Found Deceased NY - Joseph Comunale, 26, Manhattan, 12 Nov 2016 #1 *Arrests*

[Lauranyc83]

Police are still unsure which of the two conspirators killed Joseph Comunale, but murder charges are expected in the heinous attack.

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york...l&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk

 

[Simplestarz86]

Sounds like the three females might have been Joey's friends. Anyone else reading it that way?

jmo

I was thinking the same.
IMO JR and LC wanted to take the girls back to JR's apt for an after party. From what I have read about Joey he seems like a good friend. I think Joey would insist on going with the girls back to JR's apt for after party. I think JR and LC had other ideas. Something happens... Then both JC, LC and the girls are seen walking out together. Then JC and LC enter and are on elevator. IMO the ladies are walked out by the guys after a conflict ensues. Embarrassed LC escorts them all out. JC and LC have words and thinks things are good. Meanwhile JC is in apt stewing over whatever conflict ensued. LC contacts JR to let him know they( LC and JC) were coming back. Blitz attack. IMO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[kaen]

Had his name been changed legally or is he just using that name.

It has to be legal because it is on the official documents. Otherwise they would have used his legal name and added an AKA.

 

[Inthedetails]

Funeral plans have been made:

"The wake for 26-year-old Joseph Comunale was set for Tuesday in his hometown of Stamford, followed by a Wednesday funeral at St. Leo’s Church in the same Connecticut city."

RIP, Joey. Perhaps one thing to be thankful for is the family will be able to gather for Thanksgiving after the funeral. It will be heartbreaking without Joey, of course, but they will be together. I hope that is comforting to them.

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york...ly-manhattan-party-stabbing-article-1.2880307

 

[PLT]

I noticed one of the articles mentioned that JCs clothing was found in the apartment. I keep wondering why he returned back to the apartment after his friends left and exactly how familiar he was with the other two men? If they had just met that night, I would think if there were ill feelings when they left, JC would have left earlier with the women (who I am assuming he knew).

The article stated his pants were found so I thought perhaps maybe they were all going to crash there and went to bed and something happened to spark the women to leave. Maybe JC was comfortable enough after walking them out - to return, take clothing off and stay till morning but an argument ensued. It seems that most of the blame is on JR but I have a feeling LD had a larger role than just helping cover up.

I can see jealousy fueled by a night of partying causing a brawl over something foolish .....but stabbing someone 15 times.....that sounds like it was more personal. Maybe JC saw something that he was not supposed to or threatened to report those men for something they did. All speculation but I think there is way more to this. I also don't believe JR was a son but that has little right now to do with the case and more of the jewelers personal business.

 

[HastingsChi]

I noticed one of the articles mentioned that JCs clothing was found in the apartment. I keep wondering why he returned back to the apartment after his friends left and exactly how familiar he was with the other two men? If they had just met that night, I would think if there were ill feelings when they left, JC would have left earlier with the women (who I am assuming he knew).

The article stated his pants were found so I thought perhaps maybe they were all going to crash there and went to bed and something happened to spark the women to leave. Maybe JC was comfortable enough after walking them out - to return, take clothing off and stay till morning but an argument ensued. It seems that most of the blame is on JR but I have a feeling LD had a larger role than just helping cover up.

I can see jealousy fueled by a night of partying causing a brawl over something foolish .....but stabbing someone 15 times.....that sounds like it was more personal. Maybe JC saw something that he was not supposed to or threatened to report those men for something they did. All speculation but I think there is way more to this. I also don't believe JR was a son but that has little right now to do with the case and more of the jewelers personal business.

It's actually quite simple:
The killer(s) wanted to remove anything that could help identify him.

These two don't strike me as the sharpest tools in the shed.

These two geniuses made a half assed attempt to burn the corpse -- they didn't want anyone to be able to identify this guy. Maybe they saw Making a Murderer and they recalled how the Daisy*Fuentes*jeans helped identify the victim. Perhaps they heard that trace evidence is a thing and were trying to avoid having any identifiable fiber evidence in the luggage or in James' car.

