I'm hoping that through the phone calls, where she is her real self, the jury say to themselves, 'what a bunch of crock!'

Wendi was the least credible witness …. more so than Rivera. Jeffrey, Magbanua and expert witnesses were the most credible.

Hey, they didn't find her guilty so she must have done something right. I wasn't too sure what her lawyer, the female, was getting at half the time.

I agree we can lying criminal face, trying too hard to look innocent.

Lisa, Where can I listen to the phone recordings? I can't find them. Thanks

That was laughable.

👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼

Very true

She's a great actress

Narcissistic

Please tell me what did she do in relation to the murder? She acted as a go between but I am not sure how?

Lol

DCF doesn’t have any use for her or any of them now!!😉

Not right that the very people who arranged all this get away with everything.

Great point

The 5 year statute of limitations was already up at the time of this trial. That's why she admitted to it.

Good god what difference does it make now? She is in jail for a long time. She has no means to compensate for this. You sound like a government hack

Happens 24/7 unfortunately

She got life anyway lol. Makes no difference now

OH YAY! She really did? I’m way behind in this case. I had a feeling, good to hear

I came here to say the same thing! Maybe Georgia wanted to move it along so she kept quiet. Also, when Katie gives the wrong answer to the leading question, her attorney repeats the answer, and then Katie changes it to what it's supposed to be or suddenly can't remember. It's so odd. I wonder if this is why she was such a train wreck on the stand in the second trial, Tara wasn't testifying for her.

Because it was terrible defense that kept proving the state’s theory.

As Napoleon said, "Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake."

Sometimes you want to wait and do it on cross. Some jurors think the other side must be winning if you object too much.

They want her talking. It’s to their benefit.

I second that Allison

Wendi's really wicket. It's cruel of her to get rid of the kids dad and erase their surname. Hope their paternal grandparents will step in for the innocent kids.

I believe that Danny was going to go after full custody as well.

Seems that way. I don't see Charlie going to Garcia directly. And the thought of Charlie going to Luis and Luis picking Garcia by chance as a partner is ridiculous.

@@my1vice Plus Garcia hates Charlie for sleeping with Katie.

I tend to agree … which complicates the situation. Possible this would be her normal behavior regardless of a homicide. And, obviously Wendi used Jeffrey as a decoy for police to chase down ("I see why he; Jeffrey would make a good suspect". Wendi in her police interrogation.) Thus, it has to be asked could Charlie have done the same? Wendi and Charlie both started dating these 2 at the same time; fall of 2013. Just after Charlie checked into hiring a hitman in the summer of 2013 (allegedly per his sister Wendi's confession to Jeffrey). Wendi 'breaks up' with Jeffrey the week of Dan's homicide. Charlie 'breaks up' or starts ghosting Katie around the time Rivera; the original JUNE hitman, is incarcerated. And, Katie's Adelson Institute checks stop at this time as well from Donna. The day after the homicide Katie receives a phone call from Charlie. He tells her his brother (in law) has been in an 'accident' and he needs to go to Tallahassee for a few days to help his sister. If she's the 'conduit' this phone call would be (strange) because she would already know about a murder. But, more (strange) than that is why isn't Charlie being honest with Katie … ? Who describes a murder or death as an 'accident'. No wonder Katie and or the co-worker probably presumed (car) accident. Most people might. Presuming they're being honest. Charlie Adelson is reportedly not in Tallahassee to 'help' Wendi. He did not attend his brother in laws funeral services. (Did he paint the town red w/ other females?) Tara Kawass and State's prosecution …. should be pulling Charlie's cell phone records for that time period ASAP. If Charlie never discussed the homicide with Katie (and she really never knew like Jessica Hernandez also claims she never knew) …. then Katie has to KNOW that Charlie is up to his eyeballs in this and their relationship was never real. But, (them) not talking about it could also look just as suspect. But, they continued seeing each other …. and that just seems a bit awkward? Thus, I can't forget what wire taps heard Garcia tell Katie; just before his arrest, when she asked what's going on? "The LESS you know the better". Thus, possible he may have never told her as well. Or, he's about to commit another (similar) crime …. and he DOESN'T tell her about them. Thus, GARCIA may have been hired by 'the lady' just as Rivera testified. [To bad Rivera can't say if 'the lady' was from Miami or Tallahassee. It would the State's job 'easier' to bring charges.] That's why the State wants Katie to spill the beans so badly. But, what if she doesn't have any beans to spill? Now, even Katie admits after listening to the evidence during trial that Charlie is probably involved some how but she has no direct knowledge. At one point Rivera let it slip out that he thought Garcia and Wendi had 'met' and that Garcia had been to Tallahassee on multiple occasions but, then back tracked and stated he wasn't sure. So, he didn't want to say for sure as part of his plea deal. That's HUGE … but, State doesn't want to take that route. Now, he points to …. Katie? With the State hanging other charges over his head. If Jeffrey Lacasse had a 'do-over' (besides perhaps contacting LE about the 2013 murder for hire confession) I bet it would be he wished he had at least asked Wendi for more details. Who? How? What kind of people did he meet with? Apparently, Charlie didn't need Katie in the summer of 2013; they hadn't met. But, within 3 months it appears Brother and Sister had a plan … if necessary. At the very least Wendi. (Just need to see who scheduled her TV repair appt.) The State can't discredit their own 'main' witness …. who is Rivera. And, Rivera claims Garcia was being hired by 'the lady'. Neither would call Katie 'the lady'. ("I'm fixing to get hired. This lady is going to hire me" so Rivera claims) Thus, the state would need to show that connection. Not Charlie - Katie - Garcia but, Wendi/Donna - Garcia - (Katie +/-) or Wendi/Donna - Katie - Garcia And, Wendi acts as if she can barely recognize or recall Katie until presented with a beach photo. And, recalls 1 dinner with the (4) ... Charlie, Katie, Jeffrey, Wendi. The trick is finding out how Donna or Wendi knew how to contact Garcia and how one or the other knew he was the person for the job. The answer to their problem.

