DC - Savvas Savopoulos, family & Veralicia Figueroa murdered; Daron Wint Arrested #17

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
SeesSeas said:
Regarding JW - "W1 admitted he lied" as written by LE on the AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF AN ARREST WARRANT for Daron Dylon Wint -

I am curious to know if there are others here who have ever been personally aware of a crime (witnessed a crime, been a victim of crime, etc) and have obtained a copy of the police report describing the incident. I have had the opportunity to do this several times and was quite amazed at the inaccuracies stated by LEO in the police report. Even when being a victim of crime, LEO exaggerated the actions of the perpetrator. So, I not only *think* LE lie, I *know* LE lie. Unfortunate, but true.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/03/opinion/sunday/why-police-officers-lie-under-oath.html?_r=0

OPINION
WHY POLICE LIE UNDER OATH
Excerpt: …. Remarkably, New York City officers have been found to engage in patterns of deceit in cases involving charges as minor as trespass. In September it was reported that the Bronx district attorney’s office was so alarmed by police lying that it decided to stop prosecuting people who were stopped and arrested for trespassing at public housing projects, unless prosecutors first interviewed the arresting officer to ensure the arrest was actually warranted. Jeannette Rucker, the chief of arraignments for the Bronx district attorney, explained in a letter that it had become apparent that the police were arresting people even when there was convincing evidence that they were innocent. To justify the arrests, Ms. Rucker claimed, police officers provided false written statements, and in depositions, the arresting officers gave false testimony.......
Click to expand...

I think JW's interview was recorded and if he admitted he lied, his admission has been recorded. This case is a tad more serious than trespassing.

JMO
 
FelicityLemon said:
Good post! It's not just the bad guys who lie, even under oath and again, for various reasons. I've always been a huge supporter of LE and it's disappointing when anyone you respect does something against the values automatically attributed to them.

When DH and I went to apply for the restraining order, we brought along pages of the house diary* notes, observations, pictures. We documented everything as it happened or as near to, to be as accurate as possible.

First thing my therapist told us was what words and terminology we should use. He had extensive dealings with the courts and mental health/criminal issues.
He thought he was helping us, but it made me extremely uncomfortable.

Then, we went to the courthouse to fill out the forms for the TRO, and were directed to an office that had a court officer whose duties are solely to help people write up the reports and fill out the forms for restraining orders. She didn't want to read or even see our true accounts, times, etc. She didn't want us to read anything to her. She had us tell her and she typed into the computer.

Just like when you are interviewed by any person in LE, you are at the mercy of 1) what they think they are hearing you say (innocently making mistakes), 2) what they are interpreting you saying (innocently, but humanly putting their own spin on it), 3) deliberately putting their own spin on it because they're "sure" you're not right, or 4) spinning it in your favor because they're "sure" they're helping you.

You are given the papers to read and sign as true. DH and I were reading it and looking at each other because some things were grossly exaggerated in our favor, but not really true. It made us extremely uncomfortable because not only were some of those things not true, it would be lying under oath. The office was very busy, she was very nice, but harried. We understood she was trying to help us, but there was no way we were going with what she wrote as our words. We crossed things out, corrected some statements and added what was important to us. She complied, but there was a little attitude. I had further edits after her edits and there it ended.

I know she was trying to help us, but greatgoshalmighty there was no way we were taking any chances by lying to the court. As it turned out, SIL's boyfriend came to the courthouse (one of our friends saw him walking back and forth in front of it, lol) but didn't come in so we won by default. It turns out he had warrants out for his arrest for *other issues* and would have been arrested on the spot. AFTER that case, we discovered we could have been researching his extensive criminal history that he swore he never had. She, the idiot SIL showed up with scientologist lawyer in tow, she kept prodding him to address the court, he did and OMG I LOVELOVELOVE THAT JUDGE! She read him the riot act for daring to show up to represent and address the court for someone (sil) not named anywhere in the court papers! She was awesome! His face was red and he looked ready to cry, boohoo.