While they completely failed in achieving their goal, a truly epic failure, all the evidence we know of establishes that they did attempt to achieve the goal of erasing him from their lives.

Why did he go back? I certainly have some solid thoughts but will wait until that evidence becomes more clear to avoid tarnishing the victim in any manner. Let's just say I'm incredibly confident that it had nothing to do with sex and I highly doubt any sexual advances were made. If you simply wipe the notion that sexual advances were made and rejected resulting in murder and focus on the actual evidence and other claims that have been reported consistently, you'll likely have a better understanding of the most logical and probable answers to your questions.

Just my thoughts, I'm probably wrong...

;-)

 

[epiphany]

<snip> Dilione's attorney, Daniel Parker, couldn't immediately be reached for comment.

http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/loca...-of-Hofstra-Grad-Joey-Comunale-401840426.html

Not sure if this DP is the same attorney who represented one of the male escorts (both convicted) in the brutal murder of the Chelsea florist.

 

[Niner]

So next court hearing is tomorrow, Nov. 21st - as I read on one of these posts...

:rose: RIP JOEY :rose:

 

[PLT]

It's actually quite simple:
The killer(s) wanted to remove anything that could help identify him.

These two don't strike me as the sharpest tools in the shed.

These two geniuses made a half assed attempt to burn the corpse -- they didn't want anyone to be able to identify this guy. Maybe they saw Making a Murderer and they recalled how the Daisy*Fuentes*jeans helped identify the victim. Perhaps they heard that trace evidence is a thing and were trying to avoid having any identifiable fiber evidence in the luggage or in James' car.

While they completely failed in achieving their goal, a truly epic failure, all the evidence we know of establishes that they did attempt to achieve the goal of erasing him from their lives.

Why did he go back? I certainly have some solid thoughts but will wait until that evidence becomes more clear to avoid tarnishing the victim in any manner. Let's just say I'm incredibly confident that it had nothing to do with sex and I highly doubt any sexual advances were made. If you simply wipe the notion that sexual advances were made and rejected resulting in murder and focus on the actual evidence and other claims that have been reported consistently, you'll likely have a better understanding of the most logical and probable answers to your questions.

Just my thoughts, I'm probably wrong...

;-)

No I think you will likely be right and I think by next week the lawyers will be advising the two in custody and they will soon be turning against each other completely. LD already caved early on so he likely will start playing the victim and say he was threatened and had to help. Drugs are an obvious underlying cause of the violence but it seems something else was at play here. Yes they are not the brightest ....keeping the clothing and not disposing, asking about the security film, knowing they are being recorded, etc. Luckily they did leave a direct trail so that police could act quickly.

 

[trigger]

So next court hearing is tomorrow, Nov. 21st - as I read on one of these posts...

:rose: RIP JOEY :rose:

Yes court appearance is tomorrow.

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york...-partygoer-stabbed-15-times-article-1.2877608

 

[HastingsChi]

No I think you will likely be right and I think by next week the lawyers will be advising the two in custody and they will soon be turning against each other completely. LD already caved early on so he likely will start playing the victim and say he was threatened and had to help. Drugs are an obvious underlying cause of the violence but it seems something else was at play here. Yes they are not the brightest ....keeping the clothing and not disposing, asking about the security film, knowing they are being recorded, etc. Luckily they did leave a direct trail so that police could act quickly.

Agree with everything you wrote!

Consider that what has not been reported might be even more significant than what has been reported:

We know that Comunale worked as a sales associate at Tri-Ed Ltd., which sells security products such as closed-circuit TV cameras -- these are really high tech total surveillance solutions that Tri-Ed sells to residential and commercial buildings. We know that Comunale's father, Pat, is the President of Tri-Ed. We know that "it was determined that Comunale, who worked as a sales associate at for security product company Tri-Ed Ltd., had visited the exact same luxury building."

