The Dan Markel Case: Katherine Magbanua Turns Down A Deal
Who's paying Katie Magbanua's legal fees will remain a mystery, and her trial date has been set.
Katherine Magbanua
When I reported on Wendi Adelson’s new job last week, I also noted that a court hearing would determine whether we’d get to find out more about who is paying the legal fees of defendant Katherine Magbanua.
The hearing took place last Friday, and the answer is no, as reported by the Tallahassee Democrat:
The Ethical use of Generative AI
A third party is paying Katherine Magbanua’s legal fees, but it’s not the former in-laws of the man she is suspected of being involved with killing, according to her attorneys and a Leon County Circuit judge.
On Friday, a scheduled four-hour hearing in which state prosecutors sought to unravel the money trail was whittled down to 30 minutes as Magbanua’s attorneys volunteered to tell Leon Circuit Judge James Hankinson in private who was footing the bills for her first-degree murder defense.
The 32-year-old is one of three people charged in the July 2014 shooting of Florida State law professor Dan Markel in what investigators say was a murder-for-hire plot….
Hankinson said he was satisfied Magbanua’s Miami attorneys Tara Kawass and Christopher DeCoste weren’t being paid by the family of Markel’s ex-wife Wendi Adelson and declined to disclose to prosecutors who was.
“The court is comfortable that the payments for the attorney fees are being paid by a third party unrelated to the Adelson family,” Hankinson said after the 15-minute session behind closed doors. “I don’t believe any further inquiry is needed or appropriate.”
So we’ll have to keep wondering about the identity of Katie Magbanua’s mystery benefactor. My money’s on Abel Magwitch.
Here’s another thing I’m wondering: how deeply did Judge Hankinson delve into the explanation proffered by Magbanua’s counsel? One could imagine a situation where the Adelsons paid money to a third party, and the third party then paid DeCoste and Kawass, without telling DeCoste and Kawass about the Adelson connection. This would then allow DeCoste and Kawass to maintain — honestly, enthusiastically, and even indignantly — that they aren’t being paid by the Adelsons. (Cf. the possibility of Wendi Adelson not being told in advance of Dan Markel’s murder, so she would be able to comport herself properly when interviewed by the police.)
What prompted the prosecution’s curiosity about legal fees? As prosecutor Georgia Cappleman told WCTV after the hearing, “It’s a little suspicious that [Magbanua] has no money to pay, yet she’s hired an expensive legal team that’s housed in the same building as Mr. [Charlie] Adelson’s attorneys.”
Sponsored
The Ethical use of Generative AI
How To Maximize Productivity With Westlaw Precision With CoCounsel
Attention Buyer: Not All Legal AI Models Are Created Equal
Attention Buyer: Not All Legal AI Models Are Created Equal
Yes, that’s right: DeCoste and Kawass are is located in the same office building — and not just the same building, but the same suite (PH1) — as David Oscar Markus, the prominent, very successful Miami defense lawyer who represents Charlie Adelson, brother-in-law of Wendi Adelson and a person of interest in the Markel investigation. (A probable cause affidavit for Charlie Adelson has been prepared, but to date Adelson has not been charged; through David Markus, Charlie Adelson denies any involvement in the murder.)
[UPDATE (11:35 p.m.): DeCoste and Markus are in the same building, but Kawass is not. DeCoste works at 40 NW 3rd Street, but Kawass works at 780 Tamiami Canal Road. DeCoste contacted us to explain:
Tara and I don’t, and have never, shared office space. Tara was the original attorney [representing Magbanua]. Tara and myself have been working together on complex cases since before I moved into my current office (see, e.g., here, here, and here). This being complex, she brought me into the case post arrest.
Katie is fully informed and the only one making decisions concerning her life. But if you want to keep feeding foolish conspiracy theories, I should tell you Sasquatch is living in my garage and I was Stanley Kubrick’s key grip for the moon landing film.
Time will tell what conspiracy theories in this case are “foolish,” but for now, I thank DeCoste for the correction and apologize for the error.]
I reached out to David Oscar Markus to see if he had any comment on (1) the issue of Katie Magbanua’s legal fees and (2) whether he was involved, in any way whatsoever, in Magbanua’s retention of DeCoste and Kawass. His response:
Sponsored
New Report - Are Small Firms Achieving Their Legal Tech Goals?