BTW: I, like many people, lie every day of my life. I read recently that whenever someone asks How you doin? (no cheesy eyebrows raised) and I say "Fine, thank you! How are you?". It's true, I say that no matter how I feel. I'm ashamed to admit that I lie.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be ashamed for participating in a greeting that is customary in our culture. In France, it's "Ca va?" There is a big difference between saying "I am fine" and misleading authorities in a crime situation. You always seem to have very reasonable opinions, so what's your take? Are you thinking that LE was wrong and JW did not lie? Or that he actually believed each of his various stories until it was pointed out that could not be true? Or do you think he did lie but those lies have no relevance because lying is common? Or other?

IDK. To me, the lies seem significant in that he was fabricating his own story that was not in line with the truth, but maybe I am being too simplistic?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
kammiemc said:
I wouldn't be ashamed for participating in a greeting that is customary in our culture. In France, it's "Ca va?" There is quotes big difference in saying "I am fine" and misleading authorities in a crime situation. You always seem to have very reasonable opinions, so what's your take? Are you thinking that LE was wrong and JW did not lie? Or that he actually believed each of his various stories until it was pointed out that could not be true? Or do you think he did lie but those lies have no relevance because lying is common?

IDK. To me, the lies seem significant in that he was fabricating his own story that was not in line with the truth, but maybe I am being too simplistic?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I don't think you're being too simplistic. Those are such odd things to lie about. I look forward to when we can actually know what happened and what the accountant said. Knowing those things might make the lies seem all the more weird.
 
IMO the inconsistencies were admitted right away and investigated by LE. LE must not think they hindered the investigation at all and the reason of the two different accounts being given made sense to them because JW has not been charged with any offense at all. LE knows much more than we do
 
TexMex said:
IMO the inconsistencies were admitted right away and investigated by LE. LE must not think they hindered the investigation at all and the reason of the two different accounts being given made sense to them because JW has not been charged with any offense at all. LE knows much more than we do
Click to expand...

Well, the lies might not incriminate him or get him arrested, but I am not sure that would prove that he was not lying by giving different accounts or that those lies made sense. That would be generous to assume so. But, heck, it's Friday. A good day to be generous! [emoji4]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
SeesSeas said:
Again... I think LE was attempting to be more descriptive of the bag within the realm of needing to be specific for this report, or at least as specific as they thought they needed to be at the time of writing the report.

I think LE doesn't often encounter crimes where there is a Bank Bag used. And, many (perhaps most) Bank Bags have a bank name and bank logo on the front of the bag. So, a red lined bag likely seemed like a basic way to describe the bag. Maybe not the best way.
Click to expand...

I was sort of thinking that they specified red LINED because in the photo of the money they could see the interior of the bag, maybe not the exterior so couldn't say for sure that it had a red exterior. (Unless the acct could confirm it had a red exterior. I don't think LE was necessarily relying on JW's info to be accurate at that point.)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
kammiemc said:
I was sort of thinking that they specified red LINED because in the photo of the money they could see the interior of the bag, maybe not the exterior so couldn't say for sure that it had a red exterior. (Unless the acct could confirm it had a red exterior. I don't think LE was necessarily relying on JW's info to be accurate at that point.)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

That's what I thought, too. They couldn't comment on anything but the lining.
 
07/10/2015 Notice of Filing: Notice of Filing:
Attorney: AGO, ARTHUR (463681)

Two filings, not a clue.

Crickets
 
Peliman said:
07/10/2015 Notice of Filing: Notice of Filing:
Attorney: AGO, ARTHUR (463681)

Two filings, not a clue.

Crickets
Click to expand...

http://www.pdsdc.org/PDS/TrialDivision.aspx
I guess the Chief is on the case? Maybe because it's so high-profile.
I firmly believe in fair representation for all because it's the only way our system works.
However...good luck with that, Ago!
 
MyBelle said:
I think JW's interview was recorded and if he admitted he lied, his admission has been recorded. This case is a tad more serious than trespassing.

JMO
Click to expand...

The trespassing lies by LE was just a small excerpt of the NY Times Opinion article dated 2/2/2013
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/03/opinion/sunday/why-police-officers-lie-under-oath.html?_r=1

I excerpted the trespassing lies by LE as an example of how LE will bother to lie about stupid stuff - they will lie about misdemeanor crimes which are minimal public safety impact.

