DC - Savvas Savopoulos, family & Veralicia Figueroa murdered; Daron Wint Arrested #3

[i.b.nora]

While people are off doing their homework i.e. reading the Charging Document, I made a couple of observations while studying the Google streetviews around the home on Woodland Drive and 32nd Street.

1) There is a nifty, sporty, red convertible parked across from the driveway on 32nd street. Could that car belong to them?

And, 2) If you look at the images especially North along Woodland, near the intersection, there is a blonde women walking a Labrador. I will warn you though that the images go in and out, kind of like "now you see it, now you don't". You can catch a glimpse of her from 32nd street as well. Could that woman be Amy?

https://www.google.com/maps/place/3...1s0x89b7b6290cef3cf7:0xa3c13e9501a7e379?hl=en

 

[SpanishInquisition]

The charging document does raise questions as the charging document sounds like the arrangements to get the money had already been made on or before Wednesday for the driver to have been told where to pick up the money in the text on Wednesday. I wonder if the flurry of phone calls on Thursday was trying to get more money in addition to the $40K as otherwise all those calls to the bank, the exec and the accountant on Thursday don't make sense if the arrangements had already been made the day before....or this has been misreported and there was no Thursday flurry.

 

[jjenny]

I'm sorry if I missed this in all the pages of discussion here but....I'm kinda stuck on the martial arts investment. Was he a martial arts guy...I mean does he practice martial arts? Also is it strange for a responsible business guy like himself to be making some kind of spur of the moment financial transaction with cash? That's all weird to me. Again...sorry if this was all discussed.

Well, he was being held hostage when he made the financial transaction with cash (asked cash to be delivered). So maybe he should be cut some slack?
I heard martial arts was his hobby.

 

[pinkandgreenmom]

SS wasn't there until 6PM. That's in the charging docs as the time the family was taken captive.

IIR He received a text at 5:30 PM from Amy to come home because she needed to go out.

I moved out of the area 3 years ago, but as far as I remember, there would have been no way on earth to get from Chantilly to NW DC in 30 minutes during rush hour. None whatsoever. If police say he was there at 6, I believe that but I think he would have had to leave Chantilly way before 5:30 for that to have happened. Where did the he left at 5:30 come from (please don't tell me NG...). Although I suppose it is possible AS could have texted him to come home at 5:30 but he had already left.

 

[clearskies1]

On page 5 (of 8) of the affidavit it says that W-2 (who apparently withdrew the money from Bank of America) received a text from W-1 at about 9 am on May 14 that contained photos of a red-lined bag that appeared to contain 2 bundles of cash, one of which had visibly displayed a white money wrap band.

Why would W-1 (the driver) text W-2 photos of the money that W-2 had just given him?

Edited to Add: SORRY, ignore this post. W-2 did not withdraw the money from the bank. See post #673 below for correction. Apologies.

 

[rosie_lee]

I think we all need to pause and read the affidavit BEFORE reading the news articles. I think reporters are confused (understandably so). Once we read the affidavits, we can spot the errors in the articles and know what to disregard.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/266278174/Daron-Dylon-Wint-Charging-Documents

If you lose the link and need it in the future, just google Wint Charging Documents and you'll find it quickly.

Read on!

Page 8 of this charging document, starting at Detectives interviewed a witness... explains that they are referring to 3 people (W1, IT & W2).

 

[Inthedetails]

This might help some confusion:

The affidavit states there is likely Wint and others committed the crimes.

But only one person delivered the money to the house (W1 = assistant/driver)

http://www.scribd.com/doc/266278174/Daron-Dylon-Wint-Charging-Documents

 

[jjenny]

While people are off doing their homework i.e. reading the Charging Document, I made a couple of observations while studying the Google streetviews around the home on Woodland Drive and 32nd Street.

1) There is a nifty, sporty, red convertible parked across from the driveway on 32nd street. Could that car belong to them?

And, 2) If you look at the images especially North along Woodland, near the intersection, there is a blonde women walking a Labrador. I will warn you though that the images go in and out, kind of like "now you see it, now you don't". You can catch a glimpse of her from 32nd street as well. Could that woman be Amy?

https://www.google.com/maps/place/3...1s0x89b7b6290cef3cf7:0xa3c13e9501a7e379?hl=en

Good find. Woman looks like she could be Amy. They did have a labrador.

 

[stmarysmead]

I saw in one article that he had several "belts" or whatever you call it...in a certain type of martial arts. So it definitely was an interest of his. I think the article is linked in the beginning thread on this case. Sorry not to have it available.

 

[jjenny]

On page 5 (of 8) of the affidavit it says that W-2 (who apparently withdrew the money from Bank of America) received a text from W-1 at about 9 am on May 14 that contained photos of a red-lined bag that appeared to contain 2 bundles of cash, one of which had visibly displayed a white money wrap band.

Why would W-1 (the driver) text W-2 photos of the money that W-2 had just given him?

Maybe as proof that he delivered the money?

