Charlie Adelson trial Day 3 Part 1: Accomplices tell the truth

Monday morning began with defense attorney Dan Rashbaum cross-examining Luis Rivera, the accomplice who joined Sigfredo Garcia on two trips to Tallahassee in the Summer of 2014 to kill Dan Markel.

Rivera testified as a state witness in the 2019 and 2022 trials of Garcia and Katherine Magbanua, his former best friends, and last week repeated his testimony against Charlie Adelson.

On Friday, Rivera had already testified regarding how he and Garcia came to be hired for the murder — via Katie via Charlie. When asked if they had gotten any information online about Markel’s travel schedule or address, such as through a blog, Rivera quipped back, “Wendi was the blog.”

Rashbaum’s questioning of Rivera centered around the defense premise that Katie and Garcia had cooked up a plan, independently, to kill Markel and then extort money from the Adelson family. Rashbaum raised several points regarding things that Garcia had told Rivera, which the defense attorney characterized as lies — such as the original reason Garcia told Rivera they were driving up to Tallahassee and whether Garcia actually saw Wendi (“the lady”) on Trescott when they were scoping out the home.

“That’s her, that’s the guy’s wife, that’s the one who wants the kids back,” Sigfredo had told Rivera. Whether or not it was the actual Wendi the two men saw that day, Rivera was confident that Garcia believed it was “the lady” they encountered.

“It’s possible that Sigfredo lied to you, right?” Rashbaum asked Rivera, to which Rivera conceded.

“Is it possible that they lied to you about the purpose of the murder itself?” Rashbaum followed.

On that, Rivera balked.

And under Georgia Cappleman’s redirect, it was even clearer that Rivera has no doubt why he was hired to kill Markel or by whom.

“I want to do the right thing.”

And then came Magbanua — who testified twice in her own defense but never candidly until today. She appeared in purple prison scrubs, not the black suits we’d seen her in before. Cappleman asked Katie whether she was incarcerated and for what.

“Did you testify on your own behalf?” Cappleman asked her about her two trials.

“Yes, ma’am,” Katie replied.

“Were you truthful with the jury?” Cappleman prompted.

“No,” Katie admitted.

Cappleman pressed further, “Did you take the same oath that you just took today in your own trial?” to which Katie answered affirmatively.

“What was your defense when you were tried?” Cappleman asked.

“That I had nothing to do with it,” Katie continued. And when asked why she should tell the truth today, Katie said, “I believe that the truth needed to come out now so the family could get closure.”

Cappleman asked Katie whether she thought she would be successful in her defense, and Katie agreed that she thought she could get acquitted — but that she had never been threatened by anyone or promised anything in return for her silence.

Magbanua’s account was bone-chilling.

She didn’t know Dan Markel or have any personal beef with him. Her motive was purely financial and to do a favor for Charlie. As far as she was ever told, Charlie had the idea to kill Dan. He first solicited Katie’s help with a murder in October 2013. They had been at a Halloween party in Miami, and right before they got there, Charlie asked Katie if she knew anyone who could harm someone.

Katie said, “Yes,” with Sigfredo in mind.

As she came to learn more about what and who Charlie had in mind, Katie learned that Charlie’s parents and sister Wendi, were having problems with custody of her two children. Katie was told that Markel was a “terrible man making his family go through a lot.” Particularly, she was told, that Donna Adelson wasn’t eating or sleeping because of Wendi’s ex-husband.

Through all this, Katie never knew the victim’s name but referred to him exclusively as Wendi’s husband. And, because of her dual relationships with Garcia and Charlie, she tried not to talk much about each man to the other. She referred to each man as “my friend” to the other.

She never told Charlie who it was that was going to be doing the job he hired her to coordinate — and while Katie didn’t talk much with Sigfredo about the job’s connection to Charlie (because Garcia wouldn’t have wanted to do anything to help Charlie) she believes Garcia had “an inkling” that it was her dentist boyfriend who was behind it.

By the Summer of 2014, Charlie was becoming more adamant that the job gets done.

