Fire in upper NW?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:if they take the 5th and do not cooperate, they can easily be charged with aiding and abetting. So, they essentially have the choice of either cooperating or being charged.

Based on what we know right now, I think it's a stretch to say they can easily be charged with aiding and abetting. First, you would have to prove that they knew DW had committed a crime. For that to be proved, evidence will need to be found demonstrating that, and we don't know whether the police possess any such evidence. Further, if they refuse to cooperate (which is different than taking the 5th), that fact can't be used against them because it's not in and of itself inculpatory.

The guys in the truck had the cash, so that puts charges in play.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read the charging docs. I don't think they mean the boy was burned alive (at least not purposely). I think the intent was to kill everyone and then douse them all with gasoline and burn them and any evidence. But they were in separate rooms and the fire started in the child' bedroom and then didn't fully ignite the other room. It is clear that the other three were killed by trauma because their bodies were never consumed in flame. The child is unclear at best, but likely also beat (please, god quickly) and dead or nearly so (i.e. unconscious) when fire started.

I'd like to think he was in the other room, his bedroom, in bed out of kindness. They were letting the kid lie down.

Out of kindness? It would be nice to believe that, but I don't. Phillip's cause of death was thermal injuries: BURNS and sharp force injuries: STAB wounds. No kindness involved. It was sick, sadistic behavior. How horrifying for his family to have to know these details.

Exactly. And separated from his parents while all of this was going on?

PP, I'm sorry, but how dare you use the word "kindness" in any sentence or paragraph referring to these animals that killed him.

I would like to think that it wasn't complete hell for this little boy, that he got to lie down and sleep for some of it. How dare me not want it to have been 15 hours of pain and agony and desperate fear?

In the affidavit, the bed was set on fire while the child was lying on it and stabbed but alive. He died of burns and lacerations. The mattress was nearly completely consumed and the most damaged item in the room which means someone threw gasoline on it and set it on fire. Probably the reason the child was the last person identified.

"Kindness"!?! Is not the word to describe this.

[Anonymous]

not if they are "going to help him turn himself in."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:if they take the 5th and do not cooperate, they can easily be charged with aiding and abetting. So, they essentially have the choice of either cooperating or being charged.

Based on what we know right now, I think it's a stretch to say they can easily be charged with aiding and abetting. First, you would have to prove that they knew DW had committed a crime. For that to be proved, evidence will need to be found demonstrating that, and we don't know whether the police possess any such evidence. Further, if they refuse to cooperate (which is different than taking the 5th), that fact can't be used against them because it's not in and of itself inculpatory.

The guys in the truck had the cash, so that puts charges in play.

Holding cash, whether in a truck or in your pocket, is not in and of itself criminal.

[Anonymous]

Think box truck was rented as possible "hotel room"while they drive cross country to Mexico...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:if they take the 5th and do not cooperate, they can easily be charged with aiding and abetting. So, they essentially have the choice of either cooperating or being charged.

Based on what we know right now, I think it's a stretch to say they can easily be charged with aiding and abetting. First, you would have to prove that they knew DW had committed a crime. For that to be proved, evidence will need to be found demonstrating that, and we don't know whether the police possess any such evidence. Further, if they refuse to cooperate (which is different than taking the 5th), that fact can't be used against them because it's not in and of itself inculpatory.

The guys in the truck had the cash, so that puts charges in play.

Holding cash, whether in a truck or in your pocket, is not in and of itself criminal.

Receiving stolen property if they knew it was stolen?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:if they take the 5th and do not cooperate, they can easily be charged with aiding and abetting. So, they essentially have the choice of either cooperating or being charged.

Based on what we know right now, I think it's a stretch to say they can easily be charged with aiding and abetting. First, you would have to prove that they knew DW had committed a crime. For that to be proved, evidence will need to be found demonstrating that, and we don't know whether the police possess any such evidence. Further, if they refuse to cooperate (which is different than taking the 5th), that fact can't be used against them because it's not in and of itself inculpatory.

Not suggesting that refusing to cooperate would be used against them officially in the charges, but the practical situation is they can cooperate and tell what they know about Daron's actions or they can not cooperate and risk being treated as conspirators.

[Anonymous]

And where the hell is the $30,000.00.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:18:37. Love this post. Keep doing the great work you are doing. If it is not you, you clearly know enough to let us know that the US Attorney's office is doing great work, and I feel reassured that we are in good hands.

18:37 here - I am not involved in this case and I don't work for the USAO, but I've defended cases in DC Superior Court (in a prior life), and the prosecutors are very good.

Yes they are.

[Anonymous]

Does dw currently have dress? Guy driving porche did not

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And where the hell is the $30,000.00.

Maybe stashed somewhere in NYC? Or somewhere between NYC and DC?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In the affidavit, the bed was set on fire while the child was lying on it and stabbed but alive. He died of burns and lacerations. The mattress was nearly completely consumed and the most damaged item in the room which means someone threw gasoline on it and set it on fire. Probably the reason the child was the last person identified.

Not the PP from this string, but without going back and reading it, I don't believe the affidavit stated that the child was alive. When they describe the cause of death as thermal and blunt trauma, it may be that his remains were too destroyed to narrow the exact cause of death, whereas they could do so with the others. It's certainly possible that he was still alive, but I think we need to wait and see more definitive findings from an autopsy before we rush to judgment on that question either way. Further, being alive is different than being conscious.

In any event, my point is not that killers are anything other than sadistic. However, I do hold out hope that the boy did not experience anything to do with the burning nor know it was coming.

[Anonymous]

sounds like DW or someone had converted some of the cash to money orders. So it is possible they had 10K in cash, and 20K in money orders and the rest spent, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:if they take the 5th and do not cooperate, they can easily be charged with aiding and abetting. So, they essentially have the choice of either cooperating or being charged.

Based on what we know right now, I think it's a stretch to say they can easily be charged with aiding and abetting. First, you would have to prove that they knew DW had committed a crime. For that to be proved, evidence will need to be found demonstrating that, and we don't know whether the police possess any such evidence. Further, if they refuse to cooperate (which is different than taking the 5th), that fact can't be used against them because it's not in and of itself inculpatory.

The guys in the truck had the cash, so that puts charges in play.

Holding cash, whether in a truck or in your pocket, is not in and of itself criminal.

But they were just holding cash. They were holding cash and hiding out and traveling with someone they had to have known was a fugitive who got the cash in a brutal quadruple murder.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:if they take the 5th and do not cooperate, they can easily be charged with aiding and abetting. So, they essentially have the choice of either cooperating or being charged.

Based on what we know right now, I think it's a stretch to say they can easily be charged with aiding and abetting. First, you would have to prove that they knew DW had committed a crime. For that to be proved, evidence will need to be found demonstrating that, and we don't know whether the police possess any such evidence. Further, if they refuse to cooperate (which is different than taking the 5th), that fact can't be used against them because it's not in and of itself inculpatory.

The guys in the truck had the cash, so that puts charges in play.

Holding cash, whether in a truck or in your pocket, is not in and of itself criminal.

Receiving stolen property if they knew it was stolen?

As I said above, the police/prosecution would need to prove they knew DW had committed a crime and was in possession of stolen property. While someone holding a large sum of cash may be suspicious, it is not itself criminal.