Tag: Divorce

Speaking on Halloween and Daubert

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

This Halloween I will be co-presenting a webinar with the Hon. Samantha Ruiz Cohen. The presentation is sponsored by the Florida Bar Family Law Section. The webinar will discuss Florida’s dark, lonely road to a new standard for admitting expert testimony: Daubert Returns.

Daubert

The presentation addresses the changes to §90.702 and §90.704; how the new Daubert standard differs from Florida’s old Frye rule; the Constitutional problem, appellate cases applying the new standard; how the judge’s role has changed; and the new Rules’ impact on the admissibility of expert testimony in family law cases.

The webinar will take place tomorrow, October 31, 2019 beginning at noon.

Did I mention the witches?

There is still time to register by clicking here.

 

Upcoming Webinar

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

For any interested readers, I will be speaking with the Hon. Samantha Ruiz Cohen at a webinar hosted by the Florida Bar Family Law Section. The webinar will discuss Florida’s twisting road to the current standard for admitting expert testimony in family law and divorce cases.

fla-supreme-ct

The presentation addresses the statutory changes to §90.702 and §90.704; how the new Daubert standard differs from Florida’s old Frye rule; the now-settled Constitutional problem, some appellate cases applying the new standard; how the judge’s role in admitting expert testimony has changed; and the new Rules’ impact on the admissibility of expert testimony in Family Law cases.

You can register by clicking here.

 

Divorce and the Engagement Ring

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

Kim Kardashian reportedly refused to give back her engagement ring to estranged husband, former basketball player, Kris Humphries. Is a spouse obligated to return an engagement ring after a divorce has been filed – whether the ring is worth $2mm or not?

engagement ring

Keeping Up with the Kardashians

A source close to the Kardashian situation reports that her husband Kris contends that the marriage was a total sham and that Kim only wed him for publicity so therefore she has no right to keep such an expensive gift.

This is the latest battle in the drawn-out Kardashian-Humphries divorce proceedings. The reality star filed for divorce from Humphries in October 2011 after just 72-days of marriage. He responded a month later by filing for an annulment on the basis of fraud and a legal separation.

Florida Engagement Rings

I’ve written about some of the history and law about engagement rings before. Until the 1930s, a woman jilted by her fiancé could sue for financial compensation for “damage” to her reputation under what was known as the “Breach of Promise to Marry” action.

As courts began to abolish such actions, diamond ring sales rose in response to a need for a symbol of financial commitment from the groom. Florida abolished the appropriately termed “heart balm statutes”. Heart balm statutes were laws allowing couples to sue each other to recover money for the alienation of affections and breaches of contract to marry.

As one court poetically noted:

[A] gift given by a man to a woman on condition that she embark on the sea of matrimony with him is no different from a gift based on the condition that the donee sail on any other sea. If, after receiving the provisional gift, the donee refuses to leave the harbor – if the anchor of contractual performance sticks in the sands of irresolution and procrastination – the gift must be restored to the donor. A fortiori would this be true when the donee not only refuses to sail with the donor, but, on the contrary, walks up the gangplank of another ship arm in arm with the donor’s rival?

After an engagement ring is given, and if the couple doesn’t marry, in New York the law deems a broken engagement as no one’s fault. Accordingly, the ring should be given back to the giver, with few exceptions. Most states have adopted that approach.

This is true in Florida. Lawsuits to recover an engagement ring by disappointed donors usually are resolved by courts looking to see if the engagement was terminated by the donee or by mutual consent of the parties. The rationale is that rings are given on the implied condition that a marriage ensue.

Once a marriage proposal is extended and accepted — once the promise is made — no matter what day of the year, that ring is no longer considered a gift. It’s a contract to enter into marriage.

The general rule in Florida is that an engagement ring given before the marriage, becomes a non-marital gift if the marriage is completed. If so, the ring becomes the non-marital property of the Wife.

If the engagement ring is viewed by the court as a non-marital asset, it is not subject to equitable distribution in divorce proceedings, and the spouse keeps it as their own.

Reality TV

Relying on real attorneys and not Judge Judy, both sides of the Kardashian case have accused each other in court and in the media of deliberately slowing down the divorce process, which has lasted five times longer than their marriage.

Recently, Kardashian’s attorney told the judge that her client is “handcuffed to Mr. Humphries” because his team is still not ready for trial. The estranged couple is set to return to court in mid-February to determine a trial date.

The Huffington Post article is here.

