna a deal that would get her out of jail on the condition that she testify against Wendy. And I think our colleagues Mark Iglosh, Jonas Spielberg and Mark Garagos mentioned this as a possibility on the show two days ago on Wednesday. But since then we've had a development regarding that rumor and We've got a SOT. Let's play SOT 5B which is the state attorney Jack Campbel. And what he has to say about.

Dave Ehrenberg (42:05)

This, it's just totally unfounded and untrue. No such plea offer has been extended.

Sponsor Voice (42:10)

This rumor to have any impact on that jury selection.

Phil Holloway (42:13)

Well that's my concern and that's why.

Matt Murphy (42:15)

The ethical rules allow on pre trial.

Phil Holloway (42:18)

Publicity for corrections of things like this.

Matt Murphy (42:20)

And that's why I so quickly wanted to come out and correct it.

Phil Holloway (42:26)

Now it's interesting to note that he didn't say we never made any plea offer at all. He simply says if you listen carefully, he says that we didn't make the plea, that we didn't make the plea offer. That's that the rumor was about. Right. So where this goes who. But who knows? He did clearly say he's, he's preparing for trial. And today, Friday 8th August is the final pretrial hearing before jury selection kicks off later this month. So where it goes from here I don't know. But we'll have to pay close attention. Dave, do you think there's going to be a plea deal?

Dave Ehrenberg (43:05)

No. And there's no way that Donna Adelson is going to flip on her daughter Wendy. This whole thing was about protecting Wendy from the beginning. So she's not selling her out. There's not many more years that Donna has left. It's a lot more living that Wendy has to do and so there's no way she's flipping on her daughter. One thing to note, note I'll leave you with this, is that for a while, for years before the Adelson started to get arrested, they, they got away with this. The kids that they wanted down in South Florida away from Tallahassee, immediately after Dan was murdered, those kids were moved down with Wendy to South Florida. And not only that, the family removed Dan Markel's last name from the kid's last name. They changed the kid's name. Wiping out their father from existence.

Phil Holloway (43:53)

Yeah.

Dave Ehrenberg (43:53)

And that to me was such a tragedy because Dan lived for his kids and then these, the family got everything they wanted for a while and then eventually the long arm of justice caught up with it.

Phil Holloway (44:03)

All right, we'll be, we'll be watching it and we'll see. I want to move on to our, our final topic. Shane Tamura, the Manhattan high rise shooter. Las Vegas police have released body camera footage, 911 calls and documents related to past incidents involving this shooter while he lived in Las Vegas. Let's see, we've got SOT 6 which is Shane Tamura's mother talking about self harm. Let's roll slot six.

Dave Ehrenberg (44:34)

When he initially called you, did he.

Phil Holloway (44:36)

Tell you like how he wanted to hurt himself? No, he was just crying and said.

Adriana Ruiz Avalos (44:40)

I'm not going to be able to go any further.

Phil Holloway (44:43)

Okay. All right, so a suicide note was reportedly found on Tamira, who shot himself on the 33rd floor of the building in the offices of Rudin Management, According to Mayor Eric Adams. He said the preliminary investigation uncovered that Tamira took the wrong elevator. We also have some issues related to mental health. And, you know, there was notes saying that he wanted his brain to be studied for, I guess, purposes of cte. The concussions syndrome. Let's roll. Slot seven. We got some body cam footage based off the statements that he's made.

Matt Murphy (45:26)

The postman, Mason, not wanting to be here anymore.

Phil Holloway (45:33)

This is it for him. Gotcha. So he's been calm and cooperative with us.

Matt Murphy (45:38)

Okay, tell us the other man in this bag or.

Phil Holloway (45:42)

Okay, just a free R. That's. That's it. That was just a thing, you know. All right, Matt, Dave, look, we've got victims in this case who were killed that. That, you know, neither they nor their families will ever see any kind of justice because, of course, he. He took his own life. But I'm curious to hear your thoughts, Matt. What do you think the families might be able to do? Is there any recourse that they have anywhere to get any kind of justice for this?

