The Dan Markel Case: A Prosecutor's Evolving Perspective
New comments from State Attorney Willie Meggs raise the possibility of more arrests.
William N. Meggs (State Attorney’s Office – Second Judicial Circuit)
As followers of the investigation into the murder of Professor Dan Markel will recall, State Attorney Willie Meggs has been proceeding with caution in the case. Even though some of his colleagues in law enforcement allege involvement in the murder by the Adelsons, the family of Markel’s ex-wife Wendi, Meggs has so far not approved any prosecutions against them (and the Adelsons, through their lawyers, have maintained their innocence). Meggs even offered this sassy comment:
If [the police] believe they have probable cause then they should go make the arrest. They don’t need me. I would say to Chief [Michael] DeLeo go make the arrest and get ready for your civil suit from whoever they have arrested without probable cause.
Is The Future Of Law Distributed? Lessons From The Tech Adoption Curve
(Meggs seemed so protective of the Adelsons that, out of curiosity, I looked up whether they had made any campaign contributions to him. I didn’t find anything.)
But quite a bit has changed since Meggs made those remarks. One of the two alleged hitmen, Luis Rivera, pleaded guilty — and made remarks in which he implicated Wendi Adelson. Rivera also implicated Katherine Magbanua — ex-girlfriend of Markel’s former brother-in-law Charlie Adelson, and mother of two children with alleged hitman Sigfredo Garcia — and Magbanua is now in custody.
It seems that these recent developments have changed some of Meggs’s thinking. In a recent interview with VICE, Meggs made the following comments:
I believe and investigators believe that at one point [Magbanua] called Charlie to tell him the deal is done. What proof do we have? None at the moment. It will probably come, but we are not there yet.
Sponsored
Legal AI: 3 Steps Law Firms Should Take Now
The Business Case For AI At Your Law Firm
Is The Future Of Law Distributed? Lessons From The Tech Adoption Curve
The Business Case For AI At Your Law Firm
Much will depend, of course, on what Magbanua does (or does not) tell police. But Meggs does seem to credit at least some of the comments by Luis Rivera, based on these remarks to VICE:
We don’t believe Rivera was the triggerman, and yes we did make a deal with him. Did we like it? Nope. Is it the reality? Yep.
The deal, you’ll recall, was seven years for murder. That’s a favorable deal for Rivera (who’s already serving a 12-year sentence for a different crime), but quite possibly a good deal for the prosecution too, if Rivera can help them make the case against others.
Lawyers for the Adelsons are already making preemptive strikes against Rivera as a witness. Wendi Adelson’s lawyer, John Lauro, said that Rivera “is hardly a credible witness.” Charlie Adelson’s lawyer, David Oscar Markus, was even harsher:
Seven years is just offensive. The prosecution admittedly didn’t have enough evidence so it went out and bought some by giving away the farm to a murderer. This convicted gangster knows the game and would have said anything not to come out of prison in a box. The prosecution literally threatened him with the needle to get this testimony. That’s not a search for the truth. That’s a deal with the devil.
Sponsored
Early Adopters Of Legal AI Gaining Competitive Edge In Marketplace
Navigating Financial Success by Avoiding Common Pitfalls and Maximizing Firm Performance
But who are the real devils here? These new comments by Willie Meggs suggest that the story is far from over.
Who Put the Hit Out on a Florida Criminal Justice Professor? [VICE]
David Lat is the founder and managing editor of Above the Law and the author of Supreme Ambitions: A Novel. You can connect with David on Twitter (@DavidLat), LinkedIn, and Facebook, and you can reach him by email at dlat@abovethelaw.com.