 

[KristinSchmistin]

Where is the link for Chief saying there were two people at drop off? What I heard her say is that she can't comment on specifics of the case.

She did say she can't comment on the specifics- but I thought she said there was also another person with the person who dropped the money at the house. Lemme see if I can find a video.

I am also totally confused and trying to sort it out. I read the court document and at first I was confused about W1 sounding like it was w1 AND "IT" but I am pretty sure W1=IT and is just the way reports are written. Hold on lemme find a link to confirm what the chief said...

 

[grace2020]

Right? My brother and sister in law live in a very ritzy part of DC also and although my brother in laws employees don't do household stuff, they've certainly been there before and would run there on an errand If he requested. Their household help is fluid and the "schedules" change all the time- it's an as needed thing- all the household people do all the things- like all in one- they nanny the kids when needed or drop them at activities or do laundry and fold and put away or help cook/clean or whatever they need. It's so much less stressful to have a couple people you know really well that can do all the stuff you need. That's just what I gathered from them- and they are also very hands-on with their household - so they do a lot of their own stuff as well when they want.

I don't see at all what the big deal is about "blurred lines" or how that opens them up to being victimized.

These people are victims of a crime. They did NOT do anything to bring his on or cause this. They are good people and kind by what we've learned about them, their philanthropy, the way the dad treated his employees, etc. it's not unusual to have close relationships with the people in your inner circle. If someone takes advantage of that kindness it is not the fault of them. Man. That was bugging me.

And from my experience there are people who view their "staff"strictly as the help.

And there are those that view their staff as an extension of their family and treat them as close confidants and friends. Kind of like how people have different parenting styles.


Sent from my not so humble opinion.

Wow, I can certainly see how this arrangement can breed resentment. I never thought about the "blurred lines" as an issue before, but your description of your BIL's household arrangements clarifies that. Thanks very much for this helpful post. You've provided eye-opening perspective.

 

[Blondie in Spokane]

I think we all need to pause and read the affidavit BEFORE reading the news articles. I think reporters are confused (understandably so). Once we read the affidavits, we can spot the errors in the articles and know what to disregard.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/266278174/Daron-Dylon-Wint-Charging-Documents

If you lose the link and need it in the future, just google Wint Charging Documents and you'll find it quickly.

Read on!

I'm on an iPad and whenever I try to read the charging documents scribid or something wants me to pay 9.00 per mth subscription....does anyone know if there is a way around this?

 

[MyBelle]

You are right. I read another poster's description of the CNN phone interview with Lanier. There was no link, and that would have been better because I depended on someone else to "hear" the interview for me, which in not a great idea.... So IF that is what Lanier said, then two people dropped the money off. But that would seem to contradict the charging document.

Actually, there is no reason to put that information in the charging document for Wint. They did point out in it that the assistant lied to LE.

I have no reason not to believe what the poster heard on CNN.

JMO

 

[Momoffourboys]

On page 5 (of 8) of the affidavit it says that W-2 (who apparently withdrew the money from Bank of America) received a text from W-1 at about 9 am on May 14 that contained photos of a red-lined bag that appeared to contain 2 bundles of cash, one of which had visibly displayed a white money wrap band.

Why would W-1 (the driver) text W-2 photos of the money that W-2 had just given him?

BBM
This is a red flag. IMO.
Very very hinky.

 

[jjenny]

She did say she can't comment on the specifics- but I thought she said there was also another person with the person who dropped the money at the house. Lemme see if I can find a video.

I am also totally confused and trying to sort it out. I read the court document and at first I was confused about W1 sounding like it was w1 AND "IT" but I am pretty sure W1=IT and is just the way reports are written. Hold on lemme find a link to confirm what the chief said...

I am pretty sure they are using IT instead of HE or SHE as to not reveal gender of the witness. But by doing that, they confused the **** out of people and reporters.

 

[Advocate1]

BBM. It sounds like that is where this is headed.

JMO

I think your correct and I think that is why IT's identity is being withheld. IT could be in a lot of danger by the bad guys as well as in trouble by the police. I see it as LE is having to protect IT as well as IT being a target in their investigation. Make sense?

 

[Blondie in Spokane]

Wow....54 users & 103 guests are reading along......

Guests, feel free to register.....we'd love your perspective too!

 

[Inthedetails]

Page 8 of this charging document, starting at Detectives interviewed a witness... explains that they are referring to 3 people (W1, IT & W2).

IT is used as a pronoun and refers to whomever they are talking about in that sentence.

W1 is IT when they are talking about W1.
W2 is IT when they are talking about W2.
W3 is IT when they are talking about W3

 

[SpanishInquisition]

On page 5 (of 8) of the affidavit it says that W-2 (who apparently withdrew the money from Bank of America) received a text from W-1 at about 9 am on May 14 that contained photos of a red-lined bag that appeared to contain 2 bundles of cash, one of which had visibly displayed a white money wrap band.

Why would W-1 (the driver) text W-2 photos of the money that W-2 had just given him?

I was WAGing that W-2 is NG and that's how she knew about as she said the driver contacted her about it.