Fire in upper NW?

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So according this this article the 2 employees got the 40k from the bank. Employee #1 went in and got the cash from the manager. Employee#1 walked out of the bank with the cash and took 40k from their pockets and gave to employee #2 who then put the money in a red bag. Employee #2 with the money in the red bag drove to SS house and gave the money to the assistant, the assistant took the money out of the bag (and took a picture at some point of the money in the red bag) and put the money in a manila envelope and placed it in the car.

This story story stinks? Why so many people involved in this? and if employee 2 was at the house already with the money then why would the assistant need to put the money in car?

The assistant was told to meet two other employees, who were to extract $40,000 cash from a Bank of America account.
The first employee went inside the branch, received four bundles of cash from a bank manager, and put them in their pockets. Outside, a second employee received the four bundles and placed them in a red striped bag. This employee then drove to Mr Savopoulos' home on Embassy Row to meet the assistant, who placed the four bundles in a manila envelope and put it inside an unlocked red car in the garage.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3094318/Ex-convict-accused-murdering-CEO-family-DC-mansion-used-work-welder.html#ixzz3b4FodZUE
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

This account is incorrect and based on what I've seen of Daily Mail coverage the past couple of days, I wouldn't waste time reading that site. The AIW employee obtained the money from the bank (we aren't sure when, but perhaps Thursday morning) and gave it to the assistant. The assistant placed the money in a car in the garage.

The charging document does not say when the money was obtained from the bank. It does say that a picture of the money was sent at 9:00 am. The bank opens at 9:00 am. Therefore, if the AIW employee was able to get the money from the bank Thursday morning, it was done before the formal opening of the bank.

Correct. There are only certain signatures that can withdraw money. I know this. You can not withdraw money any other way, particularly that amount. It is clear that few people realize this important piece of the puzzle. This question has yet to be answered - how did the withdrawal happen without Mr. S. being physically present? WHO keeps $40k "on hand"? No one I know, and I know a ton of people in similar financial situations.

There is a myth that rich people have tons of money on hand, or easily accessible, and they just do not. It would normally take days (plural) for this amount of money to be withdrawn.

[Anonymous]

I believe there is much more evidence of which we are not aware. He was in the house, what 18 hours?

There may be hairs, skin cells, etc that he left behind.

He would have needed to use the bathroom as well.

Bags of evidence were removed from a residence in Lanham.
Maybe they were able to obtain clothes he was wearing at the scene, which would contain a wealth of evidence.
The burned out car may still contain fibers, hairs, etc.

I'm sure there's lots more, it just has not been made available to the public.

I think they released the information about the pizza crust DNA because they needed to alert the community that: THIS IS THE GUY, FIND HIM.

Now they can gather the rest of the evidence that will be used against him in court.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reason for letting 4 seeming accomplices go without arrest is simple: under the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, certain "speedy trial" rights attach at the moment of arrest. There's a clock that starts, and prosecutors have a limited amount of time within which to obtain an indictment. If they don't, the charges get dismissed. No one wants anybody connected with this crime to be sprung on this basis. With Darron Wint, prosecutors had telltale DNA evidence placing him at the scene of the crime. Easy indictment. The others were clearly involved after the fact, but it may take time and more thorough analysis of evidence to place them at the scene. If they had a role in torturing and murdering this family, you don't want them convicted simply as accessories; you want them charged as principals. I'm sure that arrests will come in the next couple of weeks, and meanwhile, these folks are being watched like hawks.

Thanks for that information. I realized that I've been thinking of Wint as the ringleader but all we know is that his DNA was on the pizza. He could just be a peon and one of the others could have been the ringleader. Hope everyone gets what they deserve.

Exactly. I doubt Wint will give up anyone else invloved.

I think he will. And those involved know he will as well.

Myabe but he's going to be in jail anyway, why tell on them and be stuck in jail with ex-friends now enemies. Especially if someone else murdered the family like that..I wouldn't want that guy pissed and in jail with me.

I think they will argue it was the possibly the brother's dna and he'll walk? with no proof of either actually committing the crime, no murder weapon, etc. they both will walk. With no proof besides the crust it is going to be a hard case.. Let's hope they have way more proof than the pizza crust.

Wint being in the home (even if he didn't commit the crime) doesn't bring on any charges?

