DC - Savvas Savopoulos, family & Veralicia Figueroa murdered; Daron Wint Arrested #7

[rkf]

I'm new to this site and want to toss my theories in to the ring

A few posters have mentioned this was a lot of work for DW to get very little. It would have been easier just to steal one or two of the cars. I don't think he intended to be part of an overnight home invasion. Maybe JW heard SS talk finances during one of many of the daily trips; SS worked in the car while JW drove. Did JW misunderstand something and thought he heard something to indicate a lot of cash would be in the house. My guess is JW was desperate for money to fund his upcoming expensive racing trips (CA in June and Italy in July) and came up with a plan with DW.

Maybe DW was just supposed to get in and get the cash and get out. It is too risky to do what he (DW) did which involved contact with too many people outside of his control. Perhaps there was a plan to take a car or two or not. If DW is an average criminal he knows he needs to get in and out fast. There is so much risk in trying to keep several adults and a 10 year old under control over night. Even ordering pizza presented an opportunity to be caught. I think from inside info he thought there was a quick payoff and instead he ended up with so little it required a change in plans.

This may be why JW lied about when SS called him regarding the pickup of the money. JW lied and said SS called him Thursday am to pick up the money. Maybe he lied because it was DW who called or texted him Wednesday night and JW isn't a criminal and isn't quick on his feet. Perhaps DW called him to let him know plans had changed and they would be scrounging for money Thursday morning. DW could have been using SS phone. JW lied about how he got the money because he wanted it to appear that he didn't have a clue that money was in the bag. The phone calls from SS to JW that JW didn't answer while he was in the Lowes or Home Depot in Chantilly could have been from DW. It could also have been from SS if JW took money from the $40k. I will be interested to hear who got the box truck and when. Was it stolen or rented and at what time? The fact that JW texted a pic of the money means he is either innocent or the most stupid criminal on the planet.

I also agree with several posters about SS trying to escape. I don't know a dad who would leave his child with DW knowing what DW had already done to PS. Most of us don't have training in the best strategies for dealing with a situation like this and knowing that DW had already hurt his child might make it impossible for SS to act.

IMO, that last sentence is key. Even if we "have a plan" or "know what we would do", without repetitive training that allows us to use those skills if/when they conflict with our instinctive responses in a traumatic situation, I'm not sure how much good "pre-planning" does. Soldiers/fire fighters/police officers train so that they can act/react consistently and predictably in spite of danger.

 

[birpu]

I don't know, but my guess that he didn't want to talk about the red bag for the same reason he decided not to leave the money in the bag. Instead, he switched the money to a manila envelope, which would be more businesslike. The red bag, by contrast, was very unbusinesslike. Maybe he didn't feel like talking about how he carried $40K in a grocery tote.

Maybe, you know, the bag was specifically embarrassing to him:


I presume that the bag was an undignified way to convey $40K cash, so he came up with a manila envelope. Later in the aftermath of the murders, he didn't feel like talking about the stupid red bag or his stupid texts of the cash to his girlfriend, either.

As a teenager, I once got in trouble for burning the sleeve off my windbreaker, in a lounge at "very important place" where I worked. I wasn't really creating a fire hazard (stone floors), but, you know, very important places aren't thrilled to hear about deliberately setting one's clothes on fire. So, I was hauled in to the head guy's office to explain myself.

"Why were you burning the sleeve off your jacket?" he asked me.
"Ah ... to match the other sleeve," I stammered. "The left arm was missing. I decided to make a vest out of it."
"So, your jacket came with one sleeve?" he asked.
"Not exactly."
"So, how did it come to have one sleeve?"
"The left sleeve burned off."
"Burned off."
"Right."
"And how did the left sleeve burn off?"
"It caught on fire while I was driving, sir."
"Was your car on fire also while you were driving?"
"No sir. I was smoking."
"So you were driving down the road, smoking, and noticed that your jacket was on fire?"
"That's right, sir."
"And what did you do about that?"
"I pulled over. There was man watering his garden with a hose, and I asked him to put out my jacket."
"Which he did?"
"Yes sir. I thanked him and went on my way."
"Do you have a special attraction to fire?"
"No sir. I was just trying to even it out."
"Because wearing a jacket with one arm would be crazy."
"That's right, sir."

Sometimes young guys do dumb things, which makes sense to them or are funny to them in the moment, but sound really stupid later when spelled out in a different setting. In my case, I thought it would be amusing to make a vest out of my ruined jacket, never dreaming that the whole story would end up coming out to the big boss.

So now you are a much matured former pyromaniac searching for embarrassing red bags online That was a good story. I enjoyed it. Costco bags are hands-down way better than Whole Foods bags, btw. They're huge. And padded. I bought two.

The idea of wanting to appear business-like sounds plausible to me. Good thing he just happened to have that manilla envelope around. I still wonder why he would have hauled a spider-man/other atrocity in the bank if it were a thing of embarrassment to him, though, since he already had the manilla envelope at his disposal.