I'm going to bet that The Grand Sutton at 418 e 59th Street was Tri-Ed client. This might explain the astonishingly fast turnaround time on the surveillance footage -- Pat Comunale likely [and rightly] made it a top priority and was able to tell NYPD exactly what it shows and when.

What we have not heard and never really came up is anything related to usage of Comunale's credit/debit cards after leaving the club and anything related to activity on Comunale's mobile device(s). In most missing persons cases these are usually the first things mentioned in the media and examined by NYPD; but it was the surveillance footage that has been discussed. I might be wrong but I don't recall hearing anything about the location of or status of Comunale's mobile(s), wallet or car. Kinda strange...

I think that the large safe, so big that NYPD had to wheel it out of James Rackover's apartment, is going to be significant. I doubt anything damning is in it but if they cleaned the safe as well as they cleaned the apartment no doubt that NYPD will find trace evidence of whatever might have been in there.

Just my thoughts, I'm probably wrong...

;-)

 

[Lauranyc83]

Agree with everything you wrote!

Consider that what has not been reported might be even more significant than what has been reported:

We know that Comunale worked as a sales associate at Tri-Ed Ltd., which sells security products such as closed-circuit TV cameras -- these are really high tech total surveillance solutions that Tri-Ed sells to residential and commercial buildings. We know that Comunale's father, Pat, is the President of Tri-Ed. We know that "it was determined that Comunale, who worked as a sales associate at for security product company Tri-Ed Ltd., had visited the exact same luxury building."

I'm going to bet that The Grand Sutton at 418 e 59th Street was Tri-Ed client. This might explain the astonishingly fast turnaround time on the surveillance footage -- Pat Comunale likely [and rightly] made it a top priority and was able to tell NYPD exactly what it shows and when.

What we have not heard and never really came up is anything related to usage of Comunale's credit/debit cards after leaving the club and anything related to activity on Comunale's mobile device(s). In most missing persons cases these are usually the first things mentioned in the media and examined by NYPD; but it was the surveillance footage that has been discussed. I might be wrong but I don't recall hearing anything about the location of or status of Comunale's mobile(s), wallet or car. Kinda strange...

I think that the large safe, so big that NYPD had to wheel it out of James Rackover's apartment, is going to be significant. I doubt anything damning is in it but if they cleaned the safe as well as they cleaned the apartment no doubt that NYPD will find trace evidence of whatever might have been in there.

Just my thoughts, I'm probably wrong...

;-)

Regarding Joey's car, I don't believe he drove in. Most take Metro North in from Stamford to the city, unless he got a ride with friends. But usually those coming from CT to party in NYC will take the metro north.

Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk

 

[Inthedetails]

Agree with everything you wrote!

Consider that what has not been reported might be even more significant than what has been reported:

We know that Comunale worked as a sales associate at Tri-Ed Ltd., which sells security products such as closed-circuit TV cameras -- these are really high tech total surveillance solutions that Tri-Ed sells to residential and commercial buildings. We know that Comunale's father, Pat, is the President of Tri-Ed. We know that "it was determined that Comunale, who worked as a sales associate at for security product company Tri-Ed Ltd., had visited the exact same luxury building."

I'm going to bet that The Grand Sutton at 418 e 59th Street was Tri-Ed client. This might explain the astonishingly fast turnaround time on the surveillance footage -- Pat Comunale likely [and rightly] made it a top priority and was able to tell NYPD exactly what it shows and when.

What we have not heard and never really came up is anything related to usage of Comunale's credit/debit cards after leaving the club and anything related to activity on Comunale's mobile device(s). In most missing persons cases these are usually the first things mentioned in the media and examined by NYPD; but it was the surveillance footage that has been discussed. I might be wrong but I don't recall hearing anything about the location of or status of Comunale's mobile(s), wallet or car. Kinda strange...

I think that the large safe, so big that NYPD had to wheel it out of James Rackover's apartment, is going to be significant. I doubt anything damning is in it but if they cleaned the safe as well as they cleaned the apartment no doubt that NYPD will find trace evidence of whatever might have been in there.

Just my thoughts, I'm probably wrong...