 

International Divorce Problems

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

The housewife in the middle of one of Britain’s biggest international divorce cases has finally succeeded in serving her billionaire ex-husband legal papers after an attempt to serve them via the messaging app WhatsApp failed, a British court has ruled.

international divorce

Russian Meddling

Tatiana Akhmedova, who is in her 40s, was awarded a 41.5 per cent share of Russian businessman Farkhad Akhmedov’s estate by a British divorce court judge in December 2016. His fortune is estimated to be worth more than £1bn and Mr Justice Haddon-Cave said Ms Akhmedova, who is British, should walk away with £453m.

However, Mrs. Justice Gwynneth Knowles, sitting in the High Court’s family division, said Mr Akhmedov, 64, had “regrettably” not “voluntarily paid a penny” of the money owed and that around £5m had been paid after enforcement.

The judge said she had been trying to serve the application by WhatsApp. That had not worked, ‘probably’ because Mr Akhmedov had blocked the number. An attempt at delivering documents to Mr Akhmedov’s office in Moscow had been ‘refused’.

Mrs. Justice Gwynneth Knowles says Ms Akhmedova has succeeded in serving legal papers relating to an application for asset freezing orders on Mr Akhmedov.

The judge heard that Farkhad Akhmedov had not voluntarily paid a penny to his ex-wife. The judge heard that Farkhad Akhmedov had not voluntarily paid a penny to his ex-wife. Mr Justice Haddon-Cave has ruled that Mr Akhmedov’s £346million yacht, the MV Luna, should be transferred into her name.

International Divorce Issues

Who sues whom, how do you sue for divorce, and in what country are problems in an international divorce? The answers are more difficult than people think. A British divorce might give more money because British courts can disregard prenuptial agreements, and the cost of living is high in London.

In France, things could be very different. Adultery can be penalized, but in the typical French divorce, any alimony could be less and for eight years at most; and prenuptial agreements are binding.

However, in Florida, the outcome could be different still. Under Florida law, alimony is constantly under threat of a major revision by the legislature, and child support is governed by a formula. Courts may award attorneys’ fees, and prenuptial agreements are generally enforceable.

Rules about children can differ too. I’ve written on international divorces, especially as they relate to child custody issues and The Hague Convention on abduction.

The Hague Abduction Convention is a multilateral treaty developed by The Hague Conference on Private International Law to provide for the prompt return of a child internationally abducted by a parent from one-member country to another.

There are three essential elements to every Hague Convention case:

  1. The child must be under the age of 16 years of age;
  2. The wrongful removal must be a violation of the left behind parent’s “rights of custody;”
  3. The left behind parent’s rights of custody “were actually being exercised or would have been exercised but for the removal.”

So, if a child under the age of sixteen has been wrongfully removed, the child must be promptly returned to the child’s country of habitual residence, unless certain exceptions apply. Even signatory countries may be bad at abiding by the convention, especially when it means enforcing the return of children to a parent alleged to have been abusive.

Hiding assets is a problem in every divorce, especially the British case. The problem of discovery of hidden wealth is even bigger in an international divorce because multiple countries, and multiple rules on discovery, can be involved. The problems in an international divorce are more complicated because hiding assets from a spouse is much easier in some countries than in others.

Florida, at one extreme, requires complete disclosure of assets and liabilities. In fact, in Florida certain financial disclosure is mandatory. At the other extreme, are countries which require very little disclosure from people going through divorce.

Choosing possible countries to file your divorce in can be construed as “forum shopping”. The European Union introduced a reform called Brussels II, which prevents “forum shopping”, with a rule that the first court to be approached decides the divorce. But the stakes are high: ending up in the wrong legal system, or with the wrong approach, may mean not just poverty but misery.

Back in Britain

Ms Akhmedova had begun legal action in Britain and abroad, taking steps to freeze his assets. Analyzing the latest stage of litigation, a judge said Ms Akhmedova has at last succeeded in serving legal papers to her ex-husband in relation to an application to freeze assets.

But the judge said the papers were successfully served on August 22 after an email was sent to Mr Akhmedov’s personal email address without a bounce back. The judge has given details of the hearing in a ruling summarizing the latest developments in the case. Neither of the respondents attended the hearing.

A spokesman for Mr Akhmedov has said his ex-wife’s attempts to seize his assets were “as misguided as the original English High Court” ruling.

The Telegraph article is here.