 

[SophieRose]

I do think the locked/unlocked car scenario is interesting from another angle. It isn't clear from the charging docs if the police caught him in that lie or he just changed the story. If he just changed the story, why? What difference would it make to stay with that lie? The police would not know one way or the other. But if the police did know he was lying originally, how did they figure that out? What would cause them to know the car was unlocked at the moment W-1 entered the garage? I can't come up with anything. So I'm assuming W-1 just up and changed his version. But it seems unnecessary.

SS may have texted a message that the car would be unlocked, so LE may have had that.

 

[Peliman]

See, all along I was thinking a different kind of money bag.

 

[MyBelle]

He wash't worried about the driver because he gave explicit instructions to him not to ring the bell.

He could not do that with a housekeeper, obviously.

No mention of the doorbell in the charging documents that I can find. What I do find is this:

Mr. Savopoulos told W-l to leave the money in the car inside the garage.

 

[al66pine]

....As a teenager, I once got in trouble for burning the sleeve off my windbreaker, in a lounge at "very important place" where I worked.
[jd - deleting convo w former employer, for brevity]
Sometimes young guys do dumb things...

bbm

^ post of the day to ---> jd dickinson.
And the pants were transformed into shorts, b/c your dog ate pants legs below knee?
LOL, J/K, LOL.

 

[rkf]

Sometimes in cases you know things without direct evidence, but rather as a reflection of other direct evidence. Direct evidence: a silent night. Reflection: "the dog that didn't bark."

The direct evidence here includes:

- 4 people killed in a house which is then set on fire
- Report in WP (leaked from LE) that Wint wore gloves while eating pizza

So, Wint wore gloves even while eating pizza in order to conceal his identity. The 4 people were killed also to conceal his identity, because they could identify him and maybe even knew his name. If they could identity him, Wint wasn't wearing a mask.

Wint probably showed up at the house wearing gloves, a neon-green workman's vest and no mask. He probably stayed that way the entire time and presented himself in this manner when SS came home.

Try to remember that if you ever come face to face with a violent criminal. Is he wearing gloves? Is he wearing a mask? The absolute worst combo is gloves and no mask. This is the face of your death. Do anything to get away.

Finally, IMO Wint set the fire not to pretend that the 4 people died in a fire (a story that couldn't stick because of the ransom delivery) but to destroy any remaining physical evidence of Wint's identity.

It's also possible he killed them because he wanted to - regardless of whether they could identify him or not.

 

[emmavoberry]

A hit is not the only possible scenario and I doubt it. But workplace theft is common and it's not that much of a stretch to "let's hit the bosses' house" or "let's hold the boss's family hostage and get him to get us the money."

The proof is in the pudding. He/they managed to access house without raising suspicion,They disable security system or know it would not be on, and feel comfortable enough to stay 18 hours. Let's trust LE is not throwing out misleading crumb. L.E. has implied some planning/knowledge.

But professional hit? No. Possibly a master-mind behind it who was only master in his own mind, but one unable to plan for contingencies and to understand that DW was ruled by irrational rage probably fueled with paranoia or perhaps drink or drug-induced. He was not going to hold up well over the course and he'd inflict un necessary damage. If a coach, a bad one. If a team, an unruly one incapable of foresight with low threshold for frustration. Stooges indeed. Evil incompetents.

 

[FelicityLemon]

I think we need a flow chart. lol

Seriously, we do or at least I do, lol! For a two days I was wondering who/what the heck IT was. I figured it wasn't Information Technology and I figured NG wasn't National Geographic, but...

Just so I'm getting this right: does IT mean "it" as in "witness" so as not to give away the sex/gender of the witness? If so, it seems (ba dumb bum) like there could be a better way to state it.

 

[MyBelle]

First things first - Cover Your *advertiser censored* and get people to sign for any transfer of cash. It protects both the giver and the recipient. I swear to whomeveryouwant that if my boss asked me to just casually leave that amount of cash (my threshold is actually much lower) in an object - no hand to hand transfer - I'd call police to say what was going on and ask for an officer to escort me and watch me do it and sign something to prove that he saw me leave $40k there. That my boss made such a request would pique most people's curiosity, and for sure, the police would want to know what's going on. That kind of cash can indicate kidnapping, extortion, ransom, drug deal, hit money. Cash for auction is traditionally in the form of a cashier's check to protect both parties. I'm curious as to why 1) the assistant didn't question this, or 2) the bank didn't red flag it. Of course, maybe they did. For sure, after this has come to light there will be changes in banking rules.

For that amount of cash, DEFINITELY I'd request we do that in a private area of the bank. I don't want anybody else knowing what I'm walking around with. Easy pickins'.

No way would I risk my job, my freedom, my future if that cash got stolen.

This is another thing that's weird. That first statement of his actually makes sense. I just couldn't believe that the employee who withdrew the cash would put that in his pockets, lol - ridiculous! No bank would let you leave with stacks of cash like that. Most people withdrawing large sums use a lock zippered heavy canvas or leather cash bag. If not, the bank will provide you with an envelope or envelopes.