;-)

I think we didn't hear about cellphone, etc. is because the NYPD had a strong lead from the very start as to where Joey was. He was with the three women, who sound like they were his friends and they obviously knew where he was last seen. And, there was that 911 call about the suspicious bag the perps were taking out of the apartment building. The 911 call came in just before the missing person report, which I'm guessing included information from the three women.

So...the NYPD didn't need to go to the public with "last pings" and such. This case moved rather quickly in terms of finding Joey and nabbing the perps.

Now, just to prove who was the murderer.

jmopinoin

 

[Momoffourboys]

I know this is probably insignificant, but, its nagging me.
Joey's pants were disposed of. IMO the perps did not remove his pants. They were already off.

I'm not sure where I'm going with this. Lol.

 

[Lauranyc83]

I know this is probably insignificant, but, its nagging me.
Joey's pants were disposed of. IMO the perps did not remove his pants. They were already off.

I'm not sure where I'm going with this. Lol.

I thought maybe they took them off of him to put him in duffle bag easier. Ugh so hard to even type that!

But your theory could also be why they were off too.

Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk

 

[epiphany]

The argument may have begun after he came out of the shower as he was preparing to head back home.

My other thought was the argument began shortly after he caught a few winks (slept in his shorts).

 

[PLT]

I know this is probably insignificant, but, its nagging me.
Joey's pants were disposed of. IMO the perps did not remove his pants. They were already off.

I'm not sure where I'm going with this. Lol.

That's what I was alluding to a few posts up - to me it sounded like the incident broke out while he was unclothed but as the other poster (HC) pointed out - maybe they thought there was evidence on the clothing so they had plans to destroy that evidence but never did. It just all sounds so disjointed but they were probably not in the best mind frame to thinkmthings through. Whatever caused the violent incident will be revealed soon I'm sure. I read police were looking for a third person (not a suspect) who they thought could shed light on what transpired.

 

[epiphany]

I had mentioned earlier that I found it odd that the perps would stop to bleach JC's clothing. Believe his pants.

Think the apt has a small washer & dryer. His pants, other clothing? were placed in a plastic bag and deposited in the chute. Then I think

discovered later in the trash. I suppose the bldg's garbage was eventually sorted & put outside.


I still find going through the trouble of bleaching the clothing rather odd

 

[Inthedetails]

That's what I was alluding to a few posts up - to me it sounded like the incident broke out while he was unclothed but as the other poster (HC) pointed out - maybe they thought there was evidence on the clothing so they had plans to destroy that evidence but never did. It just all sounds so disjointed but they were probably not in the best mind frame to thinkmthings through. Whatever caused the violent incident will be revealed soon I'm sure. I read police were looking for a third person (not a suspect) who they thought could shed light on what transpired.

This is in response to the general questioning the pants, not necessarily to this post specifically - just trying to keep the conversation in a flow.

If a female were discovered dead in a shallow grave after being in apartment where her pants were found after a night of partying, what would you think? That she took a shower or nap? No, I don't think so.

I am assuming that whatever happened in the apartment had something to do with sex. Maybe/probably drugs and money as well. It doesn't have to be sex OR drugs - it could be both. But drug-deals-gone-bad don't involve the people taking off their pants, do they?

Of course, the perps might have removed all his clothes to delay identification and hide their own DNA.

But, I do think sex is somehow involved.

jmopinion

 

[kaen]

I had mentioned earlier that I found it odd that the perps would stop to bleach JC's clothing. Believe his pants.

Think the apt has a small washer & dryer. His pants, other clothing? were placed in a plastic bag and deposited in the chute. Then I think

discovered later in the trash. I suppose the bldg's garbage was eventually sorted & put outside.


I still find going through the trouble of bleaching the clothing rather odd

I suspect someone or someones was/were doing drugs that night. In a meth state, you think all kinds of crazy thoughts that seem plausible. The next day a person says to themselves that they were thinking crazy. We have seen many people who do awful things on meth in cases here. We the readers scratch our heads and think they are so stupid.