DC - Savvas Savopoulos, family & Veralicia Figueroa murdered; Daron Wint Arrested #8

[jjenny]

Sorry to disagree but some of her speculations--which may have been influenced by things she learned from LE while questioning her--or from neighbors or some other "grapevine"--make sense. She, I believe, was reported as saying she felt the perpetrator/s knew the family routine, were known to the family. Makes sense. I think if we go back to some of her interviews with reporters, we will find some substance. No I can't site the specific sources at this time, but I have followed every thread her summarizing her interviews and the first news stories as much as I could. She is not "wholly unreliable," though she may speculate, get confused, or perhaps overstep her knowledge. I'd say JW has proven himself unreliable, as he was caught out in lies. Not the same thing when one talks to reporters. Most of us would be wisely cautioned not to. I have made that mistake once in my life. They absolutely have their ways.

If you are referring to NG, she was quoted as saying she has no idea who did this to the family.

 

[emmavoberry]

DW's was in the system. Also he was suspected of a serious crime, in part due to their identifying him on footage (and I think as others have suggested, maybe we did not see all of it, but it was released to shake him and get those who might have helped with some element). As to the others brought in from the convoy, if suspected of certain serious crimes they could have had to give DNA sample even if not charged. I would think LE wants to proceed cautiously on this so as not to have evidence thrown out later as fruit of the poisoned). They may or amy not have been able to obtain warrants. If one of the four had been arrested for a serious crime in the last six months, LE might not have been able to insist they give other than fingerprints. I speculate that
until more dots have been connected to prove the possibility that they had committed burglary, kidnapping, murder, not a slam dunk LE had DNA to compare yet. Now, if they have not got the samples and they were not in a database, they will execute the search warrants that will help them make a nexus if one is to be made between evidence at the house, from their participation in the convoy (including the truck and car), and what else they find that is listed in these warrants and what else they have from any witnesses. I'm no authority but I do know, when not under arrest, or in other circumstances, every one can not be compelled to offer DNA. Some do willingly. I agree that there's going to be some fast-tracking despite the backlog. JMO

 

[rkf]

In the Petit case they were tied up, yet subsequently not only was one of them untied they were allowed to go the bank. In this case that we know SS wasn't duct taped all the time for him to be able to call at least half a dozen people. Actually we don't know how many people outside of his home SS talked to.

He could have been duct taped and had the phone held to his ear/mouth. I'm betting the perp(s) didn't want him to have the smallest chance of escaping from his bonds. He was by far the greatest physical threat to them.

 

[kammiemc]

Given how I believe JW has already confessed to criminally prosecutable offenses related to the investigation, I don't trust that anything he's said is true unless there's other corroboration, however any or all of what he's said may be true so I have to consider that as well. I am not really sure what happened given that we have an unreliable witness who could be a conspirator, whether willfully or accidentally.

I agree you, SI. We just don't know for sure either way, regardless of JW's deception in the case as publicly stated so far. And though the court doc was written in a way in which LE made it clear that they were attributing the specifics of the drop off as what JW stated, not as something they knew as fact, there was one exception in one sentence in regard to DDW, where it was said that the four victims were killed after the ransom was delivered to the house--so I have to assume that they either have corroboration for that OR, as rfk has pointed out, and that poster sounds very smart and objective, LE might write something to bring an arrest and change once they build more of a story. Clearly were were not buying what JW's selling, so I have a hard time doing so as well, because I think they know a heck of a lot more than we do.

 

[MyBelle]

If you are under investigation for a crime or even that the crime touches you, you can get in serious trouble for deleting records prior to being served with a search warrant. Just because someone doesn't have a search warrant or arrest warranted tied to them, it doesn't mean they're free to engage in real or virtual paper shredding. If you are caught up in a criminal investigation do not alter or destroy anything that could be relevant regardless of whether or not there's any type of warrant tied to you. Halliburton is the most recent is the most recent high profile example of criminal destruction of evidence:
http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/halli...evidence-connection-deepwater-horizon-tragedy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tampering_with_evidence
This is about California law, but it goes into detail on many different ways you can be committing the crime:
http://www.shouselaw.com/destroying-concealing-evidence.html

It also could be used by prosecutors as evidence of consciousness of guilt.

For example, such evidence may include actions the defendant took to “cover up” his alleged crime.

http://definitions.uslegal.com/c/consciousness-of-guilt/

 

[SpanishInquisition]

I would think SS's hands and feet were bound and the phone was just held up to his mouth. SS was clearly a strong man -- I can't imagine that he wasn't bound throughout this ordeal.

