TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — The matriarch of a South Florida family, facing a potential life sentence for the calculated murder of her former son-in-law, is seeking a new trial. Donna Adelson’s legal team contends that alleged juror misconduct and judicial errors justify revisiting her case.
Adelson was convicted earlier this month after jurors delivered guilty verdicts during a trial that lasted several weeks. She faced serious charges including first-degree murder, conspiracy, and solicitation concerning the death of Daniel Markel, a law professor at Florida State University, who was killed in 2014.
In a motion for a retrial submitted on Tuesday, attorneys Joshua Zelman and Jackie Fulford raise concerns about two jurors who shared details of their jury experiences post-trial. One juror made headlines by posting a video on TikTok discussing her role, while another appeared on a true crime podcast titled “Surviving the Survivor.”
The defense team argues that the trial’s verdicts do not align with the evidence presented. They assert that prosecutors relied heavily on speculation rather than concrete proof, and they claim Circuit Judge Stephen Everett exhibited bias favoring the prosecution throughout the proceedings.
“Where is the evidence that Mrs. Adelson conspired with anyone for Mr. Markel’s death? There is none,” the attorneys emphasized in their motion.
The case has drawn significant attention in Florida’s capital over the years, featuring complex details involving a contentious divorce, strained family dynamics, and ongoing custody disputes. Markel was embroiled in a bitter legal battle regarding the custody of his two children with Wendi Adelson, Donna’s daughter.
Prosecutors alleged that Donna Adelson played a pivotal role in the orchestration of Markel’s murder, arguing that he obstructed her daughter and grandsons from relocating from Tallahassee to South Florida to be closer to family.
The outcome of the motion for a new trial and its implications for the case remain uncertain as the legal battle continues.
This article was automatically written by Open AI. The people, facts, circumstances, and story may be inaccurate, and any article can be requested removed, retracted, or corrected by writing an email to contact@publiclawlibrary.org.