Why the jury convicted Charlie Adelson and what's next? Legal analysis by Tim Jansen

The state presented a strong case against Charlie Adelson. The law enforcement investigation by the FBI and Tallahassee Police Department following the execution of Professor Markel was highly sophisticated, carefully orchestrated and conducted in secrecy to protect its integrity.

The FBI utilized wire taps, bus videos, business cameras, phone records, cell tower dumps, text messages, video surveillance, witness interviews, crime scene collection, emails, court filings and three FBI "bumps" used to tickle the wires.

The collection of evidence at the beginning of the case allowed law enforcement to put pieces of the puzzle as to who and why this crime was committed. Once the state realized why the crime was committed it could focus on who committed this heinous crime. As the state said all the breadcrumbs led directly to Charlie Adelson.

'Seeds' of conspiracy grow into full-fledged murder

The state proved the "seeds of the conspiracy" started on Halloween, Oct. 31, 2013. On that day Magbanua testified that Charlie asked he if she knew someone that could "rough" somebody up for him. This was the beginning of the conspiracy to kill.

The seeds took root when she gave money for rental cars, hotels, and other expenses to Garcia and Rivera. More importantly, the crime was initiated when Charlie gave her a "Mission Impossible"-style envelope which contained the address and picture of Professor Markel to be given to the killers. Charlie told Magbanua that he used gloves and didn't leave DNA on the envelope.

At this point, the conspiracy to murder Professor Markel was set in stone.

The state introduced ample evidence of the motive for the killing. The heated child custody and relocation issues reached a boiling point. Donna, Wendi and Charlie Adelson all were emotionally involved in the legal proceedings in Tallahassee. The emails from Donna and Wendi were extremely disturbing and ultimately led to Charlie taking action to "rough" somebody up, but which ended up with a murder for hire of Professor Markel.

The killers were easily identified by sophisticated enforcement techniques. Phone records led the police to other conspirators. Ultimately, the FBI utilized wire taps which resulted in highly incriminating conversations and texts between Donna, Charlie and Wendi.

Subsequent meetings by Charlie, Magbanua and Donna led to a recorded meeting between Charlie and Magbanua at the Dolce Vita restaurant. During this meeting Charlie and Magbanua talked about the bump and made incriminating statements. Two additional FBI bumps initiated conversations with Donna, Charlie and Magbanua. All these conversations led to the conviction of Charlie and the rejection of his highly suspect double extortion defense.

Charlie’s texts and conversations were his undoing. All his new explanations could not erase the portrait of him on the calls and the recordings collected by the FBI.

His double extortion theory required the jury to disregard all the evidence that was introduced in the case. This also required the jury to void their common sense to swallow this highly suspect theory of defense. One cannot escape the belief that Charlie Adelson's testimony was completely rehearsed and scripted. His testimony was not believable and didn't hold up to cross examination. He obfuscated, twisted, bucked, squirmed, and failed to directly answer Prosecutor Georgia Cappleman's questions.

The defense was unable to sell their tale. The defense's closing arguments were an abject failure from the start to the two hour forty minutes of confusing and disorganized arguments.

Cappleman's limited rebuttal arguments further demonstrate the defense's failure to sell the double extortion theory. Finally, the three-hour guilty verdict on all three counts proves the state presented an overwhelming case of guilt of Charlie Adelson.

Are more charges coming in Dan Markel murder? 'Stay tuned'

Cappleman indicated that the investigation of Professor Markel's murder is not over. In fact, she said: "stay tuned."

This sort of a preview lends credence to more possible arrests for this violent and reprehensible crime. Prosecutors will take their time to review their evidence, meet with law enforcement, and decide whether information and this verdict convinces them to believe additional persons should be charged.

During the trial, Donna Adelson was included in many incriminating recordings, texts and conversations. Her relationship with Wendi and her frustrations with the inability to have her daughter and grandkids to relocate to south Florida became apparent in her son's trial.

This is a strong case for proving motive against Donna for the murder. Her own words and conduct outlined in this trial are incriminating. Whether the state files additional charges is anyone's guess.

Why a case against Wendi Adelson could be a tough proposition

The evidence in Charlie's case seems to further buttress Wendi from prosecution. During the FBI recordings Donna and Charlie’s insulate Wendi and make it appear that she was purposefully not aware of their scheme.

In fact, Donna and Charlie state: "Wendi doesn't know how lucky she is". Both reiterate this point to the extent it would provide a defense to Wendi Adelson for charges against her.

In addition, the state by subpoenaing her as a state witness has given her use immunity on three separate occasions for her testimony. As such, the state cannot use those statements, except for a perjury case, which is very rare in this circuit.

Coincidentally, the state cannot make derivative use of her statements. Meaning the state will have to prove to a court that any evidence against her must have been independently obtained. This will require a Kastigar hearing. This type of hearing uses a high and difficult standard for the state to succeed.

Thus, many prosecutors rarely give use immunity to targets that they want to later prosecute. This also may be a reason why Donna and Harvey were not given state subpoenas to testify. It appears that Donna might be the next target in the prosecution of persons responsible for the murder of Professor Dan Markel.

A sentence reduction for Katherine Magbanua?

Cappleman during the same, post-verdict press conference stated that she was not sure if Magbanua would be receiving a sentence reduction for her testimony against Charlie Adelson.

What happens to Magbanua might shed light on whether she may be a witness for the state in additional trials. Certainly, the state would only do a one-time reduction for Magbanua.

Otherwise, she would be subject to harsher impeachment, if possible, should she receive a reduction prior to her testimony in a future trial. If Magbanua does not receive a reduction, it may be because she may be called in an additional trial against another defendant.

Jurors could advise prosecutors on next step

Finally, the state may hear from jurors in the Charlie Adelson trial and determine the strength of their case, and whether they thought additional persons should have been charged.

Nonetheless, the state has a lot of positive momentum from their strong case against Charlie and the quick verdict to bolster their decision to file additional charges.

Justice may have been slow, but it ultimately has been very effective in prosecuting the persons responsible for the murder of Professor Markel.

Will there be more prosecutions? "Stay tuned."

Tim Jansen, partner in Jansen & Davis, P.A., is a prominent criminal defense attorney in Tallahassee and former assistant U.S. attorney who worked major white collar crime cases as senior fraud prosecutor. He has represented numerous high-profile clients for years and is offering daily analysis on the Charlie Adelson trial to readers of the Tallahassee Democrat.

This article originally appeared on Tallahassee Democrat: Dan Markel murder legal analysis: Will there be more prosecutions?