Mitigating M&A Cyber Risk: Pre- & Post-Acquisition Due Diligence
The judge conducted an inquiry and rightfully concluded that the Adelsons are not involved with Ms. Magbanua’s lawyers.
Note the lack of comment from Markus on whether he played any role in Katie Magbanua hiring DeCoste and Kawass. Markus is an aggressive advocate for his clients, but also an honest and ethical one; he would rather not say anything than say anything dishonest. So this raises the possibility that David Markus did play some sort of role in Katherine Magbanua’s hiring of Chris DeCoste and Tara Kawass.
There wouldn’t be anything inherently wrong with that; lawyers make referrals and recommendations all the time. And it wouldn’t be surprising if Katie Magbanua reached out to Charlie Adelson — her former boyfriend, and possibly someone she’s still close to — for advice on whom to hire. At the same time, I can understand why Markus wouldn’t want to confirm such involvement, given the existing suspicions of Adelson family involvement in Magbanua’s defense.
At last Friday’s hearing, Judge Hankinson set a trial date for Magbanua: January 22, 2018, the same trial date as co-defendant Sigfredo Garcia (with whom Magbanua was also once romantically involved, and with whom she has two children). Whether the two will be tried together remains an open question; the state is considering it but has not yet filed to do so, as Cappleman told the court on Friday.
In her post-hearing comments to WCTV, prosecutor Georgia Cappleman also revealed this interesting information:
[Katherine Magbanua] was offered immunity, refused it. She’s now sitting in jail. I believe she holds the key to her own freedom essentially
One reader following the case flagged this for me, and noted (capitalization and punctuation in the original email):
Katherine Magbanua was offered an IMMUNITY DEAL, and — presumably following the sage, independent advice of her lawyers — she REFUSED it! WHO REFUSES AN IMMUNITY DEAL IN A CAPITAL MURDER CASE???????? What does this tell us about the conflict of interest of her attorneys and who is pulling their strings??? In my opinion… DAVID OSCAR MARKUS is their puppeteer and they are protecting his client at the expense of Ms. Magbanua and putting her in serious legal jeopardy!!! To me, this is a mockery of the justice system!
The basis for this reader’s rather passionate opinion is not entirely clear. But it’s fair to say that he’s not alone in holding it. Other observers, as well as the prosecution, do wonder why Katie Magbanua refuses to cooperate with the government.
One possibility: with her legal fees being covered by a mysterious third party — and also by her relatives, who have gone into financial hardship as a result, according to her lawyers — perhaps Magbanua feels she might as well “roll the dice” at trial. If she’s acquitted, then she’ll walk away a free woman. If she’s convicted, then she can still try and cut a deal, in the hope of getting a break at sentencing.
Another possibility: Katherine Magbanua is innocent, which is the position of her lawyers. As Christopher DeCoste told WCTV after Friday’s hearing, “[The prosecutors have] been proved wrong on who’s paying the legal fees. They will be proved wrong on the homicide.”
UPDATE (11:35 p.m.): David Oscar Markus reached out after the publication of this post to explain that he and Kawass are not in the same building (as noted in the update above), and to add the following:
The Adelsons did not use a third party to pay for Katie’s fees.
As for your all-caps commenter, she should consider that defendants are right to reject immunity deals when they are asked to lie and falsely accuse for that immunity.
Markel murder suspects could be tried together [WCTV]
Judge: No connection to Adelsons in suspect’s legal fees [Tallahassee Democrat]
Third suspect in Dan Markel murder to face jury in 2018 [WTXL]
Judge: Florida woman may keep mum on who’s paying legal fees [Associated Press]
Earlier: The Dan Markel Case: Wendi Adelson Finds A New Job
David Lat is the founder and managing editor of Above the Law and the author of Supreme Ambitions: A Novel. He previously worked as a federal prosecutor in Newark, New Jersey; a litigation associate at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz; and a law clerk to Judge Diarmuid F. O’Scannlain of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. You can connect with David on Twitter (@DavidLat), LinkedIn, and Facebook, and you can reach him by email at [email protected].
