Fire in upper NW?

[Anonymous]

Lawn service companies probably have gas cans in their trucks/trailers. Not saying they have anything to do with it, just thinking of where the gas could have come from.

[Anonymous]

It almost sounds like a diabolical envy, and sadistic revenge, because of how beautiful and well-liked they were. Is it possible the hooded person seen fleeing is a woman? I just can't tell much from watching it. Except there's something about the way the satchel is carried.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It almost sounds like a diabolical envy, and sadistic revenge, because of how beautiful and well-liked they were. Is it possible the hooded person seen fleeing is a woman? I just can't tell much from watching it. Except there's something about the way the satchel is carried.

Oh no. Not another "What gender is the suspect" debate (for the record I was sure it was a man who stabbed the lawyer).

[Anonymous]

The boy apparently had a gokart. If it was kept at the house, there was probably a gas can used for fueling the kart. That could have been the source of the gasoline.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Assuming the family was being held hostage Wednesday night, the intruder(s) must have gotten there before the maid normally leaves and then waited for the father to come home. Why? If they needed the dad why not just come at three a.m. when you know he is home? And if they didn't need the dad, why hang out that long? They may have been there up to twenty-four hours.
It can't be random and have the car end up near the business. It wasn't art thieves. They don't stick around to murder their victims. I strongly suspect he/they needed the father to do something and used his family for incentive. Maybe they didn't come in the middle of the night because they didn't want to set off alarms. It had to be more than one person. And WHAT could that possibly be carrying? The whole point of torching everything was to destroy all the evidence. Then he walks away holding something?
FWIW though, I am against the 1984-ing of society. Too much potential for misuse and any perceived benefits are vastly outweighed by that. The family could have (and may have) had cameras in the home. We don't need every move in public recorded.

This theory is thought provoking. That is the million dollar question. Why did they stay at the home for so long? Several people have posited
that the thieves were waiting for the husband or the bank to open, they had to take everyone hostage and wait to get some bigger prize. I am curious what that will turn out to be?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It almost sounds like a diabolical envy, and sadistic revenge, because of how beautiful and well-liked they were. Is it possible the hooded person seen fleeing is a woman? I just can't tell much from watching it. Except there's something about the way the satchel is carried.

What satchel? I think that the POI is carrying an industrial bucket or pail, you can almost make out a label on it.

[Anonymous]

It seems there is a lot of evidence. The employee who dropped a package off will have information. The surviving maid and all the phone records. I don't understand the suspect carrying the bucket away. Don't they usually throw that in the fire as well?

[Anonymous]

Ah, I couldn't make out what the mystery perp was carrying, nor really much of anything. That's why I was wondering if it could be female. But a bucket???

[Anonymous]

If you have no qualms about killing 4 people, why bother calling the other housekeeper ?

[Anonymous]

^^good point

[Anonymous]

That released POI video is extremely pixelated, even blurred out in parts. I think the police know more than they care to show. But even from that heavily pixelated image, you can certainly make calculations about the POI's height, girth/weight, and shoe size, based on the side-by-side comparison to the dumpster he or she runs by.

It could also be the case, that this POI is an accessory after the fact, that is, who was retained by the real perpetrator(s) solely for the purpose of disposing of the vehicle. Someone who did not ask any questions when he or she was asked to participate in a car disposal scheme - they might have thought it was an insurance crime - but was doing it for the money, without necessarily being aware of the rest of the crime.

In any case, it is important to find this POI because they will have relevant information.

[Anonymous]

I zoomed in on the church parking lot. There's a strip mall behind the church and a strip mall in front of the church. If you were trying to hide a crime, that would not be the place to do it. There has to be more video.

Funny thing, there are white buckets like the guy in the video seems to be carrying in the church yard.

8201 Annapolis Rd. in Lanham

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It almost sounds like a diabolical envy, and sadistic revenge, because of how beautiful and well-liked they were. Is it possible the hooded person seen fleeing is a woman? I just can't tell much from watching it. Except there's something about the way the satchel is carried.

Oh no. Not another "What gender is the suspect" debate (for the record I was sure it was a man who stabbed the lawyer).

A woman that tall would be easy to find. Most men aren't as tall as the person in the video.

[Anonymous]

If you have no qualms about killing 4 people, why bother calling the other housekeeper ?

I thought the same thing. Would they really go to such lengths to protect surviving housekeeper? She claims she got several messages. Also, she is now saying he sounded like he was trying to send her a message when he said the wife was sick (because he had told her earlier in the day his wife was going out that night). If he was sending a message wouldn't he have called her by the wrong name-a couple of times. That would have gotten her attention. Did he really have the presence of mind to remember he had told her earlier his wife was going out and saying she was sick would be a clue? Maybe he wasn't trying to send a clue though. Maybe he was hoping he could appease the intruders and just forgot what he told her earlier? But if he wasn't sending a clue, why not??? So anyway, the maid's story has bothered me from minute one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Assuming the family was being held hostage Wednesday night, the intruder(s) must have gotten there before the maid normally leaves and then waited for the father to come home. Why? If they needed the dad why not just come at three a.m. when you know he is home? And if they didn't need the dad, why hang out that long? They may have been there up to twenty-four hours.
It can't be random and have the car end up near the business. It wasn't art thieves. They don't stick around to murder their victims. I strongly suspect he/they needed the father to do something and used his family for incentive. Maybe they didn't come in the middle of the night because they didn't want to set off alarms. It had to be more than one person. And WHAT could that possibly be carrying? The whole point of torching everything was to destroy all the evidence. Then he walks away holding something?
FWIW though, I am against the 1984-ing of society. Too much potential for misuse and any perceived benefits are vastly outweighed by that. The family could have (and may have) had cameras in the home. We don't need every move in public recorded.

This theory is thought provoking. That is the million dollar question. Why did they stay at the home for so long? Several people have posited
that the thieves were waiting for the husband or the bank to open, they had to take everyone hostage and wait to get some bigger prize. I am curious what that will turn out to be?

If the murderers had forced the family to go to the bank, etc. on Thursday, don't you think someone from the bank would have come forward in the press, like the how the second housekeeper has. I know these scenarios play out in the movies, but I don't see how it could have happened IRL with this and no one has released any info by now.