Forum Index
»
Off-Topic
Fire in upper NW?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
| I'm pretty sure the assistant is female |
Anonymous
But I can see how , if the dreds were pulled back, it might have looked like he had short hair. Some said he may have been wearing a hoodie in the video. Seeing someone through the window of a passing vehicle would make it hard to determine exactly what you were seeing. This could well have been witness error/misinterpretation. Or not. I just don't think it's clear proof there was an accomplice. |
Anonymous
| How are the 5 others who were with them released? Aren't they guilty for helping a fugitive or accessory after the fact? |
Anonymous
I haven't been able to find the IG account myself. But in the pictures posted in one of the articles which showed the pictures taken from inside the Porsche, the person at the wheel appeared to have on pink pants/leggings. http://wttg.images.worldnow.com/images/7847837_G.jpg |
Anonymous
Same poster here, but in the article where this picture came from, they repeatedly refer to the assistant as "he", so IDK. http://www.myfoxdc.com/story/29129466/savopoulos-assistant The police know and that's all that matters. |
Anonymous
|
I don't know - the eye witness information is pretty specific: driver was a black male with "short well-groomed hair."
To me, that level of specificity implies a pretty good line of sight. You wouldn't comment like this if it could have been a hoodie. |
Anonymous
It does seem specific for sure, I guess time will tell. I remember when Hannah Graham was abducted in Charlottesville, some witnesses described the killer as being bald or with short hair, and he ended up to be a guy with long dreds. Just one example of witness error. |
Anonymous
| Will someone please post a link with the voicemail? Can't seem to find it in the thread. Thanks |
Anonymous
|
They should burn this monster just like he burned that child to death. [/bold] 2400 volts will fry him pretty quickly from the inside out. [/bold] What about just repeating what he did on the child. yes, I've heard about cruel and unusual punishment. Wint and/or his accomplice(s) made it a painful and long ordeal for the family. I wouldn't make his death quick. |
Anonymous
No. Your punishment is to find it somewhere in the low 100s. |
Anonymous
And it is an ABC link. Go! |
Anonymous
http://abcnews.go.com/US/timeline-mysterious-hours-leading-dc-mansion-fire-raise/story?id=31159620 I think this is the link - about half way through. |
Anonymous
|
Bump:
If the Steele Detective Agency is ever hiring, sign me up. Jeff Steele's posts are really calm, reasonable, and convincing. A few thoughts: 1. I won't speak to whether DW's companions should or will be charged with something at this point. However, on the issue of whether DW could plausibly make the case to that he was "on his way to turn himself in," a thought: DW had asked one or more of the women sharing the car with him to use the cash to buy money orders AFTER he returned to DC. To me, this would suggest (and it's a fair inference to argue to a jury) that a man who is trying to convert/hide his ill-gotten cash after returning to DC is not one who is planning in the near future to turn himself in. 2. Why the money orders? I am assuming it was to try to get rid of cash that DW feared could tie him even more closely to the killing. He may have feared that the serial numbers had been noted by the bank, for example. 3. On the assistant -- this responds to the person who thinks perhaps s/he was a "Mastermind." There's no evidence yet tying him to DW, but there IS evidence tying DW to the S family through former employment. Moreover, the assistant contacted the police about the cash payment, it appears from documents -- s/he came forward. Finally, I can see a couple possibilities for the factual errors in the accounts from the assistant to the police: a. The assistant deliberately lied. NOT because s/he was connected with the murder, but because s/he was (i) embarrassed and appalled about not realizing that extortion was going on, and changing the timeline to Thursday morning would raise fewer questions about whether the assistant could have changed the outcome by contacting the authorities. Similarly, I could imagine that the assistant deliberately told a false story because of being very embarrassed about texting a photo of the cash to a friend -- there s/he was having fun with the wads of cash and not thinking about potentially bad scenarios. b. The assistant did NOT intentionally mislead police, but was shocked and upset and mixed up details. The police have said that Mr. S. did call the assistant multiple times on Thursday morning, and perhaps the assistant was focusing on those phone calls with final instructions rather than the initial text. |
Anonymous
I am confused by the 3pm/6pm discrepancy. I guess an explanation might be that AS planning to go out that night was true and needed VF to stay with Phillip until SS got home. |
Anonymous
|
I think the assistant is male. In several of those car photos, it looks like men's sneakers. As for the pink pants, reminds me of something like these:
http://www.vineyardvines.com/mens-pants/saltwash-twill-island-pants/1P0168.html?start=3&cgid=Mens-Pants&dwvar_1P0168_color=628 |