Team Coverage

A Fascinating Find

When launching this effort a number of months ago it was our goal to grow an active community of those who would research, analyze and contribute ideas, leads & theories on this case.   The rewards are displayed here nearly every day.

“Bea” shared the eyecandydvds.com lead with us and another regular contributor took the baton and ran with it.  “Fascinating” took the time to attend and post on Friday’s status hearing and he steps up again by diving into the public records to find another hidden gem.

dcflagAnyone wishing to do business in the District of Columbia, even the proprietors of a smut shop, are required to register with the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs.  

 

 By plumbing the depths of the DCRA database, Fascinating found Joe Price’s registration for his planned Adams Morgan business.

 

 eyecandyreg2

File number L34317 lists Joe Price of 1050 Connecticut Avenue, NW (Arent Fox’s DC HQ address) as the Registered Agent who applied for the license to operate on July 10, 2007.  Eye Candy DVDs LLC is listed as a active ‘Domestic Limited Liability Company.”

Also, CDinDC gets the assist for finding the property listing.

Thanks to all for the many contributions.  Keep up the good work.

-the Editors

387 comments for “Team Coverage

  1. Ex Swann Dude
    04/28/2009 at 12:03 PM

    First!!

  2. Ex Swann Dude
    04/28/2009 at 12:03 PM

    First!!

  3. Ex Swann Dude
    04/28/2009 at 12:03 PM

    First!!

  4. Anon. in Arlington
    04/28/2009 at 12:08 PM

    This is good work! Thanks to everyone. I wish my day job allowed the time to research as much as I would like.

    I wonder how long they paid rent for the store? They obviously signed a lease in order to produce the grand opening banner page.

  5. Anon. in Arlington
    04/28/2009 at 12:08 PM

    This is good work! Thanks to everyone. I wish my day job allowed the time to research as much as I would like.

    I wonder how long they paid rent for the store? They obviously signed a lease in order to produce the grand opening banner page.

  6. Anon. in Arlington
    04/28/2009 at 12:08 PM

    This is good work! Thanks to everyone. I wish my day job allowed the time to research as much as I would like.

    I wonder how long they paid rent for the store? They obviously signed a lease in order to produce the grand opening banner page.

  7. N.M.
    04/28/2009 at 12:09 PM

    Interesting to see the emphasis on dvds rather than “novelties” etc.

    But why use his work address? Just a mistake on someone’s part, or did he purposely want business related correspondence to *not* go to his home address (classic deceitful spouse behavior)?

    Did this just get exponentially weirder, or what?

    • Ex Swann Dude
      04/28/2009 at 12:28 PM

      This all gets weirder and weirder. And sicker and sicker.

      Joe Price is exposed as so morally bankrupt that it appears his next step will be to “cause additional harm to himself or others”. We have institutions in place for such people …

      WAKE UP VICTOR!!

      • Lisper Doll
        04/28/2009 at 5:09 PM

        Baker Act??

        • Legal Beagle
          04/28/2009 at 7:28 PM

          Yeah, if Victor would have Baker-acted Joe a while ago they probably would just be normal people with some problems, not criminals ready to stand trial.

    • Corcoran Cutlet
      04/28/2009 at 5:21 PM

      Just a speculation on why he used the work address. Mail is sometimes inadvertently stuck in a neighbor’s slot. This means that the neighbor may know more about your personal business than you might like, even without the potential rudeness of opening it or not returning it. It happens. I heard from a friend on S Street that he would sometimes get mail for a house on Swann Street in which a garbage company Metro Waste was being run. Which would totally illegal of course. He looked it up and it was owned by some French guy who lived in France and had worked for the World Bank. That has to take the cake for strange businesses for a World Bank employee on the side.

      • N.M.
        04/28/2009 at 5:42 PM

        Bonus! Private info about one of my neighbors – I think I know precisely which one you’re talking about.

        This website is a font of knowledge.

        If your friend also got an excessive number of credit card bills mis-delivered to his address – those were probably for me. The occasional issue of Dog Fancy – also me.

        • Legal Beagle
          04/28/2009 at 7:29 PM

          Teacher, the dog ate my credit card bill!

          • N.M.
            04/28/2009 at 8:06 PM

            If only. I keep hoping someone will steal my identity.

            • CDinDC
              04/28/2009 at 10:29 PM

              NM….hilarious!!! LMAO

        • Ex Swann Dude
          04/28/2009 at 10:23 PM

          Dog Fancy?

          I guess we’re just boring N.M. I enjoy work, good friends, good food, the gym, weekend travel, my jeep, boating and my dog (Boxer, thanks).

          To think we we’re missing out on so much fun … forced drinking of urine, inflicting pain, torture, electro-ejaculation, S&M, Porn-peddling, hours on porn sites, liars, drug-addicts … I guess these three really just found the link to happiness and we missed out …

          Oh well, I suppose they didn’t have time for a dog. So mundane, I suppose.

          • CDinDC
            04/28/2009 at 10:27 PM

            But you have to walk a dog. You don’t have to walk a drug-addict. They can just pee ON you. AND get you drugs. Total bonus, dude.

          • Legal Beagle
            04/28/2009 at 11:01 PM

            Stay boring, ex-Swann dude, it’s a lot more fun. And not boring.

  8. N.M.
    04/28/2009 at 12:09 PM

    Interesting to see the emphasis on dvds rather than “novelties” etc.

    But why use his work address? Just a mistake on someone’s part, or did he purposely want business related correspondence to *not* go to his home address (classic deceitful spouse behavior)?

    Did this just get exponentially weirder, or what?

    • Ex Swann Dude
      04/28/2009 at 12:28 PM

      This all gets weirder and weirder. And sicker and sicker.

      Joe Price is exposed as so morally bankrupt that it appears his next step will be to “cause additional harm to himself or others”. We have institutions in place for such people …

      WAKE UP VICTOR!!

      • Lisper Doll
        04/28/2009 at 5:09 PM

        Baker Act??

        • Legal Beagle
          04/28/2009 at 7:28 PM

          Yeah, if Victor would have Baker-acted Joe a while ago they probably would just be normal people with some problems, not criminals ready to stand trial.

    • Corcoran Cutlet
      04/28/2009 at 5:21 PM

      Just a speculation on why he used the work address. Mail is sometimes inadvertently stuck in a neighbor’s slot. This means that the neighbor may know more about your personal business than you might like, even without the potential rudeness of opening it or not returning it. It happens. I heard from a friend on S Street that he would sometimes get mail for a house on Swann Street in which a garbage company Metro Waste was being run. Which would totally illegal of course. He looked it up and it was owned by some French guy who lived in France and had worked for the World Bank. That has to take the cake for strange businesses for a World Bank employee on the side.

      • N.M.
        04/28/2009 at 5:42 PM

        Bonus! Private info about one of my neighbors – I think I know precisely which one you’re talking about.

        This website is a font of knowledge.

        If your friend also got an excessive number of credit card bills mis-delivered to his address – those were probably for me. The occasional issue of Dog Fancy – also me.

        • Legal Beagle
          04/28/2009 at 7:29 PM

          Teacher, the dog ate my credit card bill!

          • N.M.
            04/28/2009 at 8:06 PM

            If only. I keep hoping someone will steal my identity.

  9. N.M.
    04/28/2009 at 12:09 PM

    Interesting to see the emphasis on dvds rather than “novelties” etc.

    But why use his work address? Just a mistake on someone’s part, or did he purposely want business related correspondence to *not* go to his home address (classic deceitful spouse behavior)?

    Did this just get exponentially weirder, or what?

    • Ex Swann Dude
      04/28/2009 at 12:28 PM

      This all gets weirder and weirder. And sicker and sicker.

      Joe Price is exposed as so morally bankrupt that it appears his next step will be to “cause additional harm to himself or others”. We have institutions in place for such people …

      WAKE UP VICTOR!!

      • Lisper Doll
        04/28/2009 at 5:09 PM

        Baker Act??

        • Legal Beagle
          04/28/2009 at 7:28 PM

          Yeah, if Victor would have Baker-acted Joe a while ago they probably would just be normal people with some problems, not criminals ready to stand trial.

    • Corcoran Cutlet
      04/28/2009 at 5:21 PM

      Just a speculation on why he used the work address. Mail is sometimes inadvertently stuck in a neighbor’s slot. This means that the neighbor may know more about your personal business than you might like, even without the potential rudeness of opening it or not returning it. It happens. I heard from a friend on S Street that he would sometimes get mail for a house on Swann Street in which a garbage company Metro Waste was being run. Which would totally illegal of course. He looked it up and it was owned by some French guy who lived in France and had worked for the World Bank. That has to take the cake for strange businesses for a World Bank employee on the side.

      • N.M.
        04/28/2009 at 5:42 PM

        Bonus! Private info about one of my neighbors – I think I know precisely which one you’re talking about.

        This website is a font of knowledge.

        If your friend also got an excessive number of credit card bills mis-delivered to his address – those were probably for me. The occasional issue of Dog Fancy – also me.

        • Legal Beagle
          04/28/2009 at 7:29 PM

          Teacher, the dog ate my credit card bill!

          • N.M.
            04/28/2009 at 8:06 PM

            If only. I keep hoping someone will steal my identity.

  10. CDinDC
    04/28/2009 at 12:52 PM

    Way to go Fascinating! The DCRA website is such a jumbled mess, I gave up and went to bed!!!

    • Bea
      04/28/2009 at 1:28 PM

      Me too – excellent work, Fascinating!

      My guess about using the work address is that in establishing the Limited Liability Company, Joe is wearing his lawyer hat as “registered agent” is the person to whom process is served, a required “position” that sometimes has nothing to do with the owners – for example there are “incorporators” whose business it is to incorporate others and often they provide the “registered agent”.

      But I love that he’s “lawyer Joe” in establishing the LLC but “owner Joe” in registering the domain name. We can’t tell from the record who the “members” of the limited liability company are – someones one person, sometimes more. To do this while the investigation is going on just blows my mind. Sorry to raise a point I made before, but for malpractice insurance at Big Law Firms, you have to disclose financial interests, especially as a partner. My opinion is that this playing with fire approach shows Joe to be a bit out of control, or possibly that he “liked” this next level of thrills.

      • N.M.
        04/28/2009 at 2:04 PM

        Me too – same thing. Gave up and went to sleep.

        Great find!

      • Fascinating
        04/28/2009 at 4:02 PM

        Thanks everyone. I felt like a sleuth!

        I’m surprised that Price used his work telephone and address. Certainly he knew (??) that this is public information?? I’ve registered a few domains in my day, and there’s always the “keep it private” choice, for a nominal fee.

        • Anon. in Arlington
          04/28/2009 at 4:06 PM

          Maybe he only knew enough to get himself into trouble.

      • Lance
        04/28/2009 at 6:34 PM

        So, not being a lawyer, I want to be sure I understand what “registered agent” means. Is this still compatible with Joe doing this as a favor for his brother, without any actual stake in it?

        Note, for those who read “must” when I write “might”: let me stress “compatible with”. I’m trying to figure out what this definitively tells us.

        And I’ll note, too: I said on this topic in the last post

        …in these circumstances, it probably still would have been wiser for Joe to say, “Look, Michael, I’d love to help you out, but I kind of need to keep a lower profile than that these days.”

        Even if it turns out to be true that Joe had no financial stake in the business: the more things associated with this business that he put his name on (the domain registration, the DCRA registration), the more it seems to indicate that kind of lapse in judgment. Again, not necessarily to the levels of stupidity and narcissism that it might mean; but enough to make me wonder. I mean, I think of Jay Bybee, the judge who wrote the “torture memos”–the calls for impeachment have specifically suggested that the kind of person whose judgment can lapse as much as it takes to write those memos shouldn’t be, well, a judge. Here: the kind of person whose judgment allows him to associate himself at all with this kind of business (plus keeping porn on his work computer)…well, how did he manage to stay employed at a law firm? It’s still a huge leap from there to “his judgment lapsed so far that he killed his friend”; I just…wonder.

        • Bea
          04/29/2009 at 12:56 AM

          Hi Lance, while we don’t know for sure who the LLC members are, often when a lawyer is establishing an LLC for himself/friends, he foregoes the use of the “service” and acts as “registered agent” himself (to save money). But given that on the domain registry he’s both “owner” and “administrative contact” I suspect he’s one of the LLC members (possibly the only member).

  11. CDinDC
    04/28/2009 at 12:52 PM

    Way to go Fascinating! The DCRA website is such a jumbled mess, I gave up and went to bed!!!

    • Bea
      04/28/2009 at 1:28 PM

      Me too – excellent work, Fascinating!

      My guess about using the work address is that in establishing the Limited Liability Company, Joe is wearing his lawyer hat as “registered agent” is the person to whom process is served, a required “position” that sometimes has nothing to do with the owners – for example there are “incorporators” whose business it is to incorporate others and often they provide the “registered agent”.

      But I love that he’s “lawyer Joe” in establishing the LLC but “owner Joe” in registering the domain name. We can’t tell from the record who the “members” of the limited liability company are – someones one person, sometimes more. To do this while the investigation is going on just blows my mind. Sorry to raise a point I made before, but for malpractice insurance at Big Law Firms, you have to disclose financial interests, especially as a partner. My opinion is that this playing with fire approach shows Joe to be a bit out of control, or possibly that he “liked” this next level of thrills.

