Murder at Lululemon in Bethesda

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:13:13, have you never heard the term "crime of opportunity"?

Hate to break it to you, but there are coincidences. Happens all the time.

As for the speculators who'd like to think one of the victims was in on it: you're grasping for something to make the victim NOT THE SAME AS YOU. If the victims were not complicit, but just nice law abiding women engaged in mundane daily activities, well then - that means that you too could be brutally beaten, raped, tortured, murdered - all because you forgot your cell phone or ran out to help a friend with something that seemed perfectly safe.

Guess what? It could have been you.

Ding ding ding! Exactly.

I agree, which is why this is so freaking sad and scary and why so many of us DCUM'ers are talking about it.

I just wanted to add my $.02 for what it's worth (which is nothing, I know). I believe in the old adage that the simplest answer is usually the right one. And that being said, I think that these two animals were waiting around to do something else, but then saw these two women go into the store and thought, hey, let's rob them instead. It makes sense that they would have found a boxcutter and hammer in the store and weren't sitting around armed with these things. I am also guessing/speculating/whatever that while maybe they did intend just to rob, that the two victims fought back and that these animals became angry and violent. That is NOT to say that the women are at fault for what happened. I'm just saying that there are horrendously disturbed and violent people out there who think nothing of becoming murderous torturers in the blink of an eye. Praying with all my heart and soul that they are caught.

Just wanted to chime in and say I 100% agree with this series of posts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:13:13, have you never heard the term "crime of opportunity"?

Hate to break it to you, but there are coincidences. Happens all the time.

As for the speculators who'd like to think one of the victims was in on it: you're grasping for something to make the victim NOT THE SAME AS YOU. If the victims were not complicit, but just nice law abiding women engaged in mundane daily activities, well then - that means that you too could be brutally beaten, raped, tortured, murdered - all because you forgot your cell phone or ran out to help a friend with something that seemed perfectly safe.

Guess what? It could have been you.

My thoughts exactly. No one wants to believe the two men were just on the prowl looking for any woman they could find and assault her -- I guess that scenario hits too close to home.

Thanks for the free psychoanalysis but you're just wrong here. You're being silly and possibly trying to distract yourselves by getting into another stupid, finger pointing DCUM argument. The reason I brought this up early on in the conversation is because I had been telling my dad about the case and he brought up all of these questions. He lives far from here and has been in law enforcement all of his life. I was mad at him at first for questioning the brutalized women but when I thought about it more, I realized he could be right. There are holes in the story. That is all. I don't know any more answers than you do and I don't feel any better about this than you do but I am still asking questions until we get better answers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:13:13, have you never heard the term "crime of opportunity"?

Hate to break it to you, but there are coincidences. Happens all the time.

As for the speculators who'd like to think one of the victims was in on it: you're grasping for something to make the victim NOT THE SAME AS YOU. If the victims were not complicit, but just nice law abiding women engaged in mundane daily activities, well then - that means that you too could be brutally beaten, raped, tortured, murdered - all because you forgot your cell phone or ran out to help a friend with something that seemed perfectly safe.

Guess what? It could have been you.

My thoughts exactly. No one wants to believe the two men were just on the prowl looking for any woman they could find and assault her -- I guess that scenario hits too close to home.

Thanks for the free psychoanalysis but you're just wrong here. You're being silly and possibly trying to distract yourselves by getting into another stupid, finger pointing DCUM argument. The reason I brought this up early on in the conversation is because I had been telling my dad about the case and he brought up all of these questions. He lives far from here and has been in law enforcement all of his life. I was mad at him at first for questioning the brutalized women but when I thought about it more, I realized he could be right. There are holes in the story. That is all. I don't know any more answers than you do and I don't feel any better about this than you do but I am still asking questions until we get better answers.

Of course there are holes in the story. I think your dad would agree that it would be pretty shoddy police work to reveal all the details to the press while the suspects are still at large.

[Anonymous]

Of course it is disrespectful to question and doubt the meager facts.
But that is how you get to the bottom of things, and it is not the sole prerogative of the investigators, but also of the general public.

My thoughts are with the victims of this terrifying crime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:13:13, have you never heard the term "crime of opportunity"?

Hate to break it to you, but there are coincidences. Happens all the time.

As for the speculators who'd like to think one of the victims was in on it: you're grasping for something to make the victim NOT THE SAME AS YOU. If the victims were not complicit, but just nice law abiding women engaged in mundane daily activities, well then - that means that you too could be brutally beaten, raped, tortured, murdered - all because you forgot your cell phone or ran out to help a friend with something that seemed perfectly safe.

Guess what? It could have been you.

My thoughts exactly. No one wants to believe the two men were just on the prowl looking for any woman they could find and assault her -- I guess that scenario hits too close to home.

Thanks for the free psychoanalysis but you're just wrong here. You're being silly and possibly trying to distract yourselves by getting into another stupid, finger pointing DCUM argument. The reason I brought this up early on in the conversation is because I had been telling my dad about the case and he brought up all of these questions. He lives far from here and has been in law enforcement all of his life. I was mad at him at first for questioning the brutalized women but when I thought about it more, I realized he could be right. There are holes in the story. That is all. I don't know any more answers than you do and I don't feel any better about this than you do but I am still asking questions until we get better answers.

Of course there are holes in the story. I think your dad would agree that it would be pretty shoddy police work to reveal all the details to the press while the suspects are still at large.

