Fairfax County Double Murder

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Sincerely trying to be objective here but this makes no sense to me. BB already had Ryan incapacitated, but he told AP to go get his (other?) gun from the safe, which she would have access to and be able to open? Why would there be any need for both of them, one of them presumably with little to no firearm experience, to have guns drawn on an already-shot JR?

Exactly. BB, with trained firearm experience, recognizes someone as a lethal threat and acts accordingly, but needs assistance from a 23 yo with no firearm experience who has to go retrieve a securely stored weapon to finish the job? Ludicrous.

Agreed. If BB still had his handgun in his hand, why did he need the AP to take the time to go to the bathroom, unlock the safe, retrieve that handgun, return to the bedroom, and shoot JR. Would've been easier, taken less time, for BB to have shot JR again. Investigators are more than likely looking into this, questioning BB & AP about this issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If BB simply had divorced, he would have still been able to take Juliana to the gym and restaurants. They'd just need to move to a smaller place, not a big deal. I wonder if they were planning to leave the country.

Wife (ex-wife) would be afforded half his federal pension plus his TSP (gov'ts version of 401k) if they divorced.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The zoo thing is plausible, I guess, but only just.

I still don’t get that piece at all, are they saying they were rushing out to do a quick morning trip to the zoo before school at 9? That seems totally unbelievable to me

With DC-area rush hour traffic and parking at the zoo, the whole process of getting to the zoo's entrance would take a while. But, yes, that is quite early. Typically one would plan to depart their residence for such an outing once rush hour dies down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also interesting that AP's lawyer is admitting that she shot Ryan dead -- but in his telling, it was after BB shot him the first time and didn't kill him. Then Ryan was flailing about and threatening AP. So, she got BB's other gun from the bathroom and shot Ryan right then and there.

Not sure why their story doesn't have BB shooting Ryan more than once -- oh wait -- that's because their story has to fit the medical/ballistic facts that AP actually DID shoot Ryan.

In real life, every LEO is trained to shoot to kill. Once you start shooting, you don't stop until the threat is completely neutralized. So, there is no world where a real LEO would shoot an alleged murderer (i.e. Ryan stabbing CB), and then tell the nanny to get a gun and finish the job.

LEOs are trained to shoot until the threat is stopped, not trained 'to kill.'

As I said, they shoot until the threat is "completely neutralized". But to your point, LEO are never trained to "injure" someone when they start shooting.

The choice to start shooting is the choice to shoot to kill; not maim. If they think they need to use even one bullet, they are trained to shoot that bullet to kill. And they keep shooting until there is no longer a threat...which means BB was trained to keep shooting at Joe as long as he was creating a threat (per AP's fake story --.we know Joe was never really a threat).

Yes, I agree with you that a LEO cannot just keep shooting a person who is already on the ground and not able to harm anyone. But the initial choice to use lethal force is to be LETHAL.

[Anonymous]

So *most* wives typically aren't into joining a fetish site, meeting a stranger on the site, and inviting the man into their homes. By all accounts, CB wouldn't have done this on her own.

It is more common for the husband to suggest having a threesome (or a foursome, if AP was included), esp for a special event such as the husband's birthday. My guess is this is what happened, BB (for his birthday) made the suggestion to CB that she engage in a tryst with JR -or- they had a threesome, during the evening of his bday. JR went home afterward. The husband texted JR later that night or the next morning asking him to return to the house, and under what pretext we don't know right now, could be that BB hid JR's wallet etc that night, magically found it later and texted JR to return to retrieve.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also interesting that AP's lawyer is admitting that she shot Ryan dead -- but in his telling, it was after BB shot him the first time and didn't kill him. Then Ryan was flailing about and threatening AP. So, she got BB's other gun from the bathroom and shot Ryan right then and there.

Not sure why their story doesn't have BB shooting Ryan more than once -- oh wait -- that's because their story has to fit the medical/ballistic facts that AP actually DID shoot Ryan.

In real life, every LEO is trained to shoot to kill. Once you start shooting, you don't stop until the threat is completely neutralized. So, there is no world where a real LEO would shoot an alleged murderer (i.e. Ryan stabbing CB), and then tell the nanny to get a gun and finish the job.

LEOs are trained to shoot until the threat is stopped, not trained 'to kill.'

As I said, they shoot until the threat is "completely neutralized". But to your point, LEO are never trained to "injure" someone when they start shooting.