 

Speaking Engagement on Family Law

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

It was an honor to speak today in front of a ‘standing room only’ audience at the Family Division Courthouse. The presentation was hosted by the 11th Judicial Circuit’s Family Court Services, as part of their Lunch & Learn Series. I co-presented with my colleague Evan Marks, on Florida’s twisting road to the correct standard for admitting expert testimony in family law and divorce cases called: “Daubert Returns.”

Family Law Speech

The presentation was based, in part, on an article to be published this Fall in the Florida Bar Commentator, “Daubert House.” The presentation addressed the statutory changes to §90.702 and §90.704; how the new Daubert standard differs from the old Frye rule; the now-settled Constitutional problem, Florida appellate cases applying the new standard; how the judge’s role in admitting expert testimony has changed; and the new Rules’ impact on the admissibility of expert testimony in Family Law cases.

 

Divorce and the Date of Marriage

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

The date of your marriage should be an easy question to answer. But, for one same-sex couple in the midst of a messy divorce – who made national headlines fighting to have their same-sex relationship recognized – the answer is anything but easy.

Divorce and Date of marrage

Divorce in Hot Lanta

Lawrie Demorest, an Atlanta attorney and Lee Kyser, a retired psychologist, are making headlines again, but this time over how to end their more than 20-year relationship.

The couple fought very publicly to have their relationship recognized by the Druid Hills Golf Club in Atlanta as the same as heterosexual couples, giving them the same rights and benefits as others.

Demorest, who has fought for LGBTQ equality, in response to a divorce brought by her lesbian partner, the former co-chair of the board of directors for the Human Rights Campaign has tried to legally nullify a relationship she once said should be treated the same as a marriage.

The two officially broke up in December 2017, and Demorest wanted the couple to walk away with what was titled in their own names. Kyser said no because in part she said she gave up her job to raise the twins the couple adopted in 1999, and her only source of income right now is Social Security. She accused Demorest of “setting her up for an undignified retirement.”

Kyser is suing Demorest for a divorce using the unusual argument that Georgia’s common law marriage, which was banned in 1997, coupled with the Obergefell v. Hodges decision “retroactively date the start of Kyser and Demorest’s marriage to July 1996, when Kyser moved into Demorest’s home. [Kyser] shows that, but for the unconstitutional prohibition on same-sex marriage, the parties would have been married by common law in July 1996.

DeKalb County Superior Court Judge Mark Anthony Scott denied Demorest’s Motion for Summary Judgment on Sept. 4. This means Kyser can further argue her claim that the couple should be considered common-law married due to the Obergefell ruling between July 1996, when they moved in together and January 1997, when the state banned common law marriage.

Florida Divorce

I have written about same-sex marriage and divorce issues before. Georgia, like Florida is among the states that do not recognize common law marriage. The Georgia case is important because same sex marriages were not recognized until 2014 and left an entire group of people “out in the cold” without the protections the law provides to heterosexual couples.

Florida law is similar in that no common-law marriage entered into after January 1, 1968, is valid in Florida. The generally established principle is that the validity of a marriage is determined by the law of the place where the marriage occurred. So, while Florida no longer recognizes common law marriages, nevertheless, it may to recognize the validity of common law marriages in other states.

Given the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to recognize same sex marriage, everything else from the marriage follows including rights of the parties, including marital property, alimony, divorce, and anything else. The rights and duties of marriage now apply to same sex couples.

This divorce is unusual, because one spouse is arguing they were never legally married under Georgia law.

Wisdom, Justice, Moderation

Kyser said her shock with Demorest seemingly so willing to write off nothing close to a legal marriage led to the divorce filings. She said Demorest’s longtime advocacy for marriage equality is counter to what she is doing with her own family as part of the couple’s split.

For example, Demorest served 13 years on the national Human Rights Campaign board of directors, including as co-chair between 2002-2005 during its heyday in the fight for marriage equality. She also formerly served on the board of directors of the National LGBT Bar Foundation.

However, now that her 20-year relationship with Kyser has ended, Demorest has argued in court filings that their extended union was never a marriage, was never intended to be a marriage, and that Demorest, a national leader for LGBTQ rights, “did not anticipate or have any expectation that marriage would ever become available to same-sex couples in Georgia.”

“I just can’t get over her blindness. How did she get to where she really talked herself into believing that she can advocate for equality and have this tremendous reputation, and then turn around and try to exit our relationship in this way, which is totally contradictory to fairness and equity. To have built up such a reputation professionally and politically, and to then turn and handle her own relationship and family like this just tears it down.”

In court documents, Demorest said although she and Kyser were together for two decades, including holding a commitment ceremony in 1998 and adopting and raising twins together, they never were legally married even as marriage became legal for same-sex couples.