The entire article can be read, but here is another excerpt of the article describing LE lies about drug offenses:
Agencies receive cash rewards for arresting high numbers of people for drug offenses, no matter how minor the offenses or how weak the evidence. Law enforcement has increasingly become a numbers game. And as it has, police officers’ tendency to regard procedural rules as optional and to lie and distort the facts has grown as well. Numerous scandals involving police officers lying or planting drugs — in Tulia, Tex. and Oakland, Calif., for example — have been linked to federally funded drug task forces eager to keep the cash rolling in.
 
TexMex said:
IMO the inconsistencies were admitted right away and investigated by LE. LE must not think they hindered the investigation at all and the reason of the two different accounts being given made sense to them because JW has not been charged with any offense at all. LE knows much more than we do
Click to expand...

Too bad LE had to spend valuable time running down JW's various lies rather than just confirming the truth (if he had told them that the first time). If LE believes him now, they clearly did not at the time the BMW SW was written. Now, even if he's uninvolved in the crime, he's tainted himself as a witness for the prosecution. Heck of a way to show your appreciation to the man who hired you when no one else would. JMO
 
kammiemc said:
I wouldn't be ashamed for participating in a greeting that is customary in our culture. In France, it's "Ca va?" There is a big difference between saying "I am fine" and misleading authorities in a crime situation. You always seem to have very reasonable opinions, so what's your take? Are you thinking that LE was wrong and JW did not lie? Or that he actually believed each of his various stories until it was pointed out that could not be true? Or do you think he did lie but those lies have no relevance because lying is common? Or other?

IDK. To me, the lies seem significant in that he was fabricating his own story that was not in line with the truth, but maybe I am being too simplistic?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

You asked "Are you thinking that LE was wrong and JW did not lie?" - although I realize you didn't ask me. :crystalball:
My response: I think LE was wrong and JW did not lie.
 
SeesSeas said:
The trespassing lies by LE was just a small excerpt of the NY Times Opinion article dated 2/2/2013
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/03/opinion/sunday/why-police-officers-lie-under-oath.html?_r=1

I excerpted the trespassing lies by LE as an example of how LE will bother to lie about stupid stuff - they will lie about misdemeanor crimes which are minimal public safety impact.

The entire article can be read, but here is another excerpt of the article describing LE lies about drug offenses:
Agencies receive cash rewards for arresting high numbers of people for drug offenses, no matter how minor the offenses or how weak the evidence. Law enforcement has increasingly become a numbers game. And as it has, police officers’ tendency to regard procedural rules as optional and to lie and distort the facts has grown as well. Numerous scandals involving police officers lying or planting drugs — in Tulia, Tex. and Oakland, Calif., for example — have been linked to federally funded drug task forces eager to keep the cash rolling in.
Click to expand...

LE can and do lie. They are allowed to lie in interviews. They are not allowed to lie in sworn affidavits. I think with so many eyes on them, from Chief Lanier to the US Attorney, the detectives are probably being extra careful to make sure everything is exactly right (even if they are prone to lie in other situations - I am not saying these detectives aren't truthful. I just know that LE lying has and does happen, so I'm not saying it would never happen.) Without having reason to think the LE in this case is untruthful, I feel very uncomfortable with the idea that JW is just be the poor, little bullied sweetheart whose mistakes were called lies by LE because they didn't have any other suspects at the time. We know from our sleuthing that JW has a history of lying, so it is obviously not out of character for him. Why he would lie to LE when they're investigating these gruesome murders is incomprehensible to me. But if I had to choose sides, LE under a microscope or JW on a normal day, I'd definitely put my money on LE in this case. If we knew that LE had a history of lying, that would change my calculations for sure.
 
rkf said:
Too bad LE had to spend valuable time running down JW's various lies rather than just confirming the truth (if he had told them that the first time). If LE believes him now, they clearly did not at the time the BMW SW was written. Now, even if he's uninvolved in the crime, he's tainted himself as a witness for the prosecution. Heck of a way to show your appreciation to the man who hired you when no one else would. JMO
Click to expand...

LE had a DNA match within three days. The killer was caught one week after the murders and LE just missed him prior to that in NYC.
If their investigation was hampered by JW they would have charged him with it IMO
JMO but IMO the prosecution will be able to clear up the situation for the jurors with a couple of questions.
JW will be a key witness and help put this vicious killer in jail for life with his testimony.
SS knew JW and trusted him. I trust those instincts.
 