They have to prove without a doubt he was in that house. There is noway to actually prove he ate that pizza in the house or he was walking by when domino's dominos arrived and had a piece while in was on the front step because he was hungry. Only thing they have is dna that they can argue it is a relatives. I think it's going to be a long case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So according this this article the 2 employees got the 40k from the bank. Employee #1 went in and got the cash from the manager. Employee#1 walked out of the bank with the cash and took 40k from their pockets and gave to employee #2 who then put the money in a red bag. Employee #2 with the money in the red bag drove to SS house and gave the money to the assistant, the assistant took the money out of the bag (and took a picture at some point of the money in the red bag) and put the money in a manila envelope and placed it in the car.

This story story stinks? Why so many people involved in this? and if employee 2 was at the house already with the money then why would the assistant need to put the money in car?

The assistant was told to meet two other employees, who were to extract $40,000 cash from a Bank of America account.
The first employee went inside the branch, received four bundles of cash from a bank manager, and put them in their pockets. Outside, a second employee received the four bundles and placed them in a red striped bag. This employee then drove to Mr Savopoulos' home on Embassy Row to meet the assistant, who placed the four bundles in a manila envelope and put it inside an unlocked red car in the garage.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3094318/Ex-convict-accused-murdering-CEO-family-DC-mansion-used-work-welder.html#ixzz3b4FodZUE
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

This account is incorrect and based on what I've seen of Daily Mail coverage the past couple of days, I wouldn't waste time reading that site. The AIW employee obtained the money from the bank (we aren't sure when, but perhaps Thursday morning) and gave it to the assistant. The assistant placed the money in a car in the garage.

The charging document does not say when the money was obtained from the bank. It does say that a picture of the money was sent at 9:00 am. The bank opens at 9:00 am. Therefore, if the AIW employee was able to get the money from the bank Thursday morning, it was done before the formal opening of the bank.

Correct. There are only certain signatures that can withdraw money. I know this. You can not withdraw money any other way, particularly that amount. It is clear that few people realize this important piece of the puzzle. This question has yet to be answered - how did the withdrawal happen without Mr. S. being physically present? WHO keeps $40k "on hand"? No one I know, and I know a ton of people in similar financial situations.

There is a myth that rich people have tons of money on hand, or easily accessible, and they just do not. It would normally take days (plural) for this amount of money to be withdrawn.

And somehow they did just that. Re-read the charging documents. https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/2086396/pages/wint-darron-dellon-dennis-charging-papers-may-2015-p6-normal.gif

[Anonymous]

Post 05/24/2015 11:20 Subject: Re:Fire in upper NW?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Reason for letting 4 seeming accomplices go without arrest is simple: under the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, certain "speedy trial" rights attach at the moment of arrest. There's a clock that starts, and prosecutors have a limited amount of time within which to obtain an indictment. If they don't, the charges get dismissed. No one wants anybody connected with this crime to be sprung on this basis. With Darron Wint, prosecutors had telltale DNA evidence placing him at the scene of the crime. Easy indictment. The others were clearly involved after the fact, but it may take time and more thorough analysis of evidence to place them at the scene. If they had a role in torturing and murdering this family, you don't want them convicted simply as accessories; you want them charged as principals. I'm sure that arrests will come in the next couple of weeks, and meanwhile, these folks are being watched like hawks.

Thanks for that information. I realized that I've been thinking of Wint as the ringleader but all we know is that his DNA was on the pizza. He could just be a peon and one of the others could have been the ringleader. Hope everyone gets what they deserve.



Exactly. I doubt Wint will give up anyone else invloved.



I think he will. And tho



They have to prove without a doubt he was in that house. There is noway to actually prove he ate that pizza in the house or he was walking by when domino's dominos arrived and had a piece while in was on the front step because he was hungry. Only thing they have is dna that they can argue it is a relatives. I think it's going to be a long case.

You have no way of knowing that's all they have. Therefore I find your conclusion to be completely inaccurate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Post 05/24/2015 11:20 Subject: Re:Fire in upper NW?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Reason for letting 4 seeming accomplices go without arrest is simple: under the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, certain "speedy trial" rights attach at the moment of arrest. There's a clock that starts, and prosecutors have a limited amount of time within which to obtain an indictment. If they don't, the charges get dismissed. No one wants anybody connected with this crime to be sprung on this basis. With Darron Wint, prosecutors had telltale DNA evidence placing him at the scene of the crime. Easy indictment. The others were clearly involved after the fact, but it may take time and more thorough analysis of evidence to place them at the scene. If they had a role in torturing and murdering this family, you don't want them convicted simply as accessories; you want them charged as principals. I'm sure that arrests will come in the next couple of weeks, and meanwhile, these folks are being watched like hawks.