“Up until recently when I decided that I could not wait any longer to end our relationship, I had always considered my relationship with Lee to be as my ‘significant other’ or domestic partner and co-parent of our two children, but never at any time as a legally wedded spouse,” Demorest said in an affidavit.

Demorest’s attorney said that “it’s a very murky thing to dive into and talk about the spirit of the relationship because each relationship has its own milieu. They had the opportunity to get married in 2004, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15 and they did not.

In ’15 [when Obergefell legalized same-sex marriage nationwide], they could’ve marched over to the probate court in DeKalb County like a thousand other people did and get a marriage license, but they chose not to do that.

The article is here.

 

Upcoming Speaking Engagement

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

I will be speaking at the Family Court Services Lunch & Learn Series with my colleague Evan Marks, on Florida’s twisting road to the correct standard for admitting expert testimony in family law and divorce cases called: “Daubert Returns.”

speaking engagement

The Lunch & Learn Series consists of fantastic presentations hosted monthly by Family Court Services at the Family Division Courthouse, and this one will take place on:

 October 16, 2019, from 12:00 pm – 2:00 pm at the Family Division Courthouse located at 175 NW 1st Avenue 11th Floor Miami, Florida 33128.

The presentation is based, in part, on an article to be published this Fall in the Florida Bar Commentator, “Daubert House.” The Florida Legislature amended Sections 90.702 and 90.704 of the Florida Statutes to bind Florida courts to the Daubert standard for the admission of expert testimony and the basis for an expert’s opinion. Since then, the Daubert standard has been constantly attacked.

My co-presenter, Evan Marks, Esq. and myself, will answer the questions: What was the Frye Rule? What did the Daubert standard do to change it? And how it impacts experts in your marital and family law cases.

This presentation addresses the statutory changes to §90.702 and §90.704; how the new Daubert standard differs from the old Frye rule; the now-settled Constitutional problem, Florida appellate cases applying the new standard; how the judge’s role in admitting expert testimony has changed; and the new Rules’ impact on the admissibility of expert testimony in Family Division cases.

The event is sponsored by Family Court Services. Family Court Services was developed to assist family law judges and general magistrates with some of the Court’s most difficult family cases, reducing case delays while tending to the unique needs of divorcing parents and their children.

CLE and continuing education credit for judiciary, attorneys, mental health professionals, mediators and professional interpreters are also available.

You can register here.

 

Divorce and Infidelity in Congress

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

Rep. Ilhan Omar is divorcing her husband. The Minnesota Democrat filed for divorce from Ahmed Hirsi last week. This news follows earlier reports that the Representative’s political consultant is facing his own divorce because of his infidelity with Rep. Omar.

Sex and No Fault Divorce

The Candidate

Omar and Hirsi became engaged in 2002 but never legally married. The pair had two children together before separating in 2008. Omar married Ahmed Nur Said Elmi in 2009 and later said the two obtained a divorce in their Muslim faith tradition — albeit not a legal one — in 2011.

Beth Mynett, wife of Omar’s political consultant, alleged in court documents that her husband, Tim Mynett, confessed his “devastating and shocking declaration of love” for Omar this past April, which led to the divorce.

Tim Mynett’s company, the political consulting firm E Street Group, has worked with Omar’s campaign. Federal campaign finance records show that Omar’s campaign paid Tim Mynett $7,000 in July 2018 and E Street Group roughly $222,000 from 2018 to 2019.

The E Street Group and lawyers issue a statement saying “E Street Group does not comment on the personal life of either our staff or clients. As with all marriages, this is intensely personal and a difficult time for their family.

Florida Divorce and Infidelity

I’ve written about the impact of cheating and divorce before. In practical terms, adultery as a crime poses very little threat of prosecution, but it could have other consequences.

Cheating on your spouse can even be grounds for losing your job. This is particularly true in the military, where adultery has a maximum punishment of a dishonorable discharge.

Chapter 61 discusses the “the moral fitness of the parents” as one of the factors the court considers in determining the best interests of a child. Adultery may impact the division of property. Proof that one spouse intentionally wasted marital assets could be seen as dissipation of assets. Adultery of either spouse could be a factor in determining the amount of alimony, if any, to be awarded.

There are times when evidence of adultery comes into evidence. Most often it doesn’t. In 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Lawrence v. Texas that sexual activity between consenting adults is legal.

