Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:sexual asphyxiation gone wrong?
police say no threat to the public so why get so fixated on it?
Again, the police called it a homicide and specifically asked the medical examiner not to release details of how he died.
If it was sexual asphyxiation, it would likely not be classified as murder. Why would they not release the manner of death? Something is definitely fishy. This is not an area where murders are very common.
Homicide and murder are not the same.
Please explain the difference between the two.
Would the police call a suicide a homicide?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
It seems like the only thing that makes sense with this case is that the mom is involved. Otherwise, what is this man's motive? Why would a someone who is not married to/living with the mother care if she has a long drive to see her son? According to the articles, he is married to someone else. He probably has zero relationship with the son.
Because the killer viewed John as a threat to his relationship with the woman. John was going to have a bond with her that the killer never would. The mom doesn’t necessarily have to be involved.
Then why not kill her other baby daddy/ex-husband? Maybe he did it bc she would have more time for him without having to drive to and from Ballston from Maryland?
I thought there was some overlap between John and the killer. I might have my timeline off on all these guys she was sleeping with.
Oh where did you read/hear that? That would make more sense. Based on what I have read, John was awarded full custody in 2016 and she started seeing the married accused killer within the past year/year and a half. Her relationship with the victim seemed pretty strained considering he went for full custody, not even joint. For me, it would be hard to imagine them rekindling anything during this period.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
It seems like the only thing that makes sense with this case is that the mom is involved. Otherwise, what is this man's motive? Why would a someone who is not married to/living with the mother care if she has a long drive to see her son? According to the articles, he is married to someone else. He probably has zero relationship with the son.
Because the killer viewed John as a threat to his relationship with the woman. John was going to have a bond with her that the killer never would. The mom doesn’t necessarily have to be involved.
Then why not kill her other baby daddy/ex-husband? Maybe he did it bc she would have more time for him without having to drive to and from Ballston from Maryland?
I thought there was some overlap between John and the killer. I might have my timeline off on all these guys she was sleeping with.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
It seems like the only thing that makes sense with this case is that the mom is involved. Otherwise, what is this man's motive? Why would a someone who is not married to/living with the mother care if she has a long drive to see her son? According to the articles, he is married to someone else. He probably has zero relationship with the son.
Because the killer viewed John as a threat to his relationship with the woman. John was going to have a bond with her that the killer never would. The mom doesn’t necessarily have to be involved.
Then why not kill her other baby daddy/ex-husband? Maybe he did it bc she would have more time for him without having to drive to and from Ballston from Maryland?
Anonymous wrote:OK, what happened to the young father of two who may have been killed by his wife in Vienna Va a while back?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
It seems like the only thing that makes sense with this case is that the mom is involved. Otherwise, what is this man's motive? Why would a someone who is not married to/living with the mother care if she has a long drive to see her son? According to the articles, he is married to someone else. He probably has zero relationship with the son.
Because the killer viewed John as a threat to his relationship with the woman. John was going to have a bond with her that the killer never would. The mom doesn’t necessarily have to be involved.
Anonymous wrote:
It seems like the only thing that makes sense with this case is that the mom is involved. Otherwise, what is this man's motive? Why would a someone who is not married to/living with the mother care if she has a long drive to see her son? According to the articles, he is married to someone else. He probably has zero relationship with the son.
Anonymous wrote:Yes and the story isnt getting much press, which seems unusual
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anyone have theories on what happened? And why did the media go radio silent on this? There were a couple of stories when it happened and then nothing. And police are not sharing details. This is sad and frightening. How can they say there’s no immediate threat to public but not share what happened?
https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/Virginia-Community-Uneasy-Two-Weeks-After-Homicide-and-No-Arrest-478426573.html
How was this a tragedy? It sucks the guy died, but I don’t see a “tragedy” here. A bit of a mystery, maybe.
you don’t think it is a tragedy that a young boy is left without his father? you win for most clever post.
NP Jesus ! Just come out and say you're mainly concerned because it happened where you don't think/expect it to happen .
Well, of course that is one part of the tragedy. This happened in an area where murders rarely occur. It happened to someone who appeared to be a very good guy, and it has left a child without his father. And, in an area where murders that happen to unlikely candidates (wasn't a drug dealer, no nefarious behavior), it isn't really being discussed either online or on the news. Barely a mention.
And for the poster who said that this doesn't meet their "tragedy" standard, I must respectfully disagree with you.