      • N.M.
        04/28/2009 at 2:04 PM

        Me too – same thing. Gave up and went to sleep.

        Great find!

      • Fascinating
        04/28/2009 at 4:02 PM

        Thanks everyone. I felt like a sleuth!

        I’m surprised that Price used his work telephone and address. Certainly he knew (??) that this is public information?? I’ve registered a few domains in my day, and there’s always the “keep it private” choice, for a nominal fee.

        • Anon. in Arlington
          04/28/2009 at 4:06 PM

          Maybe he only knew enough to get himself into trouble.

      • Lance
        04/28/2009 at 6:34 PM

        So, not being a lawyer, I want to be sure I understand what “registered agent” means. Is this still compatible with Joe doing this as a favor for his brother, without any actual stake in it?

        Note, for those who read “must” when I write “might”: let me stress “compatible with”. I’m trying to figure out what this definitively tells us.

        And I’ll note, too: I said on this topic in the last post

        …in these circumstances, it probably still would have been wiser for Joe to say, “Look, Michael, I’d love to help you out, but I kind of need to keep a lower profile than that these days.”

        Even if it turns out to be true that Joe had no financial stake in the business: the more things associated with this business that he put his name on (the domain registration, the DCRA registration), the more it seems to indicate that kind of lapse in judgment. Again, not necessarily to the levels of stupidity and narcissism that it might mean; but enough to make me wonder. I mean, I think of Jay Bybee, the judge who wrote the “torture memos”–the calls for impeachment have specifically suggested that the kind of person whose judgment can lapse as much as it takes to write those memos shouldn’t be, well, a judge. Here: the kind of person whose judgment allows him to associate himself at all with this kind of business (plus keeping porn on his work computer)…well, how did he manage to stay employed at a law firm? It’s still a huge leap from there to “his judgment lapsed so far that he killed his friend”; I just…wonder.

        • Bea
          04/29/2009 at 12:56 AM

          Hi Lance, while we don’t know for sure who the LLC members are, often when a lawyer is establishing an LLC for himself/friends, he foregoes the use of the “service” and acts as “registered agent” himself (to save money). But given that on the domain registry he’s both “owner” and “administrative contact” I suspect he’s one of the LLC members (possibly the only member).

  12. CDinDC
    04/28/2009 at 12:52 PM

    Way to go Fascinating! The DCRA website is such a jumbled mess, I gave up and went to bed!!!

    • Bea
      04/28/2009 at 1:28 PM

      Me too – excellent work, Fascinating!

      My guess about using the work address is that in establishing the Limited Liability Company, Joe is wearing his lawyer hat as “registered agent” is the person to whom process is served, a required “position” that sometimes has nothing to do with the owners – for example there are “incorporators” whose business it is to incorporate others and often they provide the “registered agent”.

      But I love that he’s “lawyer Joe” in establishing the LLC but “owner Joe” in registering the domain name. We can’t tell from the record who the “members” of the limited liability company are – someones one person, sometimes more. To do this while the investigation is going on just blows my mind. Sorry to raise a point I made before, but for malpractice insurance at Big Law Firms, you have to disclose financial interests, especially as a partner. My opinion is that this playing with fire approach shows Joe to be a bit out of control, or possibly that he “liked” this next level of thrills.

      • N.M.
        04/28/2009 at 2:04 PM

        Me too – same thing. Gave up and went to sleep.

        Great find!

      • Fascinating
        04/28/2009 at 4:02 PM

        Thanks everyone. I felt like a sleuth!

        I’m surprised that Price used his work telephone and address. Certainly he knew (??) that this is public information?? I’ve registered a few domains in my day, and there’s always the “keep it private” choice, for a nominal fee.

        • Anon. in Arlington
          04/28/2009 at 4:06 PM

          Maybe he only knew enough to get himself into trouble.

      • Lance
        04/28/2009 at 6:34 PM

        So, not being a lawyer, I want to be sure I understand what “registered agent” means. Is this still compatible with Joe doing this as a favor for his brother, without any actual stake in it?

        Note, for those who read “must” when I write “might”: let me stress “compatible with”. I’m trying to figure out what this definitively tells us.

        And I’ll note, too: I said on this topic in the last post

        …in these circumstances, it probably still would have been wiser for Joe to say, “Look, Michael, I’d love to help you out, but I kind of need to keep a lower profile than that these days.”

        Even if it turns out to be true that Joe had no financial stake in the business: the more things associated with this business that he put his name on (the domain registration, the DCRA registration), the more it seems to indicate that kind of lapse in judgment. Again, not necessarily to the levels of stupidity and narcissism that it might mean; but enough to make me wonder. I mean, I think of Jay Bybee, the judge who wrote the “torture memos”–the calls for impeachment have specifically suggested that the kind of person whose judgment can lapse as much as it takes to write those memos shouldn’t be, well, a judge. Here: the kind of person whose judgment allows him to associate himself at all with this kind of business (plus keeping porn on his work computer)…well, how did he manage to stay employed at a law firm? It’s still a huge leap from there to “his judgment lapsed so far that he killed his friend”; I just…wonder.

        • Bea
          04/29/2009 at 12:56 AM

          Hi Lance, while we don’t know for sure who the LLC members are, often when a lawyer is establishing an LLC for himself/friends, he foregoes the use of the “service” and acts as “registered agent” himself (to save money). But given that on the domain registry he’s both “owner” and “administrative contact” I suspect he’s one of the LLC members (possibly the only member).

  13. CDinDC
    04/28/2009 at 1:49 PM

    Look folks….Victory has unclaimed property.

    A knife, perhaps?

    UNCLAIMED PROPERTY LIST

    Last Name First Name Initial Address ID
    ZABORSKY VICTOR J APT 2 A 527142

    • Bea
      04/28/2009 at 2:14 PM

      CD, beautiful!
      Or how about “his mind”? Lost that a while ago.

      But really the list is endless: his dignity, his moral compass . . .

      • N.M.
        04/28/2009 at 2:22 PM

        … don’t forget moral standing. I don’t him being a convincing activist for any sort of justice…

        (In fact, if I ran a PAC, like HRC’s, or a candidate committee, I’d refuse his donations – I can just see the headline, “[blank] accepts money from notorious housemate….”)

      • CDinDC
        04/28/2009 at 2:26 PM

        Endless, indeed!

        Maybe he left something behind at the jail when he was arrested. There’s a crumpled brown paper bag with his name on it.

        • Anon. in Arlington
          04/28/2009 at 2:49 PM

          Just so it is not a repeat of a leather glove left behind.

  14. CDinDC
    04/28/2009 at 1:49 PM

    Look folks….Victory has unclaimed property.

    A knife, perhaps?

    UNCLAIMED PROPERTY LIST

    Last Name First Name Initial Address ID
    ZABORSKY VICTOR J APT 2 A 527142

    • Bea
      04/28/2009 at 2:14 PM

      CD, beautiful!
      Or how about “his mind”? Lost that a while ago.

      But really the list is endless: his dignity, his moral compass . . .

      • N.M.
        04/28/2009 at 2:22 PM

        … don’t forget moral standing. I don’t him being a convincing activist for any sort of justice…

        (In fact, if I ran a PAC, like HRC’s, or a candidate committee, I’d refuse his donations – I can just see the headline, “[blank] accepts money from notorious housemate….”)

      • CDinDC
        04/28/2009 at 2:26 PM

        Endless, indeed!

        Maybe he left something behind at the jail when he was arrested. There’s a crumpled brown paper bag with his name on it.

        • Anon. in Arlington
          04/28/2009 at 2:49 PM

          Just so it is not a repeat of a leather glove left behind.

  15. CDinDC
    04/28/2009 at 1:49 PM

    Look folks….Victory has unclaimed property.

    A knife, perhaps?

    UNCLAIMED PROPERTY LIST

    Last Name First Name Initial Address ID
    ZABORSKY VICTOR J APT 2 A 527142

    • Bea
      04/28/2009 at 2:14 PM

      CD, beautiful!
      Or how about “his mind”? Lost that a while ago.

      But really the list is endless: his dignity, his moral compass . . .

      • N.M.
        04/28/2009 at 2:22 PM

        … don’t forget moral standing. I don’t him being a convincing activist for any sort of justice…

        (In fact, if I ran a PAC, like HRC’s, or a candidate committee, I’d refuse his donations – I can just see the headline, “[blank] accepts money from notorious housemate….”)

      • CDinDC
        04/28/2009 at 2:26 PM

        Endless, indeed!

        Maybe he left something behind at the jail when he was arrested. There’s a crumpled brown paper bag with his name on it.

        • Anon. in Arlington
          04/28/2009 at 2:49 PM

          Just so it is not a repeat of a leather glove left behind.

  16. Frankie
    04/28/2009 at 5:01 PM

    I’m curious — what exactly has all this “good work” accomplished toward determining who killed Robert Wone?

    • CDinDC
      04/28/2009 at 5:15 PM

      Don’t be snide, Frankie.

    • Craig
      04/28/2009 at 6:02 PM

      Frankie – We note and welcome the criticism but far larger questions remain:

      What specific actions have the defendants taken to find Robert’s murderer? Where was their press conference? Where is their website? Where are their reward posters? Did they heed Kathy Wone’s call to share everything they know?

      With little to work with we’re doing the best we can to piece it together. We may never know.
      Give us time. Help us along.
      -Craig, ed.

      • Frankie
        04/28/2009 at 7:19 PM

        The first and last questions you pose are legitimate, but I don’t think the others are. No defense attorney in his right mind would allow a client facing felony charges to hold a press conference or otherwise publicly address those charges, other than to deny them. And I don’t think establishing a website is a necessary precursor to solving a murder.

        Can you tell me why you’re so fixated on this particular case, other than because it involves three “wealthy, attractive, intelligent” gay men? As I stated in an earlier post, there are about 90 unsolved murders from the year that Robert Wone was killed. What’s so special about this one?

        • KM
          04/28/2009 at 7:57 PM

          Frankie, speaking for myself, the reason I find this murder case special is because Robert Wone was made real to me, and I thank the editors for that. If this website focused only on the 3 defendants, I would simply be repelled.

          • KM
            04/28/2009 at 8:00 PM

            Unfortunately, most murder cases don’t include videos of the victim’s family making pleas for community involvement.

        • N.M.
          04/28/2009 at 8:05 PM

          Speaking for myself, because it happened practically next door to me, I was home at the time, and I couldn’t do anything to help him – I didn’t know, no one knew – but I can sure as hell try to help now.

          • Frankie
            04/28/2009 at 8:09 PM

            Because he was killed in close proximity to where you live, you feel compelled to “help” him? You’re not concerned about the thousands of other murder victims in the District of Columbia?

            • Fascinating
              04/28/2009 at 8:26 PM

              Yuck. Maybe by focusing on *one* murder we can make a difference. Frankie, you overwhelm me when you talk about “thousands” of murders. This one happened in my neighborhood and –frankly — has some freaky, sexy aspects to it. Sounds like you’re being contrary though. Question for you: why *not* this case??

            • KM
              04/28/2009 at 8:32 PM

              Personally I do feel more responsible for my neighbors than for strangers. Which is not to say that I don’t feel concerned for murder victims everywhere.

            • CDinDC
              04/28/2009 at 8:59 PM

              One at a time, Frankie. That’s all we can do.

              But here’s my question to you. Do YOU have any idea what it’s like to lose someone to brutality? I do. A beautiful human being was brutally removed from my life about 15 years ago.

              When I pull up this website and see the face of that man I’ve never met, I believe with all my heart that he, too, was a beautiful human being, and that his death was unfair. Just as unfair as all the other senseless deaths this community, city, region, state, country has ever seen.

              And if I can believe in my heart and my head that this website may do one ounce of good, then LET ME BELIEVE.

              Take your shameful criticism elsewhere.

              • Anon. in Arlington
                04/28/2009 at 9:34 PM

                CD: Sorry for your loss and pain.

                An acquaintance of mine was murdered 2/27/1997 on Capital Hill, in daylight, on a sidewalk, with a knife. This may contribute to my interest in the case.

                • CDinDC
                  04/28/2009 at 9:56 PM

                  Thank you, Anon. You can certainly understand.

                  Frankie struck a chord.
                  This case is not about Joe Price, Dylan Ward or Victor Zaborsky.
                  It’s about Robert Wone. And for
                  Frankie to complain that time
                  and energy is being spent
                  on a case because s/he questions
                  why it’s “special,” simply angers me.

                  Robert Wone WAS special. Just as my aunt was special. And your friend was special. And any other lost life, for that matter.

                  Instead of criticizing, Frankie should respect this forum and be thankful that one less victim will
                  NOT get lost in the shuffle.
                  Robert, too, would disappear into
                  obscurity, without this daily influx
                  of articles and blog postings.

                • N.M.
                  04/29/2009 at 12:24 AM

                  I’m sorry for your loss, Anon.

                  • Anon. in Arlington
                    04/29/2009 at 10:06 AM

                    Thanks N.M. He was only an acquaintance, but the violence and loss left a lasting impact on his family and friends.