Ms. Omar Goes to Washington

Omar and Hirsi reconciled after that and had a third child together in 2012. The lawmaker officially filed to divorce Elmi in 2017, and legally married Hirsi in 2018.

Earlier this year, a Minnesota campaign finance board’s investigation found that the 38-year-old freshman congresswoman and Hirsi filed joint tax returns in 2014 and 2015, while she was still legally married to Elmi.

“For years, Ilhan and Ahmed have been the object of speculation and innuendo from political opponents and the media. This has taken a significant toll on Ilhan, Ahmed, and their three children.”

The divorce documents allege there has been an irretrievable breakdown of the marriage relationship. Omar said neither partner is seeking an order of protection and she asks the court to grant them “joint legal and physical custody” of their three minor children. She also asked the court to determine child support to “serve the minor children’s best interest” and award the “marital property” as the court “may deem just and equitable.”

The Hill article is here.

 

Divorce and Financial Infidelity

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

One in five people in a relationship say their partner is financially irresponsible, and that they’re 10 times more likely to divorce for financial reasons, according to a new survey released from insurance comparison website Policygenius. Will running up excessive debts and other forms of financial infidelity be an issue in your divorce?

Divorce and financial infidelity

Financial Survey

The survey polled 2,005 adults in relationships and asked them questions like “What financial information do you and your partner know about each other?” and how they deal with money as a couple. The findings revealed that only 50% of people know their partner’s credit score, and yet 78% of those surveyed manage joint finances.

“If you’re at all doubtful about transparency, get a credit check. If they don’t give you permission to get a credit check, you’re in trouble. Know everything about your own finances, your mate’s finances and have a plan for how you’re going to work together to budget effectively and save for the future.”

The reality is that most couples openly commit financial infidelity: 12% of people in a relationship have hidden a purchase from their partner; another 20% say they’d spend $500 without telling their significant other and what’s worse, 16% said they don’t know anything about their partner’s money situation, according to the survey.

Florida Divorce Debts

I have written about divorce debts and other forms of financial infidelity before. In Florida, liabilities such as credit card debts – even if it happened without your knowledge – may be treated as any other kind of debt.

Generally, in divorce proceedings the court has to set apart to each spouse that spouse’s nonmarital assets and debts, and in distributing the marital assets and liabilities between spouses, courts have to begin with the premise that the distribution should be equal, unless there is a justification for an unequal distribution.

Some of the relevant factors for justifying an unequal distribution include the economic circumstances of the parties, the duration of the marriage and the intentional dissipation, waste, depletion, or destruction of marital assets after the filing of the petition or within 2 years prior to the filing of the petition.

A common complaint in divorce is that someone will steal or destroy assets once they learn that a divorce has been filed, or run up huge credit card bills. This could be found to be dissipation or waste.

Other forms of dissipation include:

  • Incurring major gambling losses;
  • Excessive spending on alcohol or drugs;
  • Conveying marital property to family members or friends below cost with the intent to reacquire the undervalued asset post-divorce;
  • Destroying big-ticket personal property; and
  • sustaining losses concerning a sham investment.

If a judge determines there was an intentional dissipation, waste, depletion, or destruction of marital assets, the court can divide the remaining marital property and credit or debit accordingly.

Husband and Wife Money Summits

Financial infidelity and fights about them are increasingly a pain point in relationships, particularly when one person is tight with money and the other spends more liberally. People are twice as likely to describe themselves as savers and their partners as spenders, according to separate data from SunTrust Bank.

Because of these woes, some couples are enrolling in financial therapy to get on the same page about finances. Money summits have sprouted up around the country to help couples talk about daily budgets, divvying up financial responsibilities, debt and financial goals, like saving up for a baby, a new home, retirement or for vacation.

There are little things couples can do every day to maintain a financially healthy relationship, whether it’s carving out hour-long money dates to talk openly about what you’ve spent that week and why, or to plan ahead for future expenses.

“Decide in advance how you will handle major purchase decisions together,” said Brittney Castro, a certified financial planner. “For example, some couples agree to discuss every purchase over a certain amount of money. Hurt feelings may arise from the surprise of an expenditure, rather than simply that the money was spent,”

The Fox Business article is here.

 

When Parent Relocation is Murder

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

Parent relocations are stressful, but can they lead to murder? Years after a contentious Tallahassee divorce, the trial of the murderers of FSU law professor Dan Markel is underway. Many suspect he was murdered for contesting parent relocation.