Which is exactly what her lawyer said.

That is exactly what she was doing. As well as avoiding reporting the income to the IRS

Jail puts weight on a person!!

lol

Cause Charlie hired only one ex gf & that would be Katie lol to kill Dan.

narmrn she’s ugly

They did show a pic. She looks like the person she truly is

She’s ugly and extremely unattractive

Charlie seems to have dropped his standards with this one.

@@my1vice charlie was also a male prostitute 😂

I think given that these are they're parents..... those kids lucked out

​​@@russellmuscle7434 doesn't seem like she had much time for them and neither seemed like role models. Hopefully they are in a good environment now. Out of gang life.

The kids weren’t that important to either of them, getting involved with murder proves that.

@I LOVE YOU So how many times, have you posted this exact statement? I see it everywhere. And yet, so few acknowledge it. You really hate women, it is very obvious. I feel very sorry for you. I hope you will seek counseling. There are obviously deep wounds.

I think the problem is that she is a good liar. Most people can't take the witness stand in their own defense and remain this composed, which is why criminal defendants rarely take the stand. Georgia Cappleman is probably one of the top homocide prosecutors in that office, and she really did not get much out of Katie on cross examination. At the end of the day, two or three jurors voted to acquit. In my opinion, her testimony probably played a part in this.

Guwop 313 use telegram . Cops can’t get them to reveal data

Always

Katie has the mouth..... justice for Dan markel

Yet she could fork out money for breast implants. Classy n

Pigface Magbanua polished to look innocent. Yes, we can see she is guilty but the jury seems like was sleeping.

They hoped prosecution wouldn't be prepared too - similar to them 🤦🏻‍♀️ she'd be better off with public defender

Lisa Pully My guess is so those details come out to the jury first under the controlled circumstance of her own attorney bringing it to light, rather than seeming like it was hidden and therefore “shocking” when the questions are first brought up under cross examination.

@@SarahB-zj8rz Ditto

Agreed. Her lawyer did a horrific job of representing her. She shed negative light on Katherine every single turn! And, she did not follow it up with any sort of defense! Unbelievable.

The defense did basically work, though. It ended in a mistrial.

Yeah she pure evil

I agree.

Magbanua has not been convicted for murder. She is currently in jail awaiting her 2nd trial.

@@mimikay5421 what is she in jail for?