              • Frankie
                04/28/2009 at 10:28 PM

                My “shameful criticism”? Some people here really have a problem with someone challenging any of the chorus. I knew Robert Wone. So get off your high horse.

                • CDinDC
                  04/28/2009 at 10:41 PM

                  It’s even MORE shameful, now that you claim to know Robert.

                  Cold.

                  • CDinDC
                    04/28/2009 at 10:42 PM

                    and Frankie, you didn’t challenge, you outright criticized. Big difference. Your initial comment was snide and sarcastic. You set the tone.

                    • Frankie
                      04/28/2009 at 10:55 PM

                      Right, because it’s clear that you people are interested in this case not because you’ve got any particular connection to Robert Wone, but because it involves three gay men whose lives, or former lives, you’re jealous of or whatever.

                      You don’t give a rat’s rear end about Robert Wone. If he’d been murdered in Southeast, all your “hard work” would be focused somewhere else.

                • KM
                  04/28/2009 at 10:42 PM

                  Frankie, how did you come to know Robert?

                • Kenspeckled Souckar
                  04/28/2009 at 11:18 PM

                  We high-horse queens, who have survived a life of being dissed by society and being told we are immoral, and still managed to live moral lives, are mightily pissed that our our neighborhood has been skanked up by the likes of Joe Price and his murderous friends. That, Frankie, is why we are intersted in this case. If you cannot understand the animus in that, you can go straight to hell.

                • Ex Swann Dude
                  04/29/2009 at 12:34 AM

                  Lemme guess, Mikee, er, Frankie lost his job as checkout girl at the EyeCandy Smut Shop before it even opened …

              • N.M.
                04/28/2009 at 11:01 PM

                God bless, CD. I’m not religious but… god bless.

                • CDinDC
                  04/28/2009 at 11:05 PM

                  :> Thanks NM.

            • Ex Swann Dude
              04/28/2009 at 10:29 PM

              And you Frankie? Why are you here? What are you doing to help the “thousands of other murder victims” in DC?

              Yawn …

            • N.M.
              04/28/2009 at 11:32 PM

              Frankie,

              You make a lot of unfortunate assumptions. I’m going to assume its because you’re shocked and angry to find a bunch of total strangers talking in detail about someone you know, someone who was already victimized once, and you want to defend him from being victimized a second time.

              All I can say is that I think you’ve got the wrong idea about the editors and the commenters here. We’re not a nest of “true crime” ghouls. Basically, we’re just trying to do the right thing.

              If there’s only one positive you take away from here, I hope its that it *is* possible for total strangers to care deeply about the fate of someone they’ve never met.

        • 04/28/2009 at 8:14 PM

          frankie, darling:

          any case with a sexual component to it tends to attract slightly greater interest, whether it is right or wrong, it is what it is. attorney price has been great copy too — so much success (on course to make millions) and yet perhaps undone by personal demons, revelations of s & m, documented on a work computer. also, many in the gay community see this as very relevant to the gay community – gay suspects, crime in dupont. how many of the unsolved murders involve a prominent talented handsome victim like robert wone? not too many i guess. yes, race and class matter in this world. there are many interesting twists unique to this case that distinguish; including goodlooking educated suspects – one of whom was outed by price as struggling with mental health impairments – depression; possible drug abuse? this ain’t your run of the mill in my fabulous opinion.

          • Frankie
            04/28/2009 at 8:49 PM

            It’s nice to see someone being honest about all the interest in this particular murder.

            • KM
              04/28/2009 at 9:37 PM

              Frankie,

              I was being honest.

              I can add the following to my reasons for being invested in this case:
              -Robert was kind of a little guy, and three against one isn’t fair.
              -Robert was, what, 33 years old? So young, so much promise. He was working on helping the world and, to be selfishly honest, I need help.
              -He was betrayed by friends, which I find particularly horrible.
              -I could easily have worked with Robert, Joe or Victor, and gotten a massage from Dylan, besides being in their social circle in any number of ways.
              -The parties involved share my social and political philosophies, which includes a strong desire to seek justice. What went wrong, particularly with Joe and Victor? How did two men who devoted so much to social equity lose their moral compass? I do believe that understanding contributes to positive change.

              Frankie, is one of the 90 murder victims you refer to a loved one, and you maybe resent the attention being paid to the Wone case?

              Frankly, I find it odd and rather creepy that your focus is on what you call the “salacious aspects” of this crime as being the only reason people might be interested in solving this murder.

            • Ex Swann Dude
              04/28/2009 at 10:30 PM

              Ummmm, isn’t it obvious Frankie?

        • David
          04/28/2009 at 8:28 PM

          Frankie,

          You are correct that no defense attorny in his or her right mind would allow a client facing felony charges to hold a press conference, however the three defendants in this case were not indicted until nearly two and half years after the murder. For two and half years, the defendants had time to certainly help the MPD find the intruder who they claimed entered their home and murdered their close friend. For two and half years the defendants found no time to help the Wone family and friends pressure the police to investigate this murder. Yet, they did find time to celebrate Dylan Ward’s birthday at Halo, yet they found time to help establish an adult pornography business for their sibling, and yet they found time to purchase additional real estate holdings out of the district area.

          I am not sure if your statement that it involves three “wealthy, attractive, intelligent” gay men is entirely true. I find one to be a self made formerly wealthy man (Price), one to be firmly upper middle class (Zaborsky) and one comes from a wealthy physician father, but certainly has not established great wealth on his own, and this is according to his own motion for pretrial release (Ward). They may all be attractive, but some of the moves they have made over the past two and a half years seriously questions each of their intelligence.

          Finally, since you mentioned the 90 unsolved murders from the year that Robert was murdered, which is no doubt an injustice, and since we have our hands full with this one case (you can see how much time just one case can take to help solve), maybe you could step up to the plate and help solve one of those 90 unsolved murders. Thanks in advance.

          David, ed.

          • Frankie
            04/28/2009 at 8:48 PM

            My comment about three “wealthy, attractive, intelligent” gay men comes directly from your (the editors’) observations about the defendants, which is the reason I put that in quotes. You all are the ones who have identified the three that way in comparing them to yourselves. Didn’t at least two of you comment that the defendants appear to have run in the same circles as you — the “a-list” gay crowd of “wealthy, attractive, intelligent” men? Perhaps you should revisit your own silly comments about that “fabulous” party you attended.

            With respect to addressing the 90 other unsolved murders from 2006, I’m not the one who feels the need to establish a website with the purported purpose of solving a murder. You are, and yet you cannot explain why this particular murder deserves more attention than all others. Clearly your only interest in this case lies in the salacious aspects of it and in the attention that it brings you. Because I’ve raised these issues, I need to “step up to the plate” and help solve other unsolved murders? What a stupid comment to make.

            • 04/28/2009 at 8:55 PM

              frankie, darling.

              noone is suggesting that this case deserves more attention than the other unsolved murders. that wasn’t your original question, mary, was it? you wanted to know what interest people had in this case; and the answers were honest, though apparently not to your liking. tough crap for you; now move along darling, nothing to see here.

            • CDinDC
              04/28/2009 at 9:06 PM

              You, Frankie, are the text book definition of a hypocrite. Your criticize, yet you believe you have no need to “step up to the plate.” Priceless. Pardon the pun.

              • Frankie
                04/28/2009 at 10:29 PM

                I now think that you’re simply an idiot.

                • Frankie
                  04/28/2009 at 10:41 PM

                  To clarify — Because I ask the question, given that there are 90 unsolved murders in 2006, why does this one deserve more attention than all the others, that means I should go out and solve all the other unsolved murders? What a stupid notion.

                  • CDinDC
                    04/28/2009 at 10:46 PM

                    It doesn’t deserve MORE attention, Frankie….it deserves attention. Period. As do all the other murders. So, go do something constructive instead of spewing negativity. Did you have a bad day or something? Good gawd.

                    ::pressing my ignore button::

                • Ex Swann Dude
                  04/28/2009 at 10:45 PM

                  Back at ya Frankie.

            • Craig
              04/28/2009 at 10:01 PM

              Frankie – There may have been a misinterpretation. We’re not A list guys. By a long shot.

              After the affidavit detonated in November, like many we became gripped by a dozen aspects of this case, many of them stated above: proximity, community, sexuality and brutality.

              Our reasons are honest and our approach is fair. I want you to feel welcome here and am interested in your opinions on the case.

              You’re point is taken about the other 90 murders from 2006. But like David said, one at a time for us.
              -Craig, ed.

              • Frankie
                04/28/2009 at 10:47 PM

                Thanks for an intelligent response.

                • KM
                  04/28/2009 at 10:50 PM

                  Frankie,

                  how did you come to know Robert?

                • Ex Swann Dude
                  04/28/2009 at 10:55 PM

                  Cmon Frankie, un-clamp the tits, spit out the urine-forcer, release your testicle bondage and contribute something … idiot.

            • Ex Swann Dude
              04/28/2009 at 10:38 PM

              Sounds like Frankie may be a part of that courthouse “gaggle of giggling girls” that surrounded our “dopehead, pervert porn-peddlers” last Friday.

              • Frankie
                04/28/2009 at 10:44 PM

                Sounds like you, like so many others, jump to conclusions based on simple-minded beliefs.

                • Ex Swann Dude
                  04/28/2009 at 10:51 PM

                  2nd time Frankie … How did YOU know Robert Wone and, oh by the way, what exactly have you done to help here (or anywhere else)?

          • Lance
            04/28/2009 at 8:58 PM

            You know, I still don’t know what to make of this expectation that if the roommates were innocent, they’d be working toward, or offering a reward for, catching the intruder.

            For instance, OJ Simpson offered a reward, and it didn’t do much to convince people he was innocent. Do people accused of murder routinely offer rewards to find the real killers? Do friends of murder victims always offer rewards?

            I really feel like the argument that the roommates would have done more if they were innocent is baseless. Perhaps they should have done more, in a moral sense, but I don’t see failing to do so as indicative of guilty.

            • Anon. in Arlington
              04/28/2009 at 9:03 PM

              If I were accused of something like murder, that took place in my home, I would do what ever I needed to do to be sure the truth was known. If it means doing a polygraph test on national television, I would do it. If it means allocating money to a reward that leads to a conviction, I would do that in addition to the funds needed for an attorney.

              Its beyond the moral issue Lance. Its more of cover-your-a**.

              My husband let me know that if I were ever were involved in something like this, he would send me up the river – no ands, ifs, or buts. We mutually agree on this.

            • 04/28/2009 at 9:06 PM

              noone has accused joe price of murder. if my college roommate was murdered in my house and I was not involved, I would be busting my bumper trying to bring justice in memory of my friend. Failing to do more in my opinion represents a moral depravity that reveals so much —

            • KM
              04/28/2009 at 10:01 PM

              I argue that the defendants would have attended Katherine Wone’s press conference asking for everyone to help if they were innocent. Or even if they just wanted to give the appearance of helping.

              Failing to attend, or in any manner respond to, the press conference is, I believe, indicative of guilt.

            • David
              04/28/2009 at 11:03 PM

              Lance,

              So are you saying that the defendants have done even less than OJ Simpson to find the killer in this case? Now that’s really putting them into a rather unique category.

              David, ed.

              • Lance
                04/29/2009 at 12:13 AM

                Hey, thanks for twisting my words there, David! That was just great!

            • ladydetective
              04/29/2009 at 9:07 AM

              Lance,

              If I remember correctly, OJ Simpson was found innocent of the murder of his wife and fried, so how can you say that it didn’t do much to convince people of his innocence?

              • CDinDC
                04/29/2009 at 9:13 AM

                🙂

        • Anon. in Arlington
          04/28/2009 at 8:32 PM

          In addition to the responses above, I would like to include that I personally find it fascinating that four (maybe five) people were in the house that night, and one ends up dead. It say it is a case/game of “Clue” would be disrespectful, but we are trying to help determine who committed the crime. It would be nice to know the “why” as well, so we search for the truth in that too.

          Also, (sorry to repeat myself from prior posts) we are trying to make sense of something that does not make sense. It is part of the human condition.

          Feel free to engage the blog participants in meaning dialog. If you don’t like it, you can move on. I for one hope to stick around to see justice served.

  17. Frankie
    04/28/2009 at 5:01 PM

    I’m curious — what exactly has all this “good work” accomplished toward determining who killed Robert Wone?

    • CDinDC
      04/28/2009 at 5:15 PM

      Don’t be snide, Frankie.

    • Craig
      04/28/2009 at 6:02 PM

      Frankie – We note and welcome the criticism but far larger questions remain:

      What specific actions have the defendants taken to find Robert’s murderer? Where was their press conference? Where is their website? Where are their reward posters? Did they heed Kathy Wone’s call to share everything they know?

      With little to work with we’re doing the best we can to piece it together. We may never know.
      Give us time. Help us along.
      -Craig, ed.

      • Frankie
        04/28/2009 at 7:19 PM

        The first and last questions you pose are legitimate, but I don’t think the others are. No defense attorney in his right mind would allow a client facing felony charges to hold a press conference or otherwise publicly address those charges, other than to deny them. And I don’t think establishing a website is a necessary precursor to solving a murder.