Matt Murphy (46:32)

Well, it remains to be seen. You know, and there's. There's two tracks to achieve justice in the American legal system, of course. One is criminal prosecution. The other is civil. Civil suits, where you sue for what are known as torts. Right. I don't know. I think we have to see a lot more. I can tell you this, though. Having worked homicides for 17 years, the ones that are always the most senseless and the ones that break your heart horribly are the ones where there's mental illness, because even if he hadn't killed himself, if these are legitimate, organic problems that this guy's having, and it appears the more we learn, he really did have a mental health history, those cases can be very, very difficult to prosecute in their own right, and in, you know, mental health impacts intent and all an entire host of ways that it can impact the criminal justice system. And, you know, these families are consistently denied justice in cases where mentally ill people go out and commit murder. And they're always senseless, and it's just. They're always horrific. And I just. My heart goes out to this, to the poor family. It's just. It is really kind of gives me flashbacks to some of those old cases.

Phil Holloway (47:48)

Well, the families are still being traumatized because, you know, there's warped Internet sickos that are out there celebrating the deaths of these victims. In particular, Wesley Lapatner, 43 years old, was a. A mom that was killed in the lobby of her. That Manhattan office building as she was going on. And we have people that are celebrating her death. Let's roll. Side eight.

Dave Ehrenberg (48:18)

I personally, today, I'm gonna celebrate by taking the day off and maybe doing a little bit of baking.

Jack Campbell (48:24)

Let me know how you're gonna celebrate.

Phil Holloway (48:29)

Baby. That's what I've been waiting for. That's what it's all about. To everyone who keeps on saying that.

Jack Campbell (48:41)

Blackstone CEO had a husband, why don't.

Phil Holloway (48:44)

We ask her husband, if he had.

Sponsor Voice (48:46)

The choice, if he could bring her.

Jack Campbell (48:48)

Back and have her here on Earth, but he would have to give up all of his money and struggle like.

Phil Holloway (48:54)

The rest of us.

Dave Ehrenberg (48:55)

And it's so hard, hard to say goodbye to another CEO.

Phil Holloway (49:07)

Grab your ass on purpose. You know, I. Words. Words fail me. I. I have no idea how we reached this place with our culture. In this society where you have people celebrating the merc. Just because someone is successful, they. They are hated. You know, you don't just become a CEO because somebody hands you something. You typically have to work your ass off for it, right? And so I don't know if this is just jealousy or what, but real quick, in about 20 seconds, Dave, I want to give you the last word on that.

Dave Ehrenberg (49:44)

Wesley Patner was not just a mom. She was very charitable in the community. She was a leader in the community. And to see these people say these things is so despicable, you wonder what happened to their lives to make them embrace evil like they did. They have turned into the evil that they are now embracing. Shame on them. And hopefully one day they can look back upon their behavior and realize the hurt that they've caused. They're on the wrong side of this, clearly, and one day they'll realize it.

Phil Holloway (50:11)

All right, we'll leave it there. But before we go, let me just point this out. All of us who are contributors here at MK True Crime, more or less continue these conversations out into social media. So if you'd like to continue the conversation, you know, follow me on xilhollawayesq. Follow Dave, follow all the contributors. Our handles are on the screen during these shows and see what we have to say, because we are gonna continue these conversations there. And of course, we'll be following up on all these stories here on MK True Crime. And I wanna thank you, thank you, thank you for joining us here today. This was episode number two. We have many more to come, and please make sure you like and subscribe on YouTube. Follow us wherever you get your podcasts. We're MK True Crime on all social platforms. You'll find all the links you need@mktruechrime.com thanks and we'll see you next Wednesday.

Sponsor Voice (51:13)

This episode is brought to you by Huggies Little Movers. It's fun having a baby that loves to move, but it can be challenging. Find a diaper that can keep up with them. Huggies Little Movers is designed to move with your baby with either the double grip strips or the new HugFit 360 degree waistband. You can be confident relying on Huggies Little Movers for your active little ones. Huggies Little Movers made with double grip strips or the new HugFit 360 degree waistband so your little double can keep moving like you Huggies, we got you.