@@nt9476 She waived her right to a speedy trial & was denied a pretrial release bond. 2nd trial start date is 10/4/21. Also if you’re interested- Crime & Justice by Mentor Lawyer channel posted the interview he did with 1 of the 2 jurors who deadlocked in this trial. 🙂

I’m shocked you don’t think there is clear and beyond a reasonable doubt evidence of her guilt, because I do.

Health care cost on the ACA in florida during that time was about $700 per month. Not having the augmentation would have paid for 6 months of health care. She would have needed insurance in excess of what the surgery costs. But I understand your point. However, that is not evidence she was involved in a crime other that misleading the system so kids can have health care.

Barbara Delarwelle If the person is deemed a flight risk or danger to the community (usually in homicide cases or other violent crimes) the accused will be denied pre-trial release (no bond will be allowed) and the defendant will be in prison until trial. In this case, pre-trial took 3 years

Welcome to the U.S. We have more folks incarcerated than China and Russia combined.

You also have the right to a speedy trial unless the defense waives that right.

She might say it was paid off for sleeping with charlie.

They are co-conspirators and are basically facing the same charges that’s why

@@patrickisidore7640 Yes I understand that from the States position they want to save their resources and only need to go through this process once. They want to get two birds with one stone and yes, the case is basically the same set of facts and evidence. So yes, I get it, the state wants to try them together. However, my question was do they have a right to have separate trials if they want that. it seems to me that there is a huge conflict of interest brewing where Katy would want to distance herself as far from sigfried as she could. She should have hung her hat on the statement by sigfried when he was on the phone with her and he said words to the effect, "You have no idea what is really going on". She could have said, "I thought sigfried and the other guy had done some work for Charlie whom Sigfried did meet with"... but she could have said she thought they did some construction project for him at the home or office... Then she could have said, "Yeah I dropped off a bag of money for them, but I never looked in the bag --- it was stapled shut. It wasn't mine, so I never bothered to look in it -- in any event I thought that it had maybe 4 or 5 thousand in the bag because they put in a sound system for charlie (or whatever it was) I was only dropping off the bag because I was headed that way. I had no idea there was closes to 100 thousand dollars in the bag, and I had no idea the job they did for Charlie was murder. I didn't know". Now for her to take that position she would basically have to point the finger at Sigfried, but what is the difference really? It seems to me that Sigfried's case was fairly tight around him. He had no chance of winning his case. So from a Defensive point of view I think that Caty would want to be tried after sigfried and if sigried gets convicted then point the finger at him - there is really no other choice. Another thing I wonder is this: Why didn't Sigfried take the stand and tell everyone that Katy had nothng to do with it - that she had no idea what was really going on - she thought we were putting a new back patio" -- something like that - anything like that at all -- and maybe his children would at least have a mom. So you see how the whole thing is a conflict of interest for the two Defences... Sigfried needs to deny that there ever was a bag of money... and at the same time if katy can explain what the bag of money was all about then she should be able to say she had no knowledge of a murder for hire.

She’s in prison for life and indignant .

She didn't know anything about the call because it has was an undercover cop that called.

He died in 2023 from glioblastoma (brain tumor), so maybe his speech issue was related to that. I don't know really.

Dan Stewart Agrred. It’s called professionalism, or in this case, lack there of. A good attorney should attempt to make the client clear of all prejudices that could sway the jury in the opposite direction. Your observation and conclusion is dead on, no pun intended. The last thing any attorney should want for the client is your client looking or sounding guilty because of their vocabulary. It shows that she was definitely unprepared.

Very valid and great point. I agree that the attorney should've avoided doing that at all costs and should have advised Katy to do the same

@@floydedwards3511 are you aware of the health conditions of her attorneys before the initial trial and the evidence that was withheld until late in process? For as bad as you describe she got a hung jury.

Once in a while you come across meaningful and educational comments this is one of them.

You're forgetting it's a jury of her peers (Florida jury) so likely gang bangers and financial scammers themselves 😆😆😆

She even refers to them as favors. Even worked for Charlie’s “roommate”

He hired her to collect rent payment for difficult tenants. Why her? How was she suppose to accomplish that?

I mean she fraud her way through life that’s an indication of her terrible character.

She got back with her baby daddy also stayed in contact with Charlie. They referenced an ex never mentioned her name. She was not the last ex girlfriend because she was never a girlfriend right? According to her in her whole testimony.