        Can you tell me why you’re so fixated on this particular case, other than because it involves three “wealthy, attractive, intelligent” gay men? As I stated in an earlier post, there are about 90 unsolved murders from the year that Robert Wone was killed. What’s so special about this one?

        • KM
          04/28/2009 at 7:57 PM

          Frankie, speaking for myself, the reason I find this murder case special is because Robert Wone was made real to me, and I thank the editors for that. If this website focused only on the 3 defendants, I would simply be repelled.

          • KM
            04/28/2009 at 8:00 PM

            Unfortunately, most murder cases don’t include videos of the victim’s family making pleas for community involvement.

        • N.M.
          04/28/2009 at 8:05 PM

          Speaking for myself, because it happened practically next door to me, I was home at the time, and I couldn’t do anything to help him – I didn’t know, no one knew – but I can sure as hell try to help now.

          • Frankie
            04/28/2009 at 8:09 PM

            Because he was killed in close proximity to where you live, you feel compelled to “help” him? You’re not concerned about the thousands of other murder victims in the District of Columbia?

            • N.M.
              04/28/2009 at 11:32 PM

              Frankie,

              You make a lot of unfortunate assumptions. I’m going to assume its because you’re shocked and angry to find a bunch of total strangers talking in detail about someone you know, someone who was already victimized once, and you want to defend him from being victimized a second time.

              All I can say is that I think you’ve got the wrong idea about the editors and the commenters here. We’re not a nest of “true crime” ghouls. Basically, we’re just trying to do the right thing.

              If there’s only one positive you take away from here, I hope its that it *is* possible for total strangers to care deeply about the fate of someone they’ve never met.

  18. Frankie
    04/28/2009 at 5:01 PM

    I’m curious — what exactly has all this “good work” accomplished toward determining who killed Robert Wone?

    • CDinDC
      04/28/2009 at 5:15 PM

      Don’t be snide, Frankie.

    • Craig
      04/28/2009 at 6:02 PM

      Frankie – We note and welcome the criticism but far larger questions remain:

      What specific actions have the defendants taken to find Robert’s murderer? Where was their press conference? Where is their website? Where are their reward posters? Did they heed Kathy Wone’s call to share everything they know?

      With little to work with we’re doing the best we can to piece it together. We may never know.
      Give us time. Help us along.
      -Craig, ed.

      • Frankie
        04/28/2009 at 7:19 PM

        The first and last questions you pose are legitimate, but I don’t think the others are. No defense attorney in his right mind would allow a client facing felony charges to hold a press conference or otherwise publicly address those charges, other than to deny them. And I don’t think establishing a website is a necessary precursor to solving a murder.

        Can you tell me why you’re so fixated on this particular case, other than because it involves three “wealthy, attractive, intelligent” gay men? As I stated in an earlier post, there are about 90 unsolved murders from the year that Robert Wone was killed. What’s so special about this one?

        • KM
          04/28/2009 at 7:57 PM

          Frankie, speaking for myself, the reason I find this murder case special is because Robert Wone was made real to me, and I thank the editors for that. If this website focused only on the 3 defendants, I would simply be repelled.

          • KM
            04/28/2009 at 8:00 PM

            Unfortunately, most murder cases don’t include videos of the victim’s family making pleas for community involvement.

        • N.M.
          04/28/2009 at 8:05 PM

          Speaking for myself, because it happened practically next door to me, I was home at the time, and I couldn’t do anything to help him – I didn’t know, no one knew – but I can sure as hell try to help now.

          • Frankie
            04/28/2009 at 8:09 PM

            Because he was killed in close proximity to where you live, you feel compelled to “help” him? You’re not concerned about the thousands of other murder victims in the District of Columbia?

            • N.M.
              04/28/2009 at 11:32 PM

              Frankie,

              You make a lot of unfortunate assumptions. I’m going to assume its because you’re shocked and angry to find a bunch of total strangers talking in detail about someone you know, someone who was already victimized once, and you want to defend him from being victimized a second time.

              All I can say is that I think you’ve got the wrong idea about the editors and the commenters here. We’re not a nest of “true crime” ghouls. Basically, we’re just trying to do the right thing.

              If there’s only one positive you take away from here, I hope its that it *is* possible for total strangers to care deeply about the fate of someone they’ve never met.

  19. Bea
    04/28/2009 at 5:55 PM

    Frankie, cops always keep tabs on what suspects do with their lives after the crime. And the point is that no one knows which tidbit will lead to something helpful. I think all this gives us a better sense of Joe – contrasting to his pro bono do-gooder laurels which “on paper” wouldn’t look consistent with a perpetrator of criminal acts, we now know he actively pursued a porn business, not only moonlighting from his law job (and likely contrary to policy), but during the murder investigation which itself revealed elements of S & M assault.

    There may be many, many red herrings here. But a few “hits” make it all worthwhile.

    • Frankie
      04/28/2009 at 11:01 PM

      Let me reiterate this, because it’s important — it’s clear that many here (not all) are interested in this case not because of any particular connection to Robert Wone, but because it involves three gay men whose lives, or former lives, you’re jealous of or whatever.

      You don’t give a rat’s rear end about Robert Wone. If he’d been another black man murdered in Southeast, all your “hard work” would be focused somewhere else. So let’s just drop all the “oh I really care about Robert” crap. Most of you didn’t know him and need to stop pretending that he’s the source of all your interest.

      • David
        04/28/2009 at 11:19 PM

        Frankie,

        What do you need to see that our intentions are honest? You are probably correct that if Robert had been a black man who was murdered in Southeast that our intentions might be focused elsewhere. I have found as a DC resident who has seen a few murders right outside my door, that many of these are drug and gang related. And many of those crimes are one gang fighting against another gang. It doesn’t make the loss of life any more acceptable, but as Craig said, here was a murder that is an escher drawing that doesn’t lead to any easy conclusions, but rather more and more questions. You claim that you knew Robert, and I take you at your word, and you are upset that we are being disingenous in our statements when we say justice for Robert. That is your right to feel that way, but many people who knew Robert, from his W&M days, high school, professional life have encouraged us to keep a spotlight on this unsolved case. Because we did not know Robert does not mean that we are incapable of a basic human connection to this tragedy. Yet, I am sorry you feel that the efforts of the editors and the many commenters are misplaced and only interested in salacious details.

        David, ed.

      • Bea
        04/28/2009 at 11:32 PM

        Hey, Frankie, go work on some of the other unsolved murders. If you put the work into a website that the 4 editors have, gathered all the info, provided documents and attended the hearings, financed and designed a site, I strongly suspect you’d get a lot of people like us trying to help.

        But if you don’t want to do that, then stop bitching. Lance drives me nuts but he wants to ferret out facts and wants to know what happened to Mr. Wone – I have no idea what you want to do here. Do you?

        • KM
          04/28/2009 at 11:51 PM

          I admit that I’ve developed a new appreciation for Lance.

          • Lance
            04/29/2009 at 12:14 AM

            Why thank you! All that money I paid Frankie to post here has really…er, I mean, who is that guy, anyway?

            • N.M.
              04/29/2009 at 12:17 AM

              lol, Lance!

            • Ex Swann Dude
              04/29/2009 at 12:24 AM

              A wise investment Lance …

            • KM
              04/29/2009 at 12:27 AM

              [insert smiley face for Lance]

        • Frankie
          04/28/2009 at 11:53 PM

          Bea, why don’t you read what I’ve written and try to write a responsive comment if you’re going to bother taking the time to write anything? And try conveying an original thought while you’re at it.

          Some of you people really have a problem with anyone asking whether all this speculation — and that’s all that’s here — serves any productive purpose. Why is that? You really think this website’s going to provide the US Attorney with the smoking gun he needs to nail these three with murder?

          At least the editors — at times — have responded in somewhat thoughtful ways to what I’ve said. The majority of you have responded with non-responsive, defensive, and, in several instances, moronic comments.

          • KM
            04/28/2009 at 11:58 PM

            Frankie,
            How did you come to know Robert?

          • Ex Swann Dude
            04/29/2009 at 12:26 AM

            Shouldn’t you be bartending at this hour Mikee, er, Frankie?

          • Bea
            04/29/2009 at 12:52 AM

            I repeat: why are you here? I’m not being sarcastic – if you think this is all mental masturbation, why are you reading and posting? You asked that I respond but you ignored my question.

          • Anon. in Arlington
            04/29/2009 at 10:14 AM

            Frankie,

            Have you been following this blog since November? Perhaps your evaluation of the contributors is based on only a few days of conversation. To get the entire picture, you need to read the lead post from the editors since at least 1 January.

            Yes, there are times that we get into conversations regarding the “salacious details” of this case, but those ebb and die. In doing so, we are attempting to rationalize the irrational death of Robert Wone.

      • Delores Claiborne
        04/28/2009 at 11:48 PM

        Frankie and Lance, get a room.

        • Frankie
          04/28/2009 at 11:56 PM

          Proves my point.

      • N.M.
        04/29/2009 at 12:14 AM

        Oh, Frankie. How disappointing.

        Here goes: we’re all horrible, selfish, narcissistic people. You’re the only truly honest man; now that you’ve exposed our terrible hypocrisy, we feel chastened and ashamed of ourselves. We’re just white, rich, good-looking, stuck-up, narcissistic, good-looking, shallow gay men. We only care about ourselves and our cheap thrills, while you care about black people in SE, which is really, really noble and much more important.

        Is this what you want to hear? Is this the itch you’re trying to scratch?

        • Ex Swann Dude
          04/29/2009 at 12:29 AM

          N.M. – Could you say good-looking again. I like that part of my rich, narcissistic life the most!

          • N.M.
            04/29/2009 at 12:55 AM

            Terribly, terribly good-looking. Also, we all have great abs, and firm, high buttocks.

            • Anon. in Arlington
              04/29/2009 at 10:15 AM

              Pecs! Dont forget pecs!

              • Ex Swann Dude
                04/29/2009 at 11:29 AM

                Pecs? Hairy Pecs? I’ll take two!!

                • Anon. in Arlington
                  04/29/2009 at 11:43 AM

                  Sorry ExSwann– Committed relationship here. 🙂

              • N.M.
                04/29/2009 at 5:37 PM

                I have the biggest, hairiest pecs you’ll ever see. And that’s really saying something, since I’m a girl.

                ;-0

                • CDinDC
                  04/29/2009 at 5:53 PM

                  I always think “arms” when someone says pecs. I thought “NM has hairy arms?” LOL

  20. Bea
    04/28/2009 at 5:55 PM

    Frankie, cops always keep tabs on what suspects do with their lives after the crime. And the point is that no one knows which tidbit will lead to something helpful. I think all this gives us a better sense of Joe – contrasting to his pro bono do-gooder laurels which “on paper” wouldn’t look consistent with a perpetrator of criminal acts, we now know he actively pursued a porn business, not only moonlighting from his law job (and likely contrary to policy), but during the murder investigation which itself revealed elements of S & M assault.

    There may be many, many red herrings here. But a few “hits” make it all worthwhile.

    • Frankie
      04/28/2009 at 11:01 PM

      Let me reiterate this, because it’s important — it’s clear that many here (not all) are interested in this case not because of any particular connection to Robert Wone, but because it involves three gay men whose lives, or former lives, you’re jealous of or whatever.

      You don’t give a rat’s rear end about Robert Wone. If he’d been another black man murdered in Southeast, all your “hard work” would be focused somewhere else. So let’s just drop all the “oh I really care about Robert” crap. Most of you didn’t know him and need to stop pretending that he’s the source of all your interest.

      • David
        04/28/2009 at 11:19 PM

        Frankie,

        What do you need to see that our intentions are honest? You are probably correct that if Robert had been a black man who was murdered in Southeast that our intentions might be focused elsewhere. I have found as a DC resident who has seen a few murders right outside my door, that many of these are drug and gang related. And many of those crimes are one gang fighting against another gang. It doesn’t make the loss of life any more acceptable, but as Craig said, here was a murder that is an escher drawing that doesn’t lead to any easy conclusions, but rather more and more questions. You claim that you knew Robert, and I take you at your word, and you are upset that we are being disingenous in our statements when we say justice for Robert. That is your right to feel that way, but many people who knew Robert, from his W&M days, high school, professional life have encouraged us to keep a spotlight on this unsolved case. Because we did not know Robert does not mean that we are incapable of a basic human connection to this tragedy. Yet, I am sorry you feel that the efforts of the editors and the many commenters are misplaced and only interested in salacious details.

        David, ed.

      • Bea
        04/28/2009 at 11:32 PM

        Hey, Frankie, go work on some of the other unsolved murders. If you put the work into a website that the 4 editors have, gathered all the info, provided documents and attended the hearings, financed and designed a site, I strongly suspect you’d get a lot of people like us trying to help.

        But if you don’t want to do that, then stop bitching. Lance drives me nuts but he wants to ferret out facts and wants to know what happened to Mr. Wone – I have no idea what you want to do here. Do you?

        • KM
          04/28/2009 at 11:51 PM

          I admit that I’ve developed a new appreciation for Lance.

          • Lance
            04/29/2009 at 12:14 AM

            Why thank you! All that money I paid Frankie to post here has really…er, I mean, who is that guy, anyway?

            • N.M.
              04/29/2009 at 12:17 AM

              lol, Lance!