Absolutely. And that was his point. Don't believe what you hear about this. There is more to it than the story you are getting on the news.

[Anonymous]

The police don't reveal everything to the press but they generally give a VERY good description of their take on the subject up until that point. And quite frankly it certainly seemed as if the possibility existed that it was an inside job and that the one girl that is alive had something to do with it. Does that mean she did??? NO it doesn't! But some of it doesn't add up. Although now that I know that they left the store at 9:45....and returned 15 minutes later it doesn't seem as calculating as it originally sounded when they said they closed the store at 9:00 and met back up at 10:00. It very well could have been innocent and she realized right after she left and then called the other girl immediately. I would like to know what she left in the store. I have heard phone and I have heard wallet. Wallet would make me feel much better because if it was phone I have a hard time thinking that she knew her number off the top of her head.

[Anonymous]

Detectives are saying it was a random act. Now please let the surviving victim remain anonymous if she chooses.

http://www.wtop.com/?nid=41&sid=2307435

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:13:13, have you never heard the term "crime of opportunity"?

Hate to break it to you, but there are coincidences. Happens all the time.

As for the speculators who'd like to think one of the victims was in on it: you're grasping for something to make the victim NOT THE SAME AS YOU. If the victims were not complicit, but just nice law abiding women engaged in mundane daily activities, well then - that means that you too could be brutally beaten, raped, tortured, murdered - all because you forgot your cell phone or ran out to help a friend with something that seemed perfectly safe.

Guess what? It could have been you.

My thoughts exactly. No one wants to believe the two men were just on the prowl looking for any woman they could find and assault her -- I guess that scenario hits too close to home.

Thanks for the free psychoanalysis but you're just wrong here. You're being silly and possibly trying to distract yourselves by getting into another stupid, finger pointing DCUM argument. The reason I brought this up early on in the conversation is because I had been telling my dad about the case and he brought up all of these questions. He lives far from here and has been in law enforcement all of his life. I was mad at him at first for questioning the brutalized women but when I thought about it more, I realized he could be right. There are holes in the story. That is all. I don't know any more answers than you do and I don't feel any better about this than you do but I am still asking questions until we get better answers.

Of course there are holes in the story. I think your dad would agree that it would be pretty shoddy police work to reveal all the details to the press while the suspects are still at large.

Absolutely. And that was his point. Don't believe what you hear about this. There is more to it than the story you are getting on the news.

I'm the most recent poster you quoted, and I agree with you that there is more to the story than people are hearing on the news. I just think that many of the things that have been suggested on this thread are really tacky and needlessly cruel. I agree with the poster who said that just having the right to speculate wildly on the internet doesn't make it a tasteful thing to do. I know, I know, if you don't like it, don't read it. Fair enough. But it's cold and tacky to suggest that the surviving victim was somehow complicit in her own brutal attack and the death of her friend, even if it turns out that she did know her attackers. No one wants that kind of thing to happen. I would personally really love to live in a culture where we don't descend like vultures onto a tragedy, act like we are entitled to have all the facts and post hurtful speculations about victims of violent crime, because regardless of the circumstances surrounding this attack, that's what she is - the victim of violent crime.

[Anonymous]

I don't recall anyone saying any names?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Detectives are saying it was a random act. Now please let the surviving victim remain anonymous if she chooses.

http://www.wtop.com/?nid=41&sid=2307435

The police are saying that...but that does not mean it was not. In the press release yesterday the chief kept saying that at this point in time they believe its random. If they knew that the victim was involved do you really think they would publicize that? Really? They might know the races of the men but they have not said. They are not going to give any pertinent information until they have the suspects in jail.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Detectives are saying it was a random act. Now please let the surviving victim remain anonymous if she chooses.

http://www.wtop.com/?nid=41&sid=2307435

The police are saying that...but that does not mean it was not. In the press release yesterday the chief kept saying that at this point in time they believe its random. If they knew that the victim was involved do you really think they would publicize that? Really? They might know the races of the men but they have not said. They are not going to give any pertinent information until they have the suspects in jail.

Can we just let this go already? Some people believe that it's random, others think the police are withholding info. Me, personally, I'm the former.

[Anonymous]

Interesting perspectives/opinions, most of which I don't agree with although some I do agree with.

I've spoken to a couple people who have the inside scoop on some of the facts.
First: to say this was an "inside job"and that one of the victims was involved is just flat out insane and insulting. These women were unfortunately in the wrong place at the wrong time. It's rather evident that the perpetrators are, without a doubt, sociopaths.
Second: these animals who committed this atrocious crime were, in fact, robbing the store after closing and the victims had returned while the robbery was in progress. The perpetrators didn't just waltz right in - they had been hiding in a dressing room and waited until the store closed to rob it.
Third: I know for sure that there are more facts and details as to what happened in this case but it would not be a smart or tactful move on the part of investigators to release that information to the public.

[Anonymous]

You are the FIRST to say that the robbery was in progress when they reentered the store. In fact EVERY news report specifically says that they entered the store shortly after the women arrived.

[Anonymous]

Also you must have NEVER shopped in Lululemon! No one goes into a dressing room that an employee doesn't let them in! They are diligent in there about monitoring what you are trying on in the dressing room as well as letting you in the dressing room!

[Anonymous]

So I don't believe there is ANY way that anyone walked into the back during store hours and hid in a dressing room. I think that is NOT possible!