She talks about dolce vita on 35:06

They were drunk and coked up the entire trip so of course they made a bunch of mistakes. The Adelsons didn't get their money's worth.

She didn't get medical while working for Charlie, it was mostly under the table so she could get insurance through the state.

They didn’t take the fall for anyone-they killed a man and left his children without a father.

Was a Lexus .

@@robhurt7968 that’s what I thought. I didn’t remember it being a Benz but I think it was older Lexus also and he might have been selling it to her for really cheap. Not saying that the extra money isn’t for the murder because it definitely is .

It was an LS430..... Lexus. Today, in 2021, it has a value of 7,500. So in 2014/5? Maybe 11 or 12 thousand.

@@my1vice Yes, I know the values. My family has owned a new/used card dealership since 1941, that I worked in for over 10 years (sales and finance). Whether it was a Benz or a Lexus (I thought she said it was a Mercedes Benz, this was over a year ago though), that price was still low. We know what the difference went to.

They’ve owned a dealership since 1941? That’s awesome / interesting.

I think it's a Caribbean accent

She cannot pronounce her “r” and it’s making me cringe!

@@Bump688 yes, it’s a Jamaican accent

Because she doesn't have an 'American' accent she has a speech impediment??

I think trinidad

That gyal been bad fa days boi

She did very well in her first trial in my opinion. She was a disaster during the retrial.

And she's not playing with her! lol

@@abundantsunflower1107 lol

@@abundantsunflower1107 😂😂😂

She has a speech impediment. I guess there is a lid for every pot.

Long shot : Charlie was working for the FBI - baiting Katie ?

In order for her to be credible we have to believe that "Mr. Big" Charlie Adelson wanted Dan dead, and it JUST SO HAPPENS that the Ex of his ex-girlfriend goes and kills the guy, a complete stranger, for no reason. Charlie thought he was slick, but he never thought the plot would be uncovered so quickly. His trial should be next.

Did you hear the wiretapped calls? Every other word was F@#* and those conversations showed her true character. She’s a criminal. The defense trained her well. It’s their job.

Check day 7 parts 1-3. There are short calls then some more lengthy, and the repetitious conversation , very hard to keep listening....!!! Ms. M and Mr. A tend to fuel each other...But part 3 of day 7 is probably what you are trying to hear....jmo

​@Vee Ay Who cares about the expletives in the call. We all say things differently when we think we are in private. My point was about her credibility on the stand. She obviously didn't hurt herself since the jury hung.

Ih8brusselssprouts , Please do the country a favor and avoid jury duty using any means possible, because you don’t have a damn clue.

God has his own way to punish people. Dan's parents did not deserve their intelligent son was taken away by this evil bunch of people.

Yes she did

Loser !

WTF? Are you serious???

@@michellededmon6711 … no.

@@Delphi_Primetime thank goodness! I was worried for a minute! Lol

@@michellededmon6711 Lol

How else do you explain the connection between a wealthy, professional family and 2 big gang members. She is the ONLY connection. There is ZERO evidence to show there was any other motive for the murder and ZERO evidence that there was any other connection at all except for Katy. She was clearly the middle man

Idiotic original post. So what's your theory? Two Miami bangers drive 600 miles and randomly shoot a professor in the face?

@@MK-jt7dq Apart from the fact that I believe Katie 100% and Luis Rivera 0%, I can't see Katie wanting to be involved "Oh yes, Charlie, I'll ask my children's dad who hates you to go and kill someone for you". No way Charlie is asking and no way Sigfredo is agreeing to it. No, this was Luis Rivera's hit. Through Charlie's drug supply chain the king of the Latin Kings learns about the opportunity and as king he wants to prove that he is badass enough to be king For me, Sigfredo was no more than an unlucky, unwilling passenger and witness to the homicide. As for Katie, she knew nothing at all about any of it It's inexcusable that Georgia Cappleman and her Prosecution team haven't worked that out by now but they have invested so much time into pursuing the wrong person, they have been blinded by their own theory

Adelsons wanted Dan dead. “Friends” of Katie execute Dan. These “friends” didn’t even know Dan or where he lived. These friends also didn’t have any relationship with Charlie. Cash flow and communication spikes post murder between all 3 parties. She is the link. Without her, Dan would be alive. She is guilty AF.