BBM. Exactly and I think most CEOs would have required the AIW employee who withdrew the cash be the one to deliver it to my garage. He would have immediately known something was wrong. I think requiring W-1 to do it is a decision made by Wint and his fellow extortionist(s).

This case will be prosecuted as a federal crime so the death penalty can be imposed.

JMO

 

[birpu]

See, all along I was thinking a different kind of money bag.

Nah. It's lined! Red lined bag. I was picturing a nice drawstring with red velvet interior!

 

[rkf]

Then why put the money in the red bag at all?

 

[FelicityLemon]

What I question is that he left the message at all. NG claims she didn't hear it until Thursday. NG also claims he was trying to warn her not to come to the house on Thursday yet on Wednesday he invites his young personal assistant to drop off a package to the house on Thursday. If he feared NG being pulled into it, why didn't he fear his driver's safety?

JMO

Because the cash wasn't going to get there on it's own and by having JW call 10 minutes before arriving, SS could tell him to just leave it in the car.

 

[rkf]

It's been confirmed that W2 is W1's girlfriend.

Where was that confirmed? I missed that somehow! I know it's been said, but can't remember where... TIA

 

[rkf]

If employer asked me and a company employ, perhaps way higher up, handed over the money from the bank, I'd think things were copecetic. Yeah, so he's paying out in cash for services. Contractors often take cash for a discount on a job or a car is bought with cash. I'd leave it to company accountants, Mr. S., his advisors, the bank to sort out. If ok with them, ok with me. So that the assistant would not balk I can understand. That Mr. S. would pick driver to make the drop, no. His and three other lies were on the line, so I'd think he would choose someone of longer standing service and more of a professional to deliver. But perhaps the choice was down to the unconventional nature of the drop off and S thinking the driver less likely question than person in more of a formal capacity. I still don't get why driver lied about the phone msg, the money packaging, the car being locked. I've been a "personal assistant," on an informal basis--one is a kind of all around gofer in that position doing whatever is needed that boss or other personnel can't do, different in every case and depending upon type of business serving of course but the "personal" does mean one serves the boss personally; could be by scheduling, running her shop, doing all the mail, pitching in on the laundry, running to the bank...If my boss and family is slaughtered I wouldn't lie about how I carried out her orders though to the investigators unless I had to cover myself in a big way.

I also don't understand why anyone would want W1 to know he was delivering a load of cash. Why would SS tell/AIW employee take 4 bundles of cash out of his pockets or meet the new driver at the bank? If it was me, I would have that $40,000 bundled up in a way that it wouldn't be obvious what it was... And wasn't easy to open/tamper with on the way to SS. Was this done in a rush, so that's why they met at the bank instead of at AIW office?

 

[al66pine]

.... I just couldn't believe that the employee who withdrew the cash would put that in his pockets, lol - ridiculous! No bank would let you leave with stacks of cash like that. Most people withdrawing large sums use a lock zippered heavy canvas or leather cash bag. If not, the bank will provide you with an envelope or envelopes.

. rbm some de-bbm

Yes, agreed, many ppl w "stacks of cash" to dep or w/d - wd/use bank bag or equiv.

Maybe my brain cell (singular) is not properly functioning ATM, but IIRC,
a poster here said - w link backup - that $40,000 in 100's = ~ 1 3/4" thick.
IOW cd/fit easily in a man's typical suit jacket pockets. Or blazer pockets.
If that's correct, then in $50 bills, still less than 4" thick.
JM2cts, could be wrong.

 

[Peliman]

Then why put the money in the red bag at all?

Cause the guy he got it from had it in his pockets right out in the open? I'm assuming it was a guy cause women normally don't have red velvet lined pockets.

 

[rkf]

Let's make some headway on the locked vs unlocked car. Why lie about that?

Since it was UNlocked when W1 first said it was locked, what does that mean? I would assume that the family would normally keep the cars locked. So UNlocked might mean someone opened the car before W1 arrived. Did he see that someone but not question who that someone was?? He doesn't want to admit he saw the perp and missed the chance to save the family so he lied and said he himself unlocked the car?

And now that I think about it - WHY leave the money in the car at all? Why not on a shelf in the garage or at the doorway in the garage. Why did Wint want the money in the car??

The lie about the locked vs UNlocked must mean something or why would it be called out in the doc as a lie?

????

Someone who knows more about Moslers than I said some of them have a keycode entry and that entry is recorded by the car. If this is true for this car, if it was locked, W1 would have to know the code, which could be important.

 

[birpu]

I also don't understand why anyone would want W1 to know he was delivering a load of cash. Why would SS tell/AIW employee take 4 bundles of cash out of his pockets or meet the new driver at the bank? If it was me, I would have that $40,000 bundled up in a way that it wouldn't be obvious what it was... And wasn't easy to open/tamper with on the way to SS. Was this done in a rush, so that's why they met at the bank instead of at AIW office?

The statement says they met at AIW and both went to the bank and went inside.

 

[birpu]

Cause the guy he got it from had it in his pockets right out in the open? I'm assuming it was a guy cause women normally don't have red velvet lined pockets.

I was making a joke about the velvet lining. I have no earthly clue what the bag looked like.