SeesSeas said:
Perhaps JW should have watched this video before agreeing to talk to police:
[video=youtube;6wXkI4t7nuc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc[/video]
Don’t Talk to Police
A law school professor and former criminal defense attorney tell you why you should never agree to be interviewed by the police.
Click to expand...

This was great! I actually watched the whole thing. The one thing I'm not sure about is suspect vs. witness. Is there a difference? If I knew I had nothing to do with the S family/VF murders, I'd be falling all over myself trying to be helpful to LE. It wouldn't even occur to me that I'd be seen as a suspect, so I could do damage to myself according to the guys in the video.

One thing that I found very interesting was the cop said he doesn't want to put innocent people in jail. But, he said, I usually try not to bring someone in to interview if I don't think they're guilty (I'm paraphrasing.) Where does that put witnesses that LE needs to help them reconstruct the days events, etc.?
 
quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by TexMex
IMO the inconsistencies were admitted right away and investigated by LE. LE must not think they hindered the investigation at all and the reason of the two different accounts being given made sense to them because JW has not been charged with any offense at all. LE knows much more than we do



rkf said:
Too bad LE had to spend valuable time running down JW's various lies rather than just confirming the truth (if he had told them that the first time). If LE believes him now, they clearly did not at the time the BMW SW was written. Now, even if he's uninvolved in the crime, he's tainted himself as a witness for the prosecution. Heck of a way to show your appreciation to the man who hired you when no one else would. JMO
Click to expand...

I don't think JW lied. LE might have "had to spend valuable time" untwisting their own lies. It is difficult to remedy a tangled web of lies, especially if LE initiated the lies.
 
rkf quote "LE can and do lie. They are allowed to lie in interviews. They are not allowed to lie in sworn affidavits. "

The examples in the NY Times OPINION article are beyond LE lies during interviews. That is not the point of this article in shedding light on LE lies. LE lies can be egregious and harmful to innocent people.
 
SeesSeas said:
You asked "Are you thinking that LE was wrong and JW did not lie?" - although I realize you didn't ask me. :crystalball:
My response: I think LE was wrong and JW did not lie.
Click to expand...

After being shown the text, W-1 admitted the text was accurate and IT made a mistake about when It was first told to get the package.

W-1 admitted that IT had lied when lT stated the money was in a manila envelope when IT received the money from the other employee.

Furrhermore, W-1 admitted that IT lied when IT stated the vehicle was locked, W-1 stated the vehicle was unlocked and that IT left the envelope which contained the money in the vehicle.


BBM

If LE was just trying to make JW look bad by saying he lied, why wouldn't they have said he lied about when he was first told to pick up the package? They made a distinction between a mistake and a lie. That makes it seem less like they were just trying to railroad JW.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/m0sbjtcn1j6vkpz/266278174-Daron-Dylon-Wint-Charging-Documents.pdf?dl=0
 
TexMex said:
LE had a DNA match within three days. The killer was caught one week after the murders and LE just missed him prior to that in NYC.
If their investigation was hampered by JW they would have charged him with it IMO
JMO but IMO the prosecution will be able to clear up the situation for the jurors with a couple of questions.
JW will be a key witness and help put this vicious killer in jail for life with his testimony.
SS knew JW and trusted him. I trust those instincts.
Click to expand...

There are plenty more charges to come, even if most of them go to DW.

LE still believed (believes) DW didn't act alone after they arrested DW. When JW lied, he made LE's job much more difficult as they had to follow up on more than one story from him - and he's not the only witness. I think it's too early to think anyone is in the clear for the murders or lying to LE, as it hasn't even been made clear if the case will be tried in DC court or under Federal jurisdiction. That decision will affect the criteria for peripheral crimes, such as obstruction of justice. JW seems to be home free in DC, as obstruction of justice is primarily concerned with courts/juries. The federal charge has a much broader definition. JW should be worried about that, because his actions fall squarely within 18 U.S.C. § 1001--false statements and concealment of material facts before Federal departments and agencies
http://www.justice.gov/usam/crimina...offenses-related-obstruction-justice-offenses
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 142 more.
Total: 1,808 (members: 143, guests: 1,665)

Online statistics

Members online
143
Guests online
1,665
Total visitors
1,808
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
605,450
Messages
18,187,203
Members
233,369
Latest member
GoldfishDeluxe
Back
Top