Wouldn't he call her or SS, not text? If their house is on fire, it's an emergency...you call.
"are you ok, if so..." is so incredibly absurd. If he didn't believe she was at home, why would he be asking her if she was okay?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Wouldn't he call her or SS, not text? If their house is on fire, it's an emergency...you call.
This may be a stretch... But... JW texted SS Wednesday " I got your message, I will
call you when I get the package! But who did he call or txt? His GF
It is possible he was texting because his calls went to VM.
IMO it just doesn't sound right... I don't know why, like a contrived message. And why call AS... Wouldn't it be SS that he would call?
If you heard your boss's house was on fire, wouldn't you call them...and then keep on calling them until you got through? It doesn't seem like it should have been in a text in the first place as the message itself is rather call-worthy rather than something that should be left to text.
BBM. No employee--if he values his job--is going to obviously break into a package he's dropping off at his boss' home. His boss would immediately detect it and immediately fire him.
LE can pinpoint JW's location at the time he left every text and message both up to and after the murders. He's provided them with a map. LE will compare that to the map provided by AS' phone.
JMO
Contrived is a good word for it. I don't know - I think if I thought I could be breaking the news to someone that their house was on fire, I probably wouldn't be so nonchalant about it.
It sounds like someone trying to clearly establish that they heard that the house was on fire and wanted it to be known that he didn't know her whereabouts, hence the "are you ok?"
I'm just saying... if I thought there was a chance that I was going to be the one to inform someone their house was on fire (kind of a big deal) I don't think I would do it via text. If I couldn't get in touch with them, I may text and say, "Emergency! Call me!" but I would just never text someone, "Hey, your house is on fire..."
But what strikes me about the WAPO article, if accurate, is that JW was concerned about letting SS know he had delivered the package, and he was calling the house while in his car, yet never returned the 11:54 a.m. call from SS's cell to his--or did he? No mention of that here and iirc (according to news) he did not get that call because of lack of connectivity while at Lowe's. Yet by 1:15, as per this report, he had use of his cell to phone house, but did not check his msgs.? Maybe no details on that. subject. Any one here recall mention of the 11:54 call, the last one made from SS cell as I remember? I know we have discussed it before, but with this item in WAPO, I am once again wondering.
The mistake he made is asking her if she was okay and then saying, "if so..." He had no reason to believe she wasn't okay....or did he? The FBI profilers are going to have a field day with the material he's given them.
JMO
The mistake he made is asking her if she was okay and then saying, "if so..." He had no reason to believe she wasn't okay....or did he? The FBI profilers are going to have a field day with the material he's given them.
JMO
Unless it took him a hour and half to get there because he bought another manila envelope or he knew it didn't matter. To me the first story makes more sense as I can see either a bank manager handing it over like that so that it would be inconspicuous or an accountant doing it that way rather than some accountant carrying around $40K in their pocket and all the subsequent moving around of the money. It being in a sealed package with him having to deliver that sealed package makes more sense than all this money handling drama, especially if SS's text said 'package.'
His text conversation with his girlfriend does not seem like it implicates either of them in this brutal crime. JMO
He had called/texted multiple times already. And he knew that SS, and probably AS had been home a few hours earlier because he saw all their cars.
So of course he wondered if they were OK. Who wouldn't? They were home and their house is on fire and they aren't replying to any messages. Why wouldn't he wonder if she was OK or not?
My kids are 23 and 27. They almost never call anyone. They TEXT everything. It does not seem weird to me at all.
First of all, I am sure that he was not expecting that HE was giving either of them this news for the first time. He heard it through the grapevine so he'd assume they knew it already too.
But as SS's personal assistant/driver/errand boy, it makes total sense that he would try and contact them to see if they needed help getting to or from somewhere, etc. MOO
But what strikes me about the WAPO article, if accurate, is that JW was concerned about letting SS know he had delivered the package, and he was calling the house while in his car, yet never returned the 11:54 a.m. call from SS's cell to his--or did he? No mention of that here and iirc (according to news) he did not get that call because of lack of connectivity while at Lowe's. Yet by 1:15, as per this report, he had use of his cell to phone house, but did not check his msgs.? Maybe no details on that. subject. Any one here recall mention of the 11:54 call, the last one made from SS cell as I remember? I know we have discussed it before, but with this item in WAPO, I am once again wondering.
My kids are 23 and 27. They almost never call anyone. They TEXT everything. It does not seem weird to me at all.
First of all, I am sure that he was not expecting that HE was giving either of them this news for the first time. He heard it through the grapevine so he'd assume they knew it already too.
But as SS's personal assistant/driver/errand boy, it makes total sense that he would try and contact them to see if they needed help getting to or from somewhere, etc. MOO