The choice to start shooting is the choice to shoot to kill; not maim. If they think they need to use even one bullet, they are trained to shoot that bullet to kill. And they keep shooting until there is no longer a threat...which means BB was trained to keep shooting at Joe as long as he was creating a threat (per AP's fake story --.we know Joe was never really a threat).

Yes, I agree with you that a LEO cannot just keep shooting a person who is already on the ground and not able to harm anyone. But the initial choice to use lethal force is to be LETHAL.

Sigh, I can tell you from experience that LEOs are trained to stop the threat, not trained 'to kill.' "they are trained to shoot that bullet to kill. " will you pls stop...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Sincerely trying to be objective here but this makes no sense to me. BB already had Ryan incapacitated, but he told AP to go get his (other?) gun from the safe, which she would have access to and be able to open? Why would there be any need for both of them, one of them presumably with little to no firearm experience, to have guns drawn on an already-shot JR?

Exactly. BB, with trained firearm experience, recognizes someone as a lethal threat and acts accordingly, but needs assistance from a 23 yo with no firearm experience who has to go retrieve a securely stored weapon to finish the job? Ludicrous.

Agreed. If BB still had his handgun in his hand, why did he need the AP to take the time to go to the bathroom, unlock the safe, retrieve that handgun, return to the bedroom, and shoot JR. Would've been easier, taken less time, for BB to have shot JR again. Investigators are more than likely looking into this, questioning BB & AP about this issue.

BB is not cooperating in the investigation.

Thus the need to try to squeeze AP into telling some story closer to the truth.

An about to turn 5 year old child was awake and present in the house when MULTIPLE shots were fired and multiple stab wounds inflicted on her MOMMY. If VA is correct and JR was not the perp for the stabbing, what was the plan if the little girl wandered into the chaotic scene seeking comfort? Take her out too?

Trying to smear JR & CB as deviant in death really just adds to the depravity if VA is correct and this was planned as a way to "be together" by AP and BB. Especially if the "scene" between JR and CB was orchestrated by someone else as they seem to imply.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If BB simply had divorced, he would have still been able to take Juliana to the gym and restaurants. They'd just need to move to a smaller place, not a big deal. I wonder if they were planning to leave the country.

Wife (ex-wife) would be afforded half his federal pension plus his TSP (gov'ts version of 401k) if they divorced.

plus no chance at life insurance payout

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So *most* wives typically aren't into joining a fetish site, meeting a stranger on the site, and inviting the man into their homes. By all accounts, CB wouldn't have done this on her own.

It is more common for the husband to suggest having a threesome (or a foursome, if AP was included), esp for a special event such as the husband's birthday. My guess is this is what happened, BB (for his birthday) made the suggestion to CB that she engage in a tryst with JR -or- they had a threesome, during the evening of his bday. JR went home afterward. The husband texted JR later that night or the next morning asking him to return to the house, and under what pretext we don't know right now, could be that BB hid JR's wallet etc that night, magically found it later and texted JR to return to retrieve.

Plausible theory here. Or if it was some "hotwife" scene could be to take place on the 24th, after BB left for work as part of the "scene" he may have set up. I do think CB thought AP and child would be out and she knew JR was coming over. She may have felt coerced.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So *most* wives typically aren't into joining a fetish site, meeting a stranger on the site, and inviting the man into their homes. By all accounts, CB wouldn't have done this on her own.

It is more common for the husband to suggest having a threesome (or a foursome, if AP was included), esp for a special event such as the husband's birthday. My guess is this is what happened, BB (for his birthday) made the suggestion to CB that she engage in a tryst with JR -or- they had a threesome, during the evening of his bday. JR went home afterward. The husband texted JR later that night or the next morning asking him to return to the house, and under what pretext we don't know right now, could be that BB hid JR's wallet etc that night, magically found it later and texted JR to return to retrieve.

Plausible theory here. Or if it was some "hotwife" scene could be to take place on the 24th, after BB left for work as part of the "scene" he may have set up. I do think CB thought AP and child would be out and she knew JR was coming over. She may have felt coerced.

Agreed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So *most* wives typically aren't into joining a fetish site, meeting a stranger on the site, and inviting the man into their homes. By all accounts, CB wouldn't have done this on her own.