Thanks for that information. I realized that I've been thinking of Wint as the ringleader but all we know is that his DNA was on the pizza. He could just be a peon and one of the others could have been the ringleader. Hope everyone gets what they deserve.



Exactly. I doubt Wint will give up anyone else invloved.



I think he will. And tho



They have to prove without a doubt he was in that house. There is noway to actually prove he ate that pizza in the house or he was walking by when domino's dominos arrived and had a piece while in was on the front step because he was hungry. Only thing they have is dna that they can argue it is a relatives. I think it's going to be a long case.

You have no way of knowing that's all they have. Therefore I find your conclusion to be completely inaccurate.

i have no doubt they have additional evidence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Post 05/24/2015 11:20 Subject: Re:Fire in upper NW?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Reason for letting 4 seeming accomplices go without arrest is simple: under the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, certain "speedy trial" rights attach at the moment of arrest. There's a clock that starts, and prosecutors have a limited amount of time within which to obtain an indictment. If they don't, the charges get dismissed. No one wants anybody connected with this crime to be sprung on this basis. With Darron Wint, prosecutors had telltale DNA evidence placing him at the scene of the crime. Easy indictment. The others were clearly involved after the fact, but it may take time and more thorough analysis of evidence to place them at the scene. If they had a role in torturing and murdering this family, you don't want them convicted simply as accessories; you want them charged as principals. I'm sure that arrests will come in the next couple of weeks, and meanwhile, these folks are being watched like hawks.

Thanks for that information. I realized that I've been thinking of Wint as the ringleader but all we know is that his DNA was on the pizza. He could just be a peon and one of the others could have been the ringleader. Hope everyone gets what they deserve.



Exactly. I doubt Wint will give up anyone else invloved.



I think he will. And tho



They have to prove without a doubt he was in that house. There is noway to actually prove he ate that pizza in the house or he was walking by when domino's dominos arrived and had a piece while in was on the front step because he was hungry. Only thing they have is dna that they can argue it is a relatives. I think it's going to be a long case.

You have no way of knowing that's all they have. Therefore I find your conclusion to be completely inaccurate.

You have no way of knowing they don't. Therefore I find your conclusion of my statement completely inaccurate. See how that goes? you better believe his lawyer is going to try to make a name for herself in this case. and argue every possibility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So according this this article the 2 employees got the 40k from the bank. Employee #1 went in and got the cash from the manager. Employee#1 walked out of the bank with the cash and took 40k from their pockets and gave to employee #2 who then put the money in a red bag. Employee #2 with the money in the red bag drove to SS house and gave the money to the assistant, the assistant took the money out of the bag (and took a picture at some point of the money in the red bag) and put the money in a manila envelope and placed it in the car.

This story story stinks? Why so many people involved in this? and if employee 2 was at the house already with the money then why would the assistant need to put the money in car?

The assistant was told to meet two other employees, who were to extract $40,000 cash from a Bank of America account.
The first employee went inside the branch, received four bundles of cash from a bank manager, and put them in their pockets. Outside, a second employee received the four bundles and placed them in a red striped bag. This employee then drove to Mr Savopoulos' home on Embassy Row to meet the assistant, who placed the four bundles in a manila envelope and put it inside an unlocked red car in the garage.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3094318/Ex-convict-accused-murdering-CEO-family-DC-mansion-used-work-welder.html#ixzz3b4FodZUE
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

This account is incorrect and based on what I've seen of Daily Mail coverage the past couple of days, I wouldn't waste time reading that site. The AIW employee obtained the money from the bank (we aren't sure when, but perhaps Thursday morning) and gave it to the assistant. The assistant placed the money in a car in the garage.

The charging document does not say when the money was obtained from the bank. It does say that a picture of the money was sent at 9:00 am. The bank opens at 9:00 am. Therefore, if the AIW employee was able to get the money from the bank Thursday morning, it was done before the formal opening of the bank.

Correct. There are only certain signatures that can withdraw money. I know this. You can not withdraw money any other way, particularly that amount. It is clear that few people realize this important piece of the puzzle. This question has yet to be answered - how did the withdrawal happen without Mr. S. being physically present? WHO keeps $40k "on hand"? No one I know, and I know a ton of people in similar financial situations.