In the Petit case it didn't take any physical strength to notify about the hostage situation. Any number of things could have been done as the family members know they're being held by at least one armed kidnapper as it doesn't just have to be one way all the time. I also think that SS was not caught by overwhelming physical force, but knowing if he did the wrong move that his family would be killed and that subdued him. When someone has a knife to your 10 your old child, they don't need any physical restraints on you in order to control you. I expect that most of the time he was highly restrained, but he didn't necessarily always have to be kept that way given the mortal threat to his family and that is the same reason why they let him talk in the phone in the first place.

 

[MyBelle]

I agree you, SI. We just don't know for sure either way, regardless of JW's deception in the case as publicly stated so far. And though the court doc was written in a way in which LE made it clear that they were attributing the specifics of the drop off as what JW stated, not as something they knew as fact, there was one exception in one sentence in regard to DDW, where it was said that the four victims were killed after the ransom was delivered to the house--so I have to assume that they either have corroboration for that OR, as rfk has pointed out, and that poster sounds very smart and objective, LE might write something to bring an arrest and change once they build more of a story. Clearly were were not buying what JW's selling, so I have a hard time doing so as well, because I think they know a heck of a lot more than we do.

The charging document contained what LE reasonably believed to be true at the time it was written. That could change as evidence evolves. And while it might say the deaths happened after the ransom arrived, I don't know how they could confirm that fact because Wint wasn't found with all the money. It is unknown whether the money he was found with was tied to the murders.

JMO

 

[emmavoberry]

iirc it has been reported (based supposedly on comments from a co-worker) that DW was very difficult to get along with and showed a "bad attitude" at AIW. It is his "relative" who was more recently fired tho I am lacking the source I got the info. from. So much info was in the earliest reports and we do know some of it was inaccurate. DW seems a study in explosive anger disorder, and not your everyday sociopath if he participated in or led the murders--rather, a sadistic and homicidal sociopath. We also know he was accused of sexual assault. I forget if he was charged. But surely some would consider him a time-bomb waiting to go off based on his previous run-ns with the law. I still have to say if...DNA alone is not going to be enough I don't think. JMO

 

[kammiemc]

I truly am not sure where he is given how that he has no visible means of support given how he's now unemployed and I don't think he had much money in the bank before all this. He could be with his family, but he could have asked for material witness confinement because he has no place else to go and if it's being done that way, they could have put him up in a (nice) hotel under armed protection depending on how nicely they want to treat him where he'd now have his room, board and security taken care of.

Thanks so much for posting that. I didn't know that term "material witness confinement". But that might make a lot of sense in this case, especially if DDW has some dangerous people running around knowing that JW could squeal. And where is JW's mom? That poor woman. If my son lied in a quadruple homicide case and I believed he was totally innocent, I would be on CNN defending him in the public eye. Or a smart lawyer would help me craft my quotes to media. Where is she?

 

[SpanishInquisition]

I don't see how that is enforceable. Because who says it's evidence until it is listed as such in a warrant?

A jury would say whether or not it was foreseeable what was concealed/destroyed was relevant to a criminal investigation. There's a long history of enforcing evidence tampering in both civil and criminal contexts and within the corporate ccontext the tightening up on evidence tampering was one of the major aspects of Sarbanes-Oxley. In fact it's gone so far where a fisherman was prosecuted for tossing fish (it was determined that took it too far, not that the law was unenforceable), which even the fisherman admitted before SCOTUS that they could be prosecuted other criminal evidence tampering statutes for their fish tossing:
http://www.natlawreview.com/article/supreme-court-lets-fisherman-hook-re-sarbanes-oxley-act
Altering or destroying things that may be relevant to a criminal investigation is a big no-no.

 

[emmavoberry]

Agreed. But the reason of course she did not immediately rouse authorities to go get the kidnapper parked in the car near the bank and then stay safe herself was that she'd been told her daughters would immediately be killed as the driver (forget which one) would simply make a call to his fellow hostage-taker as soon as he saw a hint of police. So she was still, even from afar, manipulated by her fear of what they would do to her children. Indeed, even as police were waiting outside, they went full on to their final act as promised. Sometimes one looks into these folks eyes and understand that they truly are capable of what they say they will do and that there is not a soul there. JMO

 

[clearskies1]

In the Petit case it didn't take any physical strength to notify about the hostage situation. Any number of things could have been done as the family members know they're being held by at least one armed kidnapper as it doesn't just have to be one way all the time. I also think that SS was not caught by overwhelming physical force, but knowing if he did the wrong move that his family would be killed and that subdued him. When someone has a knife to your 10 your old child, they don't need any physical restraints on you in order to control you. I expect that most of the time he was highly restrained, but he didn't necessarily always have to be kept that way given the mortal threat to his family and that is the same reason why they let him talk in the phone in the first place.