Charlie gave her a “kill sheet” in a sealed manilla envelope. Katie testified that Charlie told her, “Do not open it, do not touch it,” but to simply pass it along to the other person. He said he had worn gloves to avoid fingerprints, that he hadn’t printed it at his office, and that he didn’t lick the envelope to avoid physical evidence. Katie put the envelope in her diaper bag. She never opened it. For spending money on both trips, Charlie gave Katie some funds that she passed along to Garcia and Rivera.

Katie disclosed that on the night of the murder, Charlie was agitated and pacing, walking around his home carrying a gun. The two of them took Xanax and fell asleep.

“Did you threaten Charlie? Did you extort him?” Cappleman asked. “Were you sent with a message from Sigfredo that he was supposed to give her money or threaten his family in any way?”

“No, ma’am,” Katie answered to each — a direct rebuttal to the defense theory that Garcia cooked up the murder to extort their client.

The morning after the murder, Katie paid Garcia and Rivera with cash from Charlie. The money was in brown paper bags — $100 bills stapled together, which we learned today was also moldy. Katie believes Charlie’s parents literally washed the money, as Charlie didn’t keep much cash in his own home, but rather at his mother’s house — and his parents had stopped by right before Katie got there.

Cappleman asked Katie whether Garcia and Rivera could have come up to kill Markel on their own.

“No, that would be impossible,” Katie balked. “How would they have any information?”

“They could have seen it on the internet,” Cappleman suggested.

“No,” Katie replied. In fact, Katie herself hadn’t even known Markel’s name when the murder happened. The two hit men would have had no way to know who the target would be without Charlie passing it along through her.

Rashbaum began his cross-examination.

“You were arrested and charged with the murder of Professor Markel on Oct. 1, 2016,” he began. “Almost immediately, you were offered a get-out-of-jail-free card,” he continued.

“Yes, sir,” she agreed.

People have long wondered whether Charlie paid for Katie’s attorneys. Katie said he did not, but that “there was word that my brother declined that Charlie offered to pay for my attorneys,” she pushed back.

Rashbaum pushed hard to discredit Katie’s based on her prior testimony. He suggested she couldn’t have cooperated because Charlie was innocent, but Katie pushed back.

“I didn’t cooperate because in order to give up Charlie, I would have to give up Sigfredo, the father of my children,” she said.

Pushed by Rashbaum about why she was reticent in her first proffer with law enforcement after she decided to cooperate, Katie acknowledged that it was “hard for me to confess everything I’ve suppressed for the last seven years.” She went on to say that once Agent Patrick Sanford left the room, she felt more comfortable opening up.

Rashbaum pushed Katie on the “TV cheaper than a hit man” joke, suggesting that his client didn’t really believe he was hiring actual hit men.

“He acted like he was untouchable,” Katie replied. “He knew he was hiring a hit man.”

Rashbaum accused Katie, saying, “You told Charlie Adelson that a friend of yours had done this, that a terrible thing had happened,” and that if he went to the police, one of his family members would be next.

“No,” Katie pushed back.

“Isn’t it true that you were the mastermind behind the murder of Dan Markel?” Rashbaum demanded.

“No, that was Charlie,” Katie said.

“I’m sure it was,” Rashbaum said sarcastically. Throughout his cross-examination, Rashbaum repeatedly accused Katie of having “an agenda” and scolded her for asking questions — even when she was answering them. Judge Stephen Everett told the jury to disregard what they’d heard.

“What are the only two ways you can ever get out of jail?” Rashbaum asked her, saying it would only be in a coffin or by turning on Charlie.

To which Katie replied that she wanted the truth to come out.

“I want to do the right thing.”

Cappleman’s redirect of Katie cleared one specific thing Rashbaum had installed confusion on.

“The job in this case, there’s some question — is it to harm, is it to rough up, is it to kill?” she asked. “Did you know that this was going to result in a death, not a roughing up?”

“Yes,” Katie responded.

“Did Charlie Adelson know it was a murder?” Cappleman asked.

“Yes, he did,” Katie answered.

___

Florida Politics provides ongoing coverage of the Markel murder case, which is drawing international media attention to Florida’s capital city. Our reporting draws from sources including contributor Karen Cyphers of Sachs Media, who, with attorney Jason Solomon, advocates with the grassroots group “Justice for Dan” to draw attention to the case and provide analysis relevant to Florida’s political, advocacy and legal communities.