There is a myth that rich people have tons of money on hand, or easily accessible, and they just do not. It would normally take days (plural) for this amount of money to be withdrawn.

It sounds like the money was taken out of an AIW business account in which case having $40,000 in it is not unusual to have a decent cash flow for a business. And there would typically be an office or business manager who is authorized to deposit and withdraw funds.

[Anonymous]

"u have no way of knowing they don't. Therefore I find your conclusion of my statement completely inaccurate. See how that goes? you better believe his lawyer is going to try to make a name for herself in this case. and argue every possibility."
[Report Post]

Of course, and she wouldn't be doing her job if she didn't. Legally he has a right to a defense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"u have no way of knowing they don't. Therefore I find your conclusion of my statement completely inaccurate. See how that goes? you better believe his lawyer is going to try to make a name for herself in this case. and argue every possibility."
[Report Post]

Of course, and she wouldn't be doing her job if she didn't. Legally he has a right to a defense.

Right. They have to prove that without a doubt this guy did this. If the jury is able to questions anything, like the pizza crust for example to huge but so small at the same time. Yes, they got his DNA but they have to prove he was there and prove that pizza crust came from that pizza that was ordered at that time(someone could easily frame someone like this by taking his pizza crust from another time and placing it at the murder scene). It will also be difficult to prove that he didn't get the pizza crust from the box outside. etc, etc..I hope they find the murder weapon with his DNA on it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"u have no way of knowing they don't. Therefore I find your conclusion of my statement completely inaccurate. See how that goes? you better believe his lawyer is going to try to make a name for herself in this case. and argue every possibility."
[Report Post]

Of course, and she wouldn't be doing her job if she didn't. Legally he has a right to a defense.

Right. They have to prove that without a doubt this guy did this. If the jury is able to questions anything, like the pizza crust for example to huge but so small at the same time. Yes, they got his DNA but they have to prove he was there and prove that pizza crust came from that pizza that was ordered at that time(someone could easily frame someone like this by taking his pizza crust from another time and placing it at the murder scene). It will also be difficult to prove that he didn't get the pizza crust from the box outside. etc, etc..I hope they find the murder weapon with his DNA on it.

A confession would be great too

[Anonymous]

The females who were with Wint better start talking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"u have no way of knowing they don't. Therefore I find your conclusion of my statement completely inaccurate. See how that goes? you better believe his lawyer is going to try to make a name for herself in this case. and argue every possibility."
[Report Post]

Of course, and she wouldn't be doing her job if she didn't. Legally he has a right to a defense.

Right. They have to prove that without a doubt this guy did this. If the jury is able to questions anything, like the pizza crust for example to huge but so small at the same time. Yes, they got his DNA but they have to prove he was there and prove that pizza crust came from that pizza that was ordered at that time(someone could easily frame someone like this by taking his pizza crust from another time and placing it at the murder scene). It will also be difficult to prove that he didn't get the pizza crust from the box outside. etc, etc..I hope they find the murder weapon with his DNA on it.

A confession would be great too

I haven't read everything up to this point but wouldn't him being in possession of at least $10000 (I'm sure the bank matched serial numbers, right??) be proof of guilt? Even if his accomplice or accomplices (assuming they exist) committed the actual murders, aren't all parties equally guilty under the law? Why would it even matter legally who "pulled the trigger"?

(Granted my legal knowledge comes from one or two law and order svu marathons so please correct me if I'm wrong).

[Anonymous]

Under DC 22-2101, the prosecutors can get a conviction for first-degree murder against anyone who,

"without purpose to do so kills another in perpetrating or in attempting to perpetrate any arson, as defined in § 22-301 or § 22-302, first degree sexual abuse, first degree child sexual abuse, first degree cruelty to children, mayhem, robbery, or kidnaping, or in perpetrating or attempting to perpetrate any housebreaking while armed with or using a dangerous weapon, or in perpetrating or attempting to perpetrate a felony involving a controlled substance, is guilty of murder in the first degree."

Same penalties apply to felony murder as apply to premeditated murder. Thus, if they can place anyone in the house between 6 p.m. Wednesday and 1:15 p.m. Thursday, the prosecutors have a good shot getting a murder charge to stick.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The females who were with Wint better start talking.

Hopefully they get a confession from Wint. Without a witness, murder weapon, confession, this is going to be hard to prove imo