I think SS was too much of a physical threat and that he was bound within minutes of arriving at the house. I understand about the threat to his child, but I think SS would have quickly realized that his only real option was to use force, and that he would need to get his hands on and physically fight the guy holding them before any mortal wounds were actually inflicted on his child. Just my feeling, which of course could be wrong.

 

[kammiemc]

I agree SI. I suspected his possible involvement, knowingly or unwittingly, weeks ago. He may be totally innocent. What I am concerned about if due to lack of money, he could be thrown in a sharks pit. No matter how shocking this crime EVERYONE deserves proper representation. Many of the court appointed defense is frankly at the bottom of the barrel. I have experience in a law firm. Not trashing these attorneys at all. But attorneys with years of experience do not sign up as a court appointed attorney.

You might know better about this since you have legal experience, but don't semi-"famous" defense attorneys come out of the woodwork for high profile cases? Even psycho, pizza-dna-lathering DDW has a guy dying to defend him. Is it really possible that a guy like JW, a central figure in a high-profile quadruple homicide, whom at least some people are already convinced is completely innocent despite his deception--so potentially at least one future juror could think that-- wouldn't have a decent defense lawyer wanting to come in and take their chances proving himself or herself? For some reason, I'm thinking this guy will not end up with a court-appointed lawyer. Unless I'm missing something, which is totally possible!

 

[kammiemc]

I think it was all premeditated from the start. Some people can hold a grudge for years and years.
I don't think money was the only goal here.

So sad and true. Especially those who wield machetes outside their former places of employment.

 

[kammiemc]

No, that's not accurate.

Nowhere was it stated that JW received those orders. As we know, in the count doc, it says that JW stated he received orders to drop off the loot in the car in the garage. However, what some posters might be responding to is that it was reported early on that LE said the money was dropped on the doorstep. But that could have been inaccurate reporting. Or not, depending on what LE knew, thought they knew or wanted to say at the time.

 

[kammiemc]

The charging document contained what LE reasonably believed to be true at the time it was written. That could change as evidence evolves. And while it might say the deaths happened after the ransom arrived, I don't know how they could confirm that fact because Wint wasn't found with all the money. It is unknown whether the money he was found with was tied to the murders.

JMO

I absolutely, totally, 100% agree with what you are saying here! Except I lean to the idea that what was found with DDW was part of the ransom. Which I believe LE believes! Because it was in $100 bills and roughly half the ransom money collected from the bank; So it aligns with the specific language LE chose to use in the court docs, which can readily be inferred that they were implying that JW was caught showing off half of the ransom money--as well as he was being caught lying about many of the details of the ransom delivery.

 

[rkf]

What of his SM presence is evidence related to this crime? Being a narcissistic, immature, lying, wanna-be race car driver is not a crime. Even being one that needs money isn't a crime. To be guilty of destroying evidence, you have to know it might be evidence. If you are proclaiming your innocence (assuming he is charged) there is no reason to consider your SM posts evidence. JMO

It also could be used by prosecutors as evidence of consciousness of guilt.

For example, such evidence may include actions the defendant took to “cover up” his alleged crime.

http://definitions.uslegal.com/c/consciousness-of-guilt/

 

[MyBelle]

I absolutely, totally, 100% agree with what you are saying here! Except I lean to the idea that what was found with DDW was part of the ransom. Which I believe LE believes! Because it was in $100 bills and roughly half the ransom money collected from the bank; So it aligns with the specific language LE chose to use in the court docs, which can readily be inferred that they were implying that JW was caught showing off half of the ransom money--as well as he was being caught lying about many of the details of the ransom delivery.

It may have been half of the ransom money but I have a serious question about HOW the people detained with Wint have been making a living. I wonder if they are a rolling chop shop. They had the money, Wint did not. So that is an indication of a level of sophistication.

I do not believe this family is the first victim nor the last. Getting to the bottom seems to be similar to getting to the bottom of a cancer. Where did it start and where does it end?

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

What of his SM presence is evidence related to this crime? Being a narcissistic, immature, lying, wanna-be race car driver is not a crime. Even being one that needs money isn't a crime. To be guilty of destroying evidence, you have to know it might be evidence. If you are proclaiming your innocence (assuming he is charged) there is no reason to consider your SM posts evidence. JMO

Huh? Destroying evidence IS evidence of consciousness of guilt as the link I provided clearly shows.

 

[rkf]

Especially if the perp had been torturing his (SS') child. I would try to kill him the first chance I had.. IMO

I think SS was too much of a physical threat and that he was bound within minutes of arriving at the house. I understand about the threat to his child, but I think SS would have quickly realized that his only real option was to use force, and that he would need to get his hands on and physically fight the guy holding them before any mortal wounds were actually inflicted on his child. Just my feeling, which of course could be wrong.