It is more common for the husband to suggest having a threesome (or a foursome, if AP was included), esp for a special event such as the husband's birthday. My guess is this is what happened, BB (for his birthday) made the suggestion to CB that she engage in a tryst with JR -or- they had a threesome, during the evening of his bday. JR went home afterward. The husband texted JR later that night or the next morning asking him to return to the house, and under what pretext we don't know right now, could be that BB hid JR's wallet etc that night, magically found it later and texted JR to return to retrieve.

Plausible theory here. Or if it was some "hotwife" scene could be to take place on the 24th, after BB left for work as part of the "scene" he may have set up. I do think CB thought AP and child would be out and she knew JR was coming over. She may have felt coerced.

Yes, I mean in order to please BB/go along with what she thought was a fantasy scenario, she may actually have gotten the damn zoo tickets to get AP and daughter out of the house. They could’ve even gotten her to think of that on her own.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So *most* wives typically aren't into joining a fetish site, meeting a stranger on the site, and inviting the man into their homes. By all accounts, CB wouldn't have done this on her own.

It is more common for the husband to suggest having a threesome (or a foursome, if AP was included), esp for a special event such as the husband's birthday. My guess is this is what happened, BB (for his birthday) made the suggestion to CB that she engage in a tryst with JR -or- they had a threesome, during the evening of his bday. JR went home afterward. The husband texted JR later that night or the next morning asking him to return to the house, and under what pretext we don't know right now, could be that BB hid JR's wallet etc that night, magically found it later and texted JR to return to retrieve.

Plausible theory here. Or if it was some "hotwife" scene could be to take place on the 24th, after BB left for work as part of the "scene" he may have set up. I do think CB thought AP and child would be out and she knew JR was coming over. She may have felt coerced.

Yes, I mean in order to please BB/go along with what she thought was a fantasy scenario, she may actually have gotten the damn zoo tickets to get AP and daughter out of the house. They could’ve even gotten her to think of that on her own.

For sure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As many have stated, yes the zoo does still require timed entry passes to get in. but the buildings don't open until 9, so going that early in the winter means you are wandering around outside without seeing really anything for at least an hour. it just doesn't make sense.

Parking-wise it's relatively easy to find street parking in mt. pleasant, especially in the morning on a weekday when people are leaving for work. I haven't read that much, but did they say anything about planning to park? I'm just not sure why that matters here.

Again, I also don't believe the story, but if you're driving from Herndon to the national zoo, it's going to take you at least an hour. The earlier you leave, the better the traffic. I would definitely leave as early as possible and just take my kid to Starbucks for 30 minutes in order to avoid sitting in traffic for 90 minutes rather than 60 minutes.

If you roll up on Conn Ave at exactly 9:28 you can park on the street right across from the entrance. But the buses know this too so you have to be right on time.

It's just a lot easier to park at the zoo, why can't you understand this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Sincerely trying to be objective here but this makes no sense to me. BB already had Ryan incapacitated, but he told AP to go get his (other?) gun from the safe, which she would have access to and be able to open? Why would there be any need for both of them, one of them presumably with little to no firearm experience, to have guns drawn on an already-shot JR?

Exactly. BB, with trained firearm experience, recognizes someone as a lethal threat and acts accordingly, but needs assistance from a 23 yo with no firearm experience who has to go retrieve a securely stored weapon to finish the job? Ludicrous.

If he already shot JR once, then he had a firearm on his person. Why, then, did he tell AP to go get another firearm?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As many have stated, yes the zoo does still require timed entry passes to get in. but the buildings don't open until 9, so going that early in the winter means you are wandering around outside without seeing really anything for at least an hour. it just doesn't make sense.

Parking-wise it's relatively easy to find street parking in mt. pleasant, especially in the morning on a weekday when people are leaving for work. I haven't read that much, but did they say anything about planning to park? I'm just not sure why that matters here.

Again, I also don't believe the story, but if you're driving from Herndon to the national zoo, it's going to take you at least an hour. The earlier you leave, the better the traffic. I would definitely leave as early as possible and just take my kid to Starbucks for 30 minutes in order to avoid sitting in traffic for 90 minutes rather than 60 minutes.

If you roll up on Conn Ave at exactly 9:28 you can park on the street right across from the entrance. But the buses know this too so you have to be right on time.

It's just a lot easier to park at the zoo, why can't you understand this?

Guys, it wasn’t even a consideration because we all know they were never going to get to the zoo.