Parental Relcation Murder

In Cold Blood

More than five years after his horrific murder, and after numerous delays and postponements, the trial of two of the alleged murderers of law professor Dan Markel got underway in Tallahassee this week.

Professor Markel was gunned down in his driveway after sending off his children for the final time. The trial of two of the alleged perpetrators, Sigfredo Garcia, one of the alleged gunmen, and Katherine Magbanua, the alleged go-between who set up the murder, began this week.

A third man formally accused in the plot — Luis Rivera — says he joined Garcia on the hit and agreed to split $100K with the other two. Rivera already took a plea and will be the star witness.

Unfortunately, Rivera can’t give police the one thing they don’t have: a case against the people who offered up the $100,000 payment he says the crew were promised. Police believe it’s the family of Markel’s ex-wife, Wendi Adelson, who now has custody of the couple’s children and has kept them cut off from their paternal grandparents.

Adelson divorced Markel by moving out of the house and leaving divorce papers on the bed while Markel was on a business trip. After Markel was killed, Adelson told police that her brother joked about hiring a hit man to kill him and she tearfully admitted that she suspected this was done on her behalf.

Miami area Defendant Katherine Magbanua is the ex-girlfriend of Wendi Adelson’s brother, Charlie Adelson, who is also from the Miami area, who may be an unindicted co-conspirator.

Florida Parent Relocation

I’ve written about Professor Dan Markel’s case before. Parent relocations with children during a divorce happens frequently in our mobile society.

In Florida, “relocation” is defined as changing a parent’s principal residence to a new one at least 50 miles away from his or her current address for at least 60 consecutive days. Relocation is a topic that I have lectured and written on before.

Florida has a relocation statute, which in addition to defining relocations, sets out the requirements a parent needs to fill to legally relocate by agreement or court order.

The relocation statute is very technical, and lays out very specific factors a relocation parent must prove, and the court must consider to determine if the proposed relocation is in the best interests of the child.

There is no presumption in favor of or against a request to relocate with the child even though the move will materially affect the current schedule of contact, access, and time-sharing with the nonrelocating parent.

Instead, the court looks at specific factors, such as: the child’s relationship with the relocating parent and with the non-relocating parent, the age and needs of the child, the ability to preserve the relationship with the non-relocating parent; and the child’s preference, among others.

Of course, if one of the parents dies during the divorce proceedings, that would likely cause the divorce, and related issues of parent relocation with the children, to be dismissed.

Murder She Wrote

The divergent theories of Professor Markel’s killing surfaced as attorneys laid out their cases and testimony finally began in the trial of a Miami couple charged in the alleged murder-for-hire plot.

Defense attorneys for Sigfredo Garcia and Katherine Magbanua sought to distance their clients from prosecutors’ theory that the pair carried out the grisly end of a scheme financed by the family of Markel’s ex-wife Wendi Adelson. Investigators say the motive “stemmed from the desperate desire of the Adelson family” that Wendi and the couple’s two young sons be allowed to move to South Florida in the fallout of a contentious divorce with Markel.

Magbanua is the accused conduit between the Adelsons and the killers, Garcia and his friend Luis Rivera. Prosecutors say they drove from Miami to Tallahassee to shoot Markel in July 2014. The pivotal question is why the Adelson family is not facing charges, Kawass told jurors during her 30-minute opening. She asked them to follow the evidence, which prosecutors will present piecemeal.

“There is no direct evidence (Magbanua) was involved. Zero. And that’s because she wasn’t involved. She had absolutely nothing to do with this case,” she said. “The government made it very clear who is behind the killing of Dan Markel. Why aren’t the Adelsons here? Why aren’t they charged? Because they don’t have the evidence to do it.”

Details of the Tallahassee Police Department probable cause affidavit released the morning of June 2, 2016 reveal the route taken by murder suspect, Sigfredo Garcia.

Before the two defense attorneys made their case, prosecutor Georgia Cappleman traced the murder-for-hire allegations.

“Wendi Adelson had a problem and the name of that problem was Dan Markel. And the solution to that problem was Sigfredo Garcia, Katherine Magbanua and Luis Rivera. I believe that you will be convinced the state is not pulling a fast one on you but rather that Katherine Magbanua was hired to solicit Garcia to in turn solicit Rivera to come to Tallahassee and execute Mr. Markel in cold blood.”

Garcia’s attorney began his opening statements by pointing out that the third man charged, Luis Rivera, only received a seven-year sentence for his confession. But the statements to investigators by the state’s key witness were rife with inconsistencies, he told the jury.

The Tallahassee Democrat article is here.