            • Ex Swann Dude
              04/29/2009 at 12:24 AM

              A wise investment Lance …

            • KM
              04/29/2009 at 12:27 AM

              [insert smiley face for Lance]

        • Frankie
          04/28/2009 at 11:53 PM

          Bea, why don’t you read what I’ve written and try to write a responsive comment if you’re going to bother taking the time to write anything? And try conveying an original thought while you’re at it.

          Some of you people really have a problem with anyone asking whether all this speculation — and that’s all that’s here — serves any productive purpose. Why is that? You really think this website’s going to provide the US Attorney with the smoking gun he needs to nail these three with murder?

          At least the editors — at times — have responded in somewhat thoughtful ways to what I’ve said. The majority of you have responded with non-responsive, defensive, and, in several instances, moronic comments.

          • KM
            04/28/2009 at 11:58 PM

            Frankie,
            How did you come to know Robert?

          • Ex Swann Dude
            04/29/2009 at 12:26 AM

            Shouldn’t you be bartending at this hour Mikee, er, Frankie?

          • Bea
            04/29/2009 at 12:52 AM

            I repeat: why are you here? I’m not being sarcastic – if you think this is all mental masturbation, why are you reading and posting? You asked that I respond but you ignored my question.

          • Anon. in Arlington
            04/29/2009 at 10:14 AM

            Frankie,

            Have you been following this blog since November? Perhaps your evaluation of the contributors is based on only a few days of conversation. To get the entire picture, you need to read the lead post from the editors since at least 1 January.

            Yes, there are times that we get into conversations regarding the “salacious details” of this case, but those ebb and die. In doing so, we are attempting to rationalize the irrational death of Robert Wone.

      • Delores Claiborne
        04/28/2009 at 11:48 PM

        Frankie and Lance, get a room.

        • Frankie
          04/28/2009 at 11:56 PM

          Proves my point.

      • N.M.
        04/29/2009 at 12:14 AM

        Oh, Frankie. How disappointing.

        Here goes: we’re all horrible, selfish, narcissistic people. You’re the only truly honest man; now that you’ve exposed our terrible hypocrisy, we feel chastened and ashamed of ourselves. We’re just white, rich, good-looking, stuck-up, narcissistic, good-looking, shallow gay men. We only care about ourselves and our cheap thrills, while you care about black people in SE, which is really, really noble and much more important.

        Is this what you want to hear? Is this the itch you’re trying to scratch?

        • Ex Swann Dude
          04/29/2009 at 12:29 AM

          N.M. – Could you say good-looking again. I like that part of my rich, narcissistic life the most!

          • N.M.
            04/29/2009 at 12:55 AM

            Terribly, terribly good-looking. Also, we all have great abs, and firm, high buttocks.

            • Anon. in Arlington
              04/29/2009 at 10:15 AM

              Pecs! Dont forget pecs!

              • Ex Swann Dude
                04/29/2009 at 11:29 AM

                Pecs? Hairy Pecs? I’ll take two!!

                • Anon. in Arlington
                  04/29/2009 at 11:43 AM

                  Sorry ExSwann– Committed relationship here. 🙂

              • N.M.
                04/29/2009 at 5:37 PM

                I have the biggest, hairiest pecs you’ll ever see. And that’s really saying something, since I’m a girl.

                ;-0

                • CDinDC
                  04/29/2009 at 5:53 PM

                  I always think “arms” when someone says pecs. I thought “NM has hairy arms?” LOL

  21. Bea
    04/28/2009 at 5:55 PM

    Frankie, cops always keep tabs on what suspects do with their lives after the crime. And the point is that no one knows which tidbit will lead to something helpful. I think all this gives us a better sense of Joe – contrasting to his pro bono do-gooder laurels which “on paper” wouldn’t look consistent with a perpetrator of criminal acts, we now know he actively pursued a porn business, not only moonlighting from his law job (and likely contrary to policy), but during the murder investigation which itself revealed elements of S & M assault.

    There may be many, many red herrings here. But a few “hits” make it all worthwhile.

    • Frankie
      04/28/2009 at 11:01 PM

      Let me reiterate this, because it’s important — it’s clear that many here (not all) are interested in this case not because of any particular connection to Robert Wone, but because it involves three gay men whose lives, or former lives, you’re jealous of or whatever.

      You don’t give a rat’s rear end about Robert Wone. If he’d been another black man murdered in Southeast, all your “hard work” would be focused somewhere else. So let’s just drop all the “oh I really care about Robert” crap. Most of you didn’t know him and need to stop pretending that he’s the source of all your interest.

      • David
        04/28/2009 at 11:19 PM

        Frankie,

        What do you need to see that our intentions are honest? You are probably correct that if Robert had been a black man who was murdered in Southeast that our intentions might be focused elsewhere. I have found as a DC resident who has seen a few murders right outside my door, that many of these are drug and gang related. And many of those crimes are one gang fighting against another gang. It doesn’t make the loss of life any more acceptable, but as Craig said, here was a murder that is an escher drawing that doesn’t lead to any easy conclusions, but rather more and more questions. You claim that you knew Robert, and I take you at your word, and you are upset that we are being disingenous in our statements when we say justice for Robert. That is your right to feel that way, but many people who knew Robert, from his W&M days, high school, professional life have encouraged us to keep a spotlight on this unsolved case. Because we did not know Robert does not mean that we are incapable of a basic human connection to this tragedy. Yet, I am sorry you feel that the efforts of the editors and the many commenters are misplaced and only interested in salacious details.

        David, ed.

      • Bea
        04/28/2009 at 11:32 PM

        Hey, Frankie, go work on some of the other unsolved murders. If you put the work into a website that the 4 editors have, gathered all the info, provided documents and attended the hearings, financed and designed a site, I strongly suspect you’d get a lot of people like us trying to help.

        But if you don’t want to do that, then stop bitching. Lance drives me nuts but he wants to ferret out facts and wants to know what happened to Mr. Wone – I have no idea what you want to do here. Do you?

        • KM
          04/28/2009 at 11:51 PM

          I admit that I’ve developed a new appreciation for Lance.

          • Lance
            04/29/2009 at 12:14 AM

            Why thank you! All that money I paid Frankie to post here has really…er, I mean, who is that guy, anyway?

            • N.M.
              04/29/2009 at 12:17 AM

              lol, Lance!

            • Ex Swann Dude
              04/29/2009 at 12:24 AM

              A wise investment Lance …

            • KM
              04/29/2009 at 12:27 AM

              [insert smiley face for Lance]

        • Frankie
          04/28/2009 at 11:53 PM

          Bea, why don’t you read what I’ve written and try to write a responsive comment if you’re going to bother taking the time to write anything? And try conveying an original thought while you’re at it.

          Some of you people really have a problem with anyone asking whether all this speculation — and that’s all that’s here — serves any productive purpose. Why is that? You really think this website’s going to provide the US Attorney with the smoking gun he needs to nail these three with murder?

          At least the editors — at times — have responded in somewhat thoughtful ways to what I’ve said. The majority of you have responded with non-responsive, defensive, and, in several instances, moronic comments.

          • KM
            04/28/2009 at 11:58 PM

            Frankie,
            How did you come to know Robert?

          • Ex Swann Dude
            04/29/2009 at 12:26 AM

            Shouldn’t you be bartending at this hour Mikee, er, Frankie?

          • Bea
            04/29/2009 at 12:52 AM

            I repeat: why are you here? I’m not being sarcastic – if you think this is all mental masturbation, why are you reading and posting? You asked that I respond but you ignored my question.

          • Anon. in Arlington
            04/29/2009 at 10:14 AM

            Frankie,

            Have you been following this blog since November? Perhaps your evaluation of the contributors is based on only a few days of conversation. To get the entire picture, you need to read the lead post from the editors since at least 1 January.

            Yes, there are times that we get into conversations regarding the “salacious details” of this case, but those ebb and die. In doing so, we are attempting to rationalize the irrational death of Robert Wone.

      • Delores Claiborne
        04/28/2009 at 11:48 PM

        Frankie and Lance, get a room.

        • Frankie
          04/28/2009 at 11:56 PM

          Proves my point.

      • N.M.
        04/29/2009 at 12:14 AM

        Oh, Frankie. How disappointing.

        Here goes: we’re all horrible, selfish, narcissistic people. You’re the only truly honest man; now that you’ve exposed our terrible hypocrisy, we feel chastened and ashamed of ourselves. We’re just white, rich, good-looking, stuck-up, narcissistic, good-looking, shallow gay men. We only care about ourselves and our cheap thrills, while you care about black people in SE, which is really, really noble and much more important.

        Is this what you want to hear? Is this the itch you’re trying to scratch?

        • Ex Swann Dude
          04/29/2009 at 12:29 AM

          N.M. – Could you say good-looking again. I like that part of my rich, narcissistic life the most!

          • N.M.
            04/29/2009 at 12:55 AM

            Terribly, terribly good-looking. Also, we all have great abs, and firm, high buttocks.

            • Anon. in Arlington
              04/29/2009 at 10:15 AM

              Pecs! Dont forget pecs!

              • Ex Swann Dude
                04/29/2009 at 11:29 AM

                Pecs? Hairy Pecs? I’ll take two!!

                • Anon. in Arlington
                  04/29/2009 at 11:43 AM

                  Sorry ExSwann– Committed relationship here. 🙂

              • N.M.
                04/29/2009 at 5:37 PM

                I have the biggest, hairiest pecs you’ll ever see. And that’s really saying something, since I’m a girl.

                ;-0

                • CDinDC
                  04/29/2009 at 5:53 PM

                  I always think “arms” when someone says pecs. I thought “NM has hairy arms?” LOL

  22. CDinDC
    04/28/2009 at 10:58 PM

    ANOTHER….NIGHT….OF…..USELESS ANTAGONISM.

  23. CDinDC
    04/28/2009 at 10:58 PM

    ANOTHER….NIGHT….OF…..USELESS ANTAGONISM.

  24. CDinDC
    04/28/2009 at 10:58 PM

    ANOTHER….NIGHT….OF…..USELESS ANTAGONISM.

  25. CDinDC
    04/28/2009 at 11:57 PM

    Frankie says: “you people”

    I wonder what that means.

  26. CDinDC
    04/28/2009 at 11:57 PM

    Frankie says: “you people”

    I wonder what that means.

  27. CDinDC
    04/28/2009 at 11:57 PM

    Frankie says: “you people”

    I wonder what that means.

  28. 04/28/2009 at 11:58 PM

    And this particular threat started out so hopeful . . .

    “A Fascinating Find . . . When launching this effort a number of months ago it was our goal to grow an active community of those who would research, analyze and contribute ideas, leads & theories on this case . . .”

    It would be splendid if those who regularly contribute to this site pushed themselves even further to help uncover even more “fascinating finds,” and more earnestly resisted the many temptations for provoking increased “useless antagonism.”

    • KM
      04/29/2009 at 12:03 AM

      JG, point taken.

      • Frankie
        04/29/2009 at 12:06 AM

        What a disturbing group-think at work here. Interesting how so many here take obvious comfort in that.

        • Dupont Dweller
          04/29/2009 at 12:25 AM

          Learning moment. All morality is based on standards of groups. The check on that is a court. Nothing said here deprives the three of a day in court. But the “people” have the right to a well investigated case. That is what this murder has not gotten. But do not miss that all morality is based in groups, and the individual’s rights are in contrast to it. What is disturbing is the reflex superiority of your posts. Not because you have different opinion, but because you are surprised that a group of homosexuals could be so serious to discuss matters like this rather than going to the bar.

  29. 04/28/2009 at 11:58 PM

    And this particular threat started out so hopeful . . .

    “A Fascinating Find . . . When launching this effort a number of months ago it was our goal to grow an active community of those who would research, analyze and contribute ideas, leads & theories on this case . . .”

    It would be splendid if those who regularly contribute to this site pushed themselves even further to help uncover even more “fascinating finds,” and more earnestly resisted the many temptations for provoking increased “useless antagonism.”

    • KM
      04/29/2009 at 12:03 AM

      JG, point taken.

      • Frankie
        04/29/2009 at 12:06 AM

        What a disturbing group-think at work here. Interesting how so many here take obvious comfort in that.

        • Dupont Dweller
          04/29/2009 at 12:25 AM

          Learning moment. All morality is based on standards of groups. The check on that is a court. Nothing said here deprives the three of a day in court. But the “people” have the right to a well investigated case. That is what this murder has not gotten. But do not miss that all morality is based in groups, and the individual’s rights are in contrast to it. What is disturbing is the reflex superiority of your posts. Not because you have different opinion, but because you are surprised that a group of homosexuals could be so serious to discuss matters like this rather than going to the bar.

  30. 04/28/2009 at 11:58 PM

    And this particular threat started out so hopeful . . .

    “A Fascinating Find . . . When launching this effort a number of months ago it was our goal to grow an active community of those who would research, analyze and contribute ideas, leads & theories on this case . . .”

    It would be splendid if those who regularly contribute to this site pushed themselves even further to help uncover even more “fascinating finds,” and more earnestly resisted the many temptations for provoking increased “useless antagonism.”

    • KM
      04/29/2009 at 12:03 AM

      JG, point taken.

      • Frankie
        04/29/2009 at 12:06 AM

        What a disturbing group-think at work here. Interesting how so many here take obvious comfort in that.

        • Dupont Dweller
          04/29/2009 at 12:25 AM

          Learning moment. All morality is based on standards of groups. The check on that is a court. Nothing said here deprives the three of a day in court. But the “people” have the right to a well investigated case. That is what this murder has not gotten. But do not miss that all morality is based in groups, and the individual’s rights are in contrast to it. What is disturbing is the reflex superiority of your posts. Not because you have different opinion, but because you are surprised that a group of homosexuals could be so serious to discuss matters like this rather than going to the bar.

  31. Lance
    04/29/2009 at 12:26 AM

    I kind of hate to engage Frankie on this at all, given the volumes of vitriol that have already been poured out (a) at him and (b) by him. But I’m going to take a chance and ask this, and hopefully this sub-discussion can remain civil.

    Frankie, what would you like to have happen with respect to this site and its editors and commenters? Should they stop investigating, discussing, and speculating altogether? Should they be focusing their energy in another direction on this case? Or on some other case, or cases? Or cause?

    I mean, hey, I’m also somewhat skeptical that this site will “accomplish” anything. (Sorry, guys.) But my only real concern here is that the defendants be treated fairly, that they not be pre-judged, that people not call them “human filth” because they’ve been accused of a crime. To that end, I try to discuss the evidence at hand, and point out when I think people may be misinterpreting it, or when I think there may be more evidence than we’re aware of. Unfortunately, I let myself drift a little and antagonize people offering hypotheses, which I really shouldn’t do; but at least it’s not why I post here.

    Now, also to that end, I really wish people wouldn’t accuse posters of being related to or working for the defense, or say things like “get a room”, which is unnecessarily dismissive. But for all the occasional ad hominem attacks (which I try to call people on, and honestly I do sometimes wish the editors would just delete non-contributing attack posts, even though I’d presumably have a few of my own deleted), I’d like to think that most of the people here are at least genuinely interested in seeing Robert Wone’s killer(s) brought to justice, which I imagine is a sentiment you share. Maybe you’re right; maybe they themselves won’t really accomplish that. But as long as no one’s getting hurt–including, let me stress, the defendants, unless and until they’ve been proven guilty–then what do you see as the harm in the site?

    • CDinDC
      04/29/2009 at 12:42 AM

      Nice post, Lance.

    • Ex Swann Dude
      04/29/2009 at 12:44 AM

      Lance (and I am glad you are here), I call them human trash because they lived their lives like narcissistic, self-absorbed human trash long before the murder. The murder is just the end of a long road of intentional moral decline.

      • Lance
        04/29/2009 at 3:26 AM

        I don’t think I’m especially clear yet on how they were “narcissistic, self-absorbed human trash”. Clearly their friends didn’t think so. Could you explain why you think this?

        • Ex Swann Dude
          04/29/2009 at 11:23 AM

          Obviously their friends were cut from the same cloth …

          • Anon. in Arlington
            04/29/2009 at 11:42 AM

            Hmmm… I want to believe that some of their friends had no idea or out-right bamboozled! Moreover, I think Kim Musheno and Catherine Alston have been placed in a very sad situation. I feel for their children. Even if they knew Victor and Joe extremely well prior to the birth of their children, they may feel betrayed now. In this statement, I am not focused on the BDSM (that’s old hat) but the character of the two men not being forthright in what they know.

          • Lance
            04/29/2009 at 1:10 PM

            But you’re not answering the question. On what basis are you making this evaluation? What non-Wone-related facts demonstrate that they were “narcissistic, self-absorbed human trash”?

  32. Lance
    04/29/2009 at 12:26 AM

    I kind of hate to engage Frankie on this at all, given the volumes of vitriol that have already been poured out (a) at him and (b) by him. But I’m going to take a chance and ask this, and hopefully this sub-discussion can remain civil.

    Frankie, what would you like to have happen with respect to this site and its editors and commenters? Should they stop investigating, discussing, and speculating altogether? Should they be focusing their energy in another direction on this case? Or on some other case, or cases? Or cause?

    I mean, hey, I’m also somewhat skeptical that this site will “accomplish” anything. (Sorry, guys.) But my only real concern here is that the defendants be treated fairly, that they not be pre-judged, that people not call them “human filth” because they’ve been accused of a crime. To that end, I try to discuss the evidence at hand, and point out when I think people may be misinterpreting it, or when I think there may be more evidence than we’re aware of. Unfortunately, I let myself drift a little and antagonize people offering hypotheses, which I really shouldn’t do; but at least it’s not why I post here.

    Now, also to that end, I really wish people wouldn’t accuse posters of being related to or working for the defense, or say things like “get a room”, which is unnecessarily dismissive. But for all the occasional ad hominem attacks (which I try to call people on, and honestly I do sometimes wish the editors would just delete non-contributing attack posts, even though I’d presumably have a few of my own deleted), I’d like to think that most of the people here are at least genuinely interested in seeing Robert Wone’s killer(s) brought to justice, which I imagine is a sentiment you share. Maybe you’re right; maybe they themselves won’t really accomplish that. But as long as no one’s getting hurt–including, let me stress, the defendants, unless and until they’ve been proven guilty–then what do you see as the harm in the site?

    • CDinDC
      04/29/2009 at 12:42 AM

      Nice post, Lance.

    • Ex Swann Dude
      04/29/2009 at 12:44 AM

      Lance (and I am glad you are here), I call them human trash because they lived their lives like narcissistic, self-absorbed human trash long before the murder. The murder is just the end of a long road of intentional moral decline.

      • Lance
        04/29/2009 at 3:26 AM

        I don’t think I’m especially clear yet on how they were “narcissistic, self-absorbed human trash”. Clearly their friends didn’t think so. Could you explain why you think this?

        • Ex Swann Dude
          04/29/2009 at 11:23 AM

          Obviously their friends were cut from the same cloth …

          • Anon. in Arlington
            04/29/2009 at 11:42 AM

            Hmmm… I want to believe that some of their friends had no idea or out-right bamboozled! Moreover, I think Kim Musheno and Catherine Alston have been placed in a very sad situation. I feel for their children. Even if they knew Victor and Joe extremely well prior to the birth of their children, they may feel betrayed now. In this statement, I am not focused on the BDSM (that’s old hat) but the character of the two men not being forthright in what they know.

          • Lance
            04/29/2009 at 1:10 PM

            But you’re not answering the question. On what basis are you making this evaluation? What non-Wone-related facts demonstrate that they were “narcissistic, self-absorbed human trash”?

  33. Lance
    04/29/2009 at 12:26 AM

    I kind of hate to engage Frankie on this at all, given the volumes of vitriol that have already been poured out (a) at him and (b) by him. But I’m going to take a chance and ask this, and hopefully this sub-discussion can remain civil.

    Frankie, what would you like to have happen with respect to this site and its editors and commenters? Should they stop investigating, discussing, and speculating altogether? Should they be focusing their energy in another direction on this case? Or on some other case, or cases? Or cause?

    I mean, hey, I’m also somewhat skeptical that this site will “accomplish” anything. (Sorry, guys.) But my only real concern here is that the defendants be treated fairly, that they not be pre-judged, that people not call them “human filth” because they’ve been accused of a crime. To that end, I try to discuss the evidence at hand, and point out when I think people may be misinterpreting it, or when I think there may be more evidence than we’re aware of. Unfortunately, I let myself drift a little and antagonize people offering hypotheses, which I really shouldn’t do; but at least it’s not why I post here.

    Now, also to that end, I really wish people wouldn’t accuse posters of being related to or working for the defense, or say things like “get a room”, which is unnecessarily dismissive. But for all the occasional ad hominem attacks (which I try to call people on, and honestly I do sometimes wish the editors would just delete non-contributing attack posts, even though I’d presumably have a few of my own deleted), I’d like to think that most of the people here are at least genuinely interested in seeing Robert Wone’s killer(s) brought to justice, which I imagine is a sentiment you share. Maybe you’re right; maybe they themselves won’t really accomplish that. But as long as no one’s getting hurt–including, let me stress, the defendants, unless and until they’ve been proven guilty–then what do you see as the harm in the site?

    • CDinDC
      04/29/2009 at 12:42 AM

      Nice post, Lance.

    • Ex Swann Dude
      04/29/2009 at 12:44 AM

      Lance (and I am glad you are here), I call them human trash because they lived their lives like narcissistic, self-absorbed human trash long before the murder. The murder is just the end of a long road of intentional moral decline.

      • Lance
        04/29/2009 at 3:26 AM

        I don’t think I’m especially clear yet on how they were “narcissistic, self-absorbed human trash”. Clearly their friends didn’t think so. Could you explain why you think this?

        • Ex Swann Dude
          04/29/2009 at 11:23 AM

          Obviously their friends were cut from the same cloth …

          • Anon. in Arlington
            04/29/2009 at 11:42 AM

            Hmmm… I want to believe that some of their friends had no idea or out-right bamboozled! Moreover, I think Kim Musheno and Catherine Alston have been placed in a very sad situation. I feel for their children. Even if they knew Victor and Joe extremely well prior to the birth of their children, they may feel betrayed now. In this statement, I am not focused on the BDSM (that’s old hat) but the character of the two men not being forthright in what they know.

          • Lance
            04/29/2009 at 1:10 PM

            But you’re not answering the question. On what basis are you making this evaluation? What non-Wone-related facts demonstrate that they were “narcissistic, self-absorbed human trash”?

  34. Spike
    04/29/2009 at 1:15 AM

    What does “intentional moral decline” actually mean? I don’t think there are many people in the world, even truly nasty mean and evil people, who THINK they are those things, let alone set out to become those things.

    I think people go down roads they don’t foresee, take turns they hadn’t anticipated, find themselves in over their heads before it’s too late. I think some aware people are able to look back and see they have found themselves at rock bottom after a moral decline, but I don’t think most people plan that journey.

    I’ve gotten a lawyer colleague somewhat hooked on this site and she even sat down with me and a whiteboard and plotted out why she thinks this was actually a planned out Leopold & Loeb-like murder.

    My thought has pretty steadily been that it was sex play gone horribly horribly wrong and some messed up person or people (messed up due to substances) thought would make an accidental death look like murder by an intruder so as not to get in trouble for the drug issue.

    As for Frankie, it seems as if your questions are loose enough that no matter how somebody replies to you you’re not going to be satisfied. I bet what you might want to hear is that you’re right, you knew Robert Wone better than anybody involved in this site and so therefore have some sort of moral highground in your care about him.

    • 04/29/2009 at 1:31 AM

      Well said Spike. Your assessment rings true on all accounts.

    • ladydetective
      04/29/2009 at 11:03 AM

      Frankie,

      Are you angry that four men (the editors) and many commenters, many who did not know Robert Wone, are doing more to try and figure out what happened to Robert Wone than you, a person who actually knew him? If so, your anger is misplaced. Turn your anger in productive discussion and help us figure out what happened to your friend.

  35. Spike
    04/29/2009 at 1:15 AM

    What does “intentional moral decline” actually mean? I don’t think there are many people in the world, even truly nasty mean and evil people, who THINK they are those things, let alone set out to become those things.

    I think people go down roads they don’t foresee, take turns they hadn’t anticipated, find themselves in over their heads before it’s too late. I think some aware people are able to look back and see they have found themselves at rock bottom after a moral decline, but I don’t think most people plan that journey.

    I’ve gotten a lawyer colleague somewhat hooked on this site and she even sat down with me and a whiteboard and plotted out why she thinks this was actually a planned out Leopold & Loeb-like murder.

    My thought has pretty steadily been that it was sex play gone horribly horribly wrong and some messed up person or people (messed up due to substances) thought would make an accidental death look like murder by an intruder so as not to get in trouble for the drug issue.

    As for Frankie, it seems as if your questions are loose enough that no matter how somebody replies to you you’re not going to be satisfied. I bet what you might want to hear is that you’re right, you knew Robert Wone better than anybody involved in this site and so therefore have some sort of moral highground in your care about him.

    • 04/29/2009 at 1:31 AM

      Well said Spike. Your assessment rings true on all accounts.

    • ladydetective
      04/29/2009 at 11:03 AM

      Frankie,

      Are you angry that four men (the editors) and many commenters, many who did not know Robert Wone, are doing more to try and figure out what happened to Robert Wone than you, a person who actually knew him? If so, your anger is misplaced. Turn your anger in productive discussion and help us figure out what happened to your friend.

  36. Spike
    04/29/2009 at 1:15 AM

    What does “intentional moral decline” actually mean? I don’t think there are many people in the world, even truly nasty mean and evil people, who THINK they are those things, let alone set out to become those things.

    I think people go down roads they don’t foresee, take turns they hadn’t anticipated, find themselves in over their heads before it’s too late. I think some aware people are able to look back and see they have found themselves at rock bottom after a moral decline, but I don’t think most people plan that journey.

    I’ve gotten a lawyer colleague somewhat hooked on this site and she even sat down with me and a whiteboard and plotted out why she thinks this was actually a planned out Leopold & Loeb-like murder.

    My thought has pretty steadily been that it was sex play gone horribly horribly wrong and some messed up person or people (messed up due to substances) thought would make an accidental death look like murder by an intruder so as not to get in trouble for the drug issue.

    As for Frankie, it seems as if your questions are loose enough that no matter how somebody replies to you you’re not going to be satisfied. I bet what you might want to hear is that you’re right, you knew Robert Wone better than anybody involved in this site and so therefore have some sort of moral highground in your care about him.

    • 04/29/2009 at 1:31 AM

      Well said Spike. Your assessment rings true on all accounts.

    • ladydetective
      04/29/2009 at 11:03 AM

      Frankie,

      Are you angry that four men (the editors) and many commenters, many who did not know Robert Wone, are doing more to try and figure out what happened to Robert Wone than you, a person who actually knew him? If so, your anger is misplaced. Turn your anger in productive discussion and help us figure out what happened to your friend.

  37. Jack
    04/29/2009 at 1:42 AM

    I don’t begrudge Frankie his question. Indeed, I think it’s an interesting one, although I think it’s a bit incomplete, given that this murder did not initially receive much attention. This site does a terrific job, largely by having anonymous posts in which all sorts of information can come forth, whether or not it ultimately proves helpful, as Bea notes above. (It’s hard to know, in researching a murder, what in fact will prove useful in the end, if there is an end, that is.) But I sometimes wonder, too, in the nature of some readers’ interests: I’m referring to the times when the postings consist, as they sometimes do, of bitchy remarks about the decor at 1509 Swann Street or about the value of real estate over time.

  38. Jack
    04/29/2009 at 1:42 AM

    I don’t begrudge Frankie his question. Indeed, I think it’s an interesting one, although I think it’s a bit incomplete, given that this murder did not initially receive much attention. This site does a terrific job, largely by having anonymous posts in which all sorts of information can come forth, whether or not it ultimately proves helpful, as Bea notes above. (It’s hard to know, in researching a murder, what in fact will prove useful in the end, if there is an end, that is.) But I sometimes wonder, too, in the nature of some readers’ interests: I’m referring to the times when the postings consist, as they sometimes do, of bitchy remarks about the decor at 1509 Swann Street or about the value of real estate over time.

  39. Jack
    04/29/2009 at 1:42 AM

    I don’t begrudge Frankie his question. Indeed, I think it’s an interesting one, although I think it’s a bit incomplete, given that this murder did not initially receive much attention. This site does a terrific job, largely by having anonymous posts in which all sorts of information can come forth, whether or not it ultimately proves helpful, as Bea notes above. (It’s hard to know, in researching a murder, what in fact will prove useful in the end, if there is an end, that is.) But I sometimes wonder, too, in the nature of some readers’ interests: I’m referring to the times when the postings consist, as they sometimes do, of bitchy remarks about the decor at 1509 Swann Street or about the value of real estate over time.

  40. Bea
    04/29/2009 at 5:47 AM

    Jack, I agree in large part, though I suspect the “bitchy” comments are often just gallows humor and a way of blowing off steam given the frustration factor here – for me, that there aren’t murder charges pending. At other times, the “bitchy” comments are just normal reactions of someone feeling provoked.

    Much as Frankie frustrates me (because I question his reason for coming back time and again if he thinks this site serves no useful purpose) I will try to genuinely formulate my response. His questions do have me defining for myself my own near-obsession. The reasons for my coming here is many layered. Having lived near Swann MANY years ago, having a very similar position to Joe Price’s, the story caught my eye. I am outraged that a man was stabbed to death and most facts point to clear culprits (I won’t state the obvious reasons – and I acknowledge the people here who vehemently disagree) yet the killers are not being charged with murder.

    But in my view, Frankie is completely off base in thinking that “we” are “jealous” of the “affluent, attractive gay defendants”; for me, THAT aspect of being drawn here is almost the reverse of his speculation: as a gay person I denounce their behavior and do not want the “stink” of them on me or on gay people in general.

    What I “want” is for Robert Wone’s murderers to be brought to justice. In full disclosure, I admit that as a lesbian, and as a lesbian parent, I think about that USA Today article about gay parents featuring Victor and Joe – and that the media will have that plastered all over the news if (in my opinion, WHEN) Dylan and Joe’s acts are fully disclosed. The gay community will suffer a serious setback in the minds of people who are not critical thinkers. Bill O’Reilly comes immediately to mind.

    Yes, part of my frustration is selfish and simplistic and immature – not that I’m proud of it – and this “first instinct” is cut from the same cloth of why I’d rather Richard Simmons wasn’t “one of us”.

    What I think Frankie fails to understand is that I’d LOVE to be able to think that Ward, Price and Zaborsky are entirely innocent. It would be so much easier in relation to generalized fall-out over Price and Zaborsky’s history as being poster boys for the gay community. And if it was an intruder, even a gay one, the residual damage would not be so great. But I don’t come here to try to exonerate the trio now that I’ve formed an opinion (again, I’d love to be wrong). I read and research and communicate here to see if there’s anything we “can do”. As has been stated, often important facts don’t look like much at first glance. The upshot is that I spend too much time hoping that this case is solved and “doing my part”.

    Perhaps I’m alone in my thinking, and maybe Frankie’s real point isn’t about “what if” it were an African American man in Southeast, but a collective sense of wanting to clean our own house. This is a case where, in my opinion, the murderer(s) are gay. And I am disgusted in reading what Robert Wone endured during his murder.

    Is it a complicated set of reasons which draws me to this case? Absolutely. Will this site help? Maybe. And “maybe” is good enough for me. So I direct my anger and frustration to what I believe to be the proper place, the murderers, and in hoping to help bring them to justice.

    My reluctance in posting this (besides boring everyone) is that Frankie (or others) may choose to quote particular sentences of my text as “evidence” of some new supposition, but I just wanted it said.

    • Anon. in Arlington
      04/29/2009 at 10:23 AM

      A tip of the hat to Bea. Well said.

    • Fascinating
      04/29/2009 at 12:12 PM

      Frankie is contrary. I’ve read all the posts here. Frankie questions “why this murder”, then questions the motives of those who answer “because we care about Robert Wone”, then accuses the blog of “group think”, then ascribes motives to the group because of an obsession with “rich gay white guys”, then wonders why the blog doesn’t care about the black, yellow, and purple people who were murdered in 2006.

      There’s no winning with Frankie.

      He’s contrary. And incapable of grasping that various reasons have cause different types of people to congregate on this blog.

      So which is worse: Bloggers gabbing and dissecting a murder? Or Frankie dissecting the bloggers dissecting the murder?

      Oy!

      • Jack
        04/30/2009 at 12:03 AM

        That, Bea, was an enormously thoughtful reply, as well as a reply that’s generous in its self-awareness. Thank you.

  41. Bea
    04/29/2009 at 5:47 AM

    Jack, I agree in large part, though I suspect the “bitchy” comments are often just gallows humor and a way of blowing off steam given the frustration factor here – for me, that there aren’t murder charges pending. At other times, the “bitchy” comments are just normal reactions of someone feeling provoked.

    Much as Frankie frustrates me (because I question his reason for coming back time and again if he thinks this site serves no useful purpose) I will try to genuinely formulate my response. His questions do have me defining for myself my own near-obsession. The reasons for my coming here is many layered. Having lived near Swann MANY years ago, having a very similar position to Joe Price’s, the story caught my eye. I am outraged that a man was stabbed to death and most facts point to clear culprits (I won’t state the obvious reasons – and I acknowledge the people here who vehemently disagree) yet the killers are not being charged with murder.

    But in my view, Frankie is completely off base in thinking that “we” are “jealous” of the “affluent, attractive gay defendants”; for me, THAT aspect of being drawn here is almost the reverse of his speculation: as a gay person I denounce their behavior and do not want the “stink” of them on me or on gay people in general.

    What I “want” is for Robert Wone’s murderers to be brought to justice. In full disclosure, I admit that as a lesbian, and as a lesbian parent, I think about that USA Today article about gay parents featuring Victor and Joe – and that the media will have that plastered all over the news if (in my opinion, WHEN) Dylan and Joe’s acts are fully disclosed. The gay community will suffer a serious setback in the minds of people who are not critical thinkers. Bill O’Reilly comes immediately to mind.

    Yes, part of my frustration is selfish and simplistic and immature – not that I’m proud of it – and this “first instinct” is cut from the same cloth of why I’d rather Richard Simmons wasn’t “one of us”.

    What I think Frankie fails to understand is that I’d LOVE to be able to think that Ward, Price and Zaborsky are entirely innocent. It would be so much easier in relation to generalized fall-out over Price and Zaborsky’s history as being poster boys for the gay community. And if it was an intruder, even a gay one, the residual damage would not be so great. But I don’t come here to try to exonerate the trio now that I’ve formed an opinion (again, I’d love to be wrong). I read and research and communicate here to see if there’s anything we “can do”. As has been stated, often important facts don’t look like much at first glance. The upshot is that I spend too much time hoping that this case is solved and “doing my part”.

    Perhaps I’m alone in my thinking, and maybe Frankie’s real point isn’t about “what if” it were an African American man in Southeast, but a collective sense of wanting to clean our own house. This is a case where, in my opinion, the murderer(s) are gay. And I am disgusted in reading what Robert Wone endured during his murder.

    Is it a complicated set of reasons which draws me to this case? Absolutely. Will this site help? Maybe. And “maybe” is good enough for me. So I direct my anger and frustration to what I believe to be the proper place, the murderers, and in hoping to help bring them to justice.

    My reluctance in posting this (besides boring everyone) is that Frankie (or others) may choose to quote particular sentences of my text as “evidence” of some new supposition, but I just wanted it said.

    • Anon. in Arlington
      04/29/2009 at 10:23 AM

      A tip of the hat to Bea. Well said.

    • Fascinating
      04/29/2009 at 12:12 PM

      Frankie is contrary. I’ve read all the posts here. Frankie questions “why this murder”, then questions the motives of those who answer “because we care about Robert Wone”, then accuses the blog of “group think”, then ascribes motives to the group because of an obsession with “rich gay white guys”, then wonders why the blog doesn’t care about the black, yellow, and purple people who were murdered in 2006.

      There’s no winning with Frankie.

      He’s contrary. And incapable of grasping that various reasons have cause different types of people to congregate on this blog.

      So which is worse: Bloggers gabbing and dissecting a murder? Or Frankie dissecting the bloggers dissecting the murder?

      Oy!

      • Jack
        04/30/2009 at 12:03 AM

        That, Bea, was an enormously thoughtful reply, as well as a reply that’s generous in its self-awareness. Thank you.

  42. Bea
    04/29/2009 at 5:47 AM

    Jack, I agree in large part, though I suspect the “bitchy” comments are often just gallows humor and a way of blowing off steam given the frustration factor here – for me, that there aren’t murder charges pending. At other times, the “bitchy” comments are just normal reactions of someone feeling provoked.

    Much as Frankie frustrates me (because I question his reason for coming back time and again if he thinks this site serves no useful purpose) I will try to genuinely formulate my response. His questions do have me defining for myself my own near-obsession. The reasons for my coming here is many layered. Having lived near Swann MANY years ago, having a very similar position to Joe Price’s, the story caught my eye. I am outraged that a man was stabbed to death and most facts point to clear culprits (I won’t state the obvious reasons – and I acknowledge the people here who vehemently disagree) yet the killers are not being charged with murder.

    But in my view, Frankie is completely off base in thinking that “we” are “jealous” of the “affluent, attractive gay defendants”; for me, THAT aspect of being drawn here is almost the reverse of his speculation: as a gay person I denounce their behavior and do not want the “stink” of them on me or on gay people in general.

    What I “want” is for Robert Wone’s murderers to be brought to justice. In full disclosure, I admit that as a lesbian, and as a lesbian parent, I think about that USA Today article about gay parents featuring Victor and Joe – and that the media will have that plastered all over the news if (in my opinion, WHEN) Dylan and Joe’s acts are fully disclosed. The gay community will suffer a serious setback in the minds of people who are not critical thinkers. Bill O’Reilly comes immediately to mind.

    Yes, part of my frustration is selfish and simplistic and immature – not that I’m proud of it – and this “first instinct” is cut from the same cloth of why I’d rather Richard Simmons wasn’t “one of us”.

    What I think Frankie fails to understand is that I’d LOVE to be able to think that Ward, Price and Zaborsky are entirely innocent. It would be so much easier in relation to generalized fall-out over Price and Zaborsky’s history as being poster boys for the gay community. And if it was an intruder, even a gay one, the residual damage would not be so great. But I don’t come here to try to exonerate the trio now that I’ve formed an opinion (again, I’d love to be wrong). I read and research and communicate here to see if there’s anything we “can do”. As has been stated, often important facts don’t look like much at first glance. The upshot is that I spend too much time hoping that this case is solved and “doing my part”.

    Perhaps I’m alone in my thinking, and maybe Frankie’s real point isn’t about “what if” it were an African American man in Southeast, but a collective sense of wanting to clean our own house. This is a case where, in my opinion, the murderer(s) are gay. And I am disgusted in reading what Robert Wone endured during his murder.

    Is it a complicated set of reasons which draws me to this case? Absolutely. Will this site help? Maybe. And “maybe” is good enough for me. So I direct my anger and frustration to what I believe to be the proper place, the murderers, and in hoping to help bring them to justice.

    My reluctance in posting this (besides boring everyone) is that Frankie (or others) may choose to quote particular sentences of my text as “evidence” of some new supposition, but I just wanted it said.

    • Anon. in Arlington
      04/29/2009 at 10:23 AM

      A tip of the hat to Bea. Well said.

    • Fascinating
      04/29/2009 at 12:12 PM

      Frankie is contrary. I’ve read all the posts here. Frankie questions “why this murder”, then questions the motives of those who answer “because we care about Robert Wone”, then accuses the blog of “group think”, then ascribes motives to the group because of an obsession with “rich gay white guys”, then wonders why the blog doesn’t care about the black, yellow, and purple people who were murdered in 2006.

      There’s no winning with Frankie.

      He’s contrary. And incapable of grasping that various reasons have cause different types of people to congregate on this blog.

      So which is worse: Bloggers gabbing and dissecting a murder? Or Frankie dissecting the bloggers dissecting the murder?

      Oy!

      • Jack
        04/30/2009 at 12:03 AM

        That, Bea, was an enormously thoughtful reply, as well as a reply that’s generous in its self-awareness. Thank you.

  43. BlondeAnon
    04/30/2009 at 3:36 AM

    As one who has never posted, Frankie’s misdirected anger has flushed me out of the shadows to say what a great and important job everyone is doing discussing all aspects and angles of this murder. I think Frankie doesn’t realize how little info and news reporting there was about this case almost from the beginning. I had been searching and googling for info without much success for quite some time when this site started. I thank the editors for putting up the site and the posters for the added info and opinion. I am originally from Vienna, VA (next to Oakton where Robert is from) and went to William and Mary. I don’t know Robert, but happened to read about his murder when it happened (I live in California, but still check up on local news). I felt badly for Robert and his wife, but immediately new something was fishy with the explanation of the murder. I was frustrated with the lack of information and reporting on this case and at first wondered if it was being covered up for some unknown reason. I am a heterosexual woman (and a rather cute one) that has no connection whatsoever to the case, and am absolutely rivetted by it. I know nothing of the DC gay community, the drug world, the BDSM world, the law firm world, etc. I don’t know what I would do without this site. It allows me to process the information that comes out about the case and fills in some huge gaps of knowledge that I have about what some of the information means. I’m here because I care, and it seems that most people on the site care. This site seems to be the best place to be for people who do care about Robert Wone’s murder, no matter what their reasons are. Frankie, do I have a good enough reason for caring about this case? Because I lived in the next town over? Because I went to the same college? Who cares why I care or anyone else cares? The point is we are all interested in this case and everyone seems to have an area of expertise that helps shed light on the info that comes up. For that I am extremely grateful. Yes, some of the posters can get catty and obnoxious, but so can my family. You take the good with the bad. There is great information on this site Frankie. I hope you actually take the time to read it before you judge.

    Oh and as for why this case as opposed to the other 90 you refer to: I think it’s because of Robert’s appeal. He seems like you average guy trying to do right in the world. He could be you or me. He spent the night at a friend’s house to accomodate his work schedule and he died…and the crime scene was cleaned up…and the statements of the occupants of the house make no sense. Why Nancy Grace and Greta aren’t all over this case is beyond me, but I’m glad they aren’t.

    • CDinDC
      04/30/2009 at 9:31 AM

      Hi Blonde….nice post. I hope we hear more from you! Some fresh insight is always helpful!

    • Anon. in Arlington
      04/30/2009 at 10:12 AM

      Great post BlondeAnon!

      In reading Blonde’s post, I wondered if this case was too much of a “hot potato” and the main stream media did not know how to handle it. Was it too “salacious” for their broadcast? It surely is not too much for the Washington Post. Or are reporters as confused and frustrated as we?

      What do readers think? Any regular readers who are involved in the media who can weigh in?

      • Swann Eye Leading the Blind
        04/30/2009 at 10:57 AM

        I spoke to Steven Tschida of News Channel Eight and ABC who had been camped out outside of my house for days on end. I actually offered him a cold drink because it was hot. We chatted in general about this case. He told me the following, which I can only paraphrase at this point because I don’t remember the exact wording —- The police investigating in the house told me you are lucky to be covering this case because when it breaks it is going to be national news due to the repercussions. They told me this is the kind of a case that can make a career.

        Well, read into this what you want, but there it is more or less as I remember it from Mr. Tschida, who was on Swann Street every day for at least three weeks.

        If it is true, it means there may be many reasons why this case has not gotten attention, or has gone the way it has. I leave that to the reader.

        • Anon. in Arlington
          04/30/2009 at 12:07 PM

          Thanks Swann Eye.

          Let’s hope that what investigators were hinting to Tschida is true and that the prosecution has much more to go on and a “better story” than we are led to believe at this time.

          • Swann Eye Leading the Blind
            04/30/2009 at 12:41 PM

            It’s very interesting to me that you are going in a different direction with this than I have assumed all along, sitting on Steven Tschida’ s comment for some time now. I have just assumed that it pertained to someone that would be affected by Price being found guilty. Or that Price would likely cough-up some choice info to get better treatment. Something along those lines. What you are suggesting is that somehow someone else is involved that we don’t know about, which is logically speaking related to the “intruder” explanation. I find that hard to believe, and especially hard to believe that it would not have come out already if true.
            But several people I have discussed Tschida’s comments with have pointed out that Grand Juries can keep a lot of things secret. I’m not a lawyer, but I would imagine that all of this would have to come out at trial. But, thinking somewhat conspiratorially I know, I have wondered if the pursuit of the lesser charges than murder is a way of keeping certain information from coming to light. I am someone who feels that sometimes it is not desirable for everything to come out anyways. I do not feel confident about any of these speculations or educated guesses. All I can do is swear that what Tschida told me is true. I personally am very reluctant to discuss sensitive matters, or those I suspect might be sensitive to others who might be somehow innocently related to this whole matter. That is why I have not mentioned Tschida’s particular comments before, and discussed it only with others in confidence. However,
            I feel strongly that the political change in the world is real now, and safely on its way, and that given all of this, now I can
            speak. Let me emphasize again, though that I have absolutely no knowledge as to what the Tschida’s comments might mean specifically, only a good nose for trouble
            developed over a lifetime.

            • Anon. in Arlington
              04/30/2009 at 2:32 PM

              Not sure if your questions were directed to me. I simply thought that Mr. Tschida had an inside lead that indicated there was a lot of information and physical evidence within the home that would be disclosed at some point. It also sounded as if the informant was indicating that if Tschida stick with it, he may be the first to break the story. It is not a reflection on Tschida that he did not stay longer as information ceased to flow (one could imagine network managers wanting to know why he was working this for so long).

              I, for one, am hungry for information yet not at the expense of throwing this case.

              After reading the follow-up comments below, I too am left to wonder the magnitude of information that may have been inferred by the informant. The ME report would not have been released so quickly, so what did that informant know that would lead them to think this story would be interesting on a national level beyond a straight man murdered in the home of 3 gay men. Unless of course the informant was not seasoned enough to absorb the three-way relationship and BDSM paraphernalia from the house.

              • Swann Eye Leading the Blind
                04/30/2009 at 2:52 PM

                You could be right about all of that. I don’t want to make a mountain out of a molehill. It has just made me wonder for a long time now. Really, all I can say is “Dunno”.

                I only met Joe Price once, though I immediately forgot his name. My impression was not positive with the guy at all. That is the extent of my knowledge.

                • KM
                  04/30/2009 at 4:13 PM

                  SELtB,

                  Could you expand on why your impression of Price was not positive?

                  Was it what he said? The way he said it? Facial expressions, eye contact, body language? Even the way he was dressed, car he drove, or the like?

                  Any insight you have would be interesting. Thanks.

                  • Swann Eye Leading the Blind
                    04/30/2009 at 4:41 PM

                    A very bad feeling.

  44. BlondeAnon
    04/30/2009 at 3:36 AM

    As one who has never posted, Frankie’s misdirected anger has flushed me out of the shadows to say what a great and important job everyone is doing discussing all aspects and angles of this murder. I think Frankie doesn’t realize how little info and news reporting there was about this case almost from the beginning. I had been searching and googling for info without much success for quite some time when this site started. I thank the editors for putting up the site and the posters for the added info and opinion. I am originally from Vienna, VA (next to Oakton where Robert is from) and went to William and Mary. I don’t know Robert, but happened to read about his murder when it happened (I live in California, but still check up on local news). I felt badly for Robert and his wife, but immediately new something was fishy with the explanation of the murder. I was frustrated with the lack of information and reporting on this case and at first wondered if it was being covered up for some unknown reason. I am a heterosexual woman (and a rather cute one) that has no connection whatsoever to the case, and am absolutely rivetted by it. I know nothing of the DC gay community, the drug world, the BDSM world, the law firm world, etc. I don’t know what I would do without this site. It allows me to process the information that comes out about the case and fills in some huge gaps of knowledge that I have about what some of the information means. I’m here because I care, and it seems that most people on the site care. This site seems to be the best place to be for people who do care about Robert Wone’s murder, no matter what their reasons are. Frankie, do I have a good enough reason for caring about this case? Because I lived in the next town over? Because I went to the same college? Who cares why I care or anyone else cares? The point is we are all interested in this case and everyone seems to have an area of expertise that helps shed light on the info that comes up. For that I am extremely grateful. Yes, some of the posters can get catty and obnoxious, but so can my family. You take the good with the bad. There is great information on this site Frankie. I hope you actually take the time to read it before you judge.

    Oh and as for why this case as opposed to the other 90 you refer to: I think it’s because of Robert’s appeal. He seems like you average guy trying to do right in the world. He could be you or me. He spent the night at a friend’s house to accomodate his work schedule and he died…and the crime scene was cleaned up…and the statements of the occupants of the house make no sense. Why Nancy Grace and Greta aren’t all over this case is beyond me, but I’m glad they aren’t.

    • CDinDC
      04/30/2009 at 9:31 AM

      Hi Blonde….nice post. I hope we hear more from you! Some fresh insight is always helpful!

    • Anon. in Arlington
      04/30/2009 at 10:12 AM

      Great post BlondeAnon!

      In reading Blonde’s post, I wondered if this case was too much of a “hot potato” and the main stream media did not know how to handle it. Was it too “salacious” for their broadcast? It surely is not too much for the Washington Post. Or are reporters as confused and frustrated as we?

      What do readers think? Any regular readers who are involved in the media who can weigh in?

      • Swann Eye Leading the Blind
        04/30/2009 at 10:57 AM

        I spoke to Steven Tschida of News Channel Eight and ABC who had been camped out outside of my house for days on end. I actually offered him a cold drink because it was hot. We chatted in general about this case. He told me the following, which I can only paraphrase at this point because I don’t remember the exact wording —- The police investigating in the house told me you are lucky to be covering this case because when it breaks it is going to be national news due to the repercussions. They told me this is the kind of a case that can make a career.

        Well, read into this what you want, but there it is more or less as I remember it from Mr. Tschida, who was on Swann Street every day for at least three weeks.

        If it is true, it means there may be many reasons why this case has not gotten attention, or has gone the way it has. I leave that to the reader.

        • Anon. in Arlington
          04/30/2009 at 12:07 PM

          Thanks Swann Eye.

          Let’s hope that what investigators were hinting to Tschida is true and that the prosecution has much more to go on and a “better story” than we are led to believe at this time.

          • Swann Eye Leading the Blind
            04/30/2009 at 12:41 PM

            It’s very interesting to me that you are going in a different direction with this than I have assumed all along, sitting on Steven Tschida’ s comment for some time now. I have just assumed that it pertained to someone that would be affected by Price being found guilty. Or that Price would likely cough-up some choice info to get better treatment. Something along those lines. What you are suggesting is that somehow someone else is involved that we don’t know about, which is logically speaking related to the “intruder” explanation. I find that hard to believe, and especially hard to believe that it would not have come out already if true.
            But several people I have discussed Tschida’s comments with have pointed out that Grand Juries can keep a lot of things secret. I’m not a lawyer, but I would imagine that all of this would have to come out at trial. But, thinking somewhat conspiratorially I know, I have wondered if the pursuit of the lesser charges than murder is a way of keeping certain information from coming to light. I am someone who feels that sometimes it is not desirable for everything to come out anyways. I do not feel confident about any of these speculations or educated guesses. All I can do is swear that what Tschida told me is true. I personally am very reluctant to discuss sensitive matters, or those I suspect might be sensitive to others who might be somehow innocently related to this whole matter. That is why I have not mentioned Tschida’s particular comments before, and discussed it only with others in confidence. However,
            I feel strongly that the political change in the world is real now, and safely on its way, and that given all of this, now I can
            speak. Let me emphasize again, though that I have absolutely no knowledge as to what the Tschida’s comments might mean specifically, only a good nose for trouble
            developed over a lifetime.

            • Anon. in Arlington
              04/30/2009 at 2:32 PM

              Not sure if your questions were directed to me. I simply thought that Mr. Tschida had an inside lead that indicated there was a lot of information and physical evidence within the home that would be disclosed at some point. It also sounded as if the informant was indicating that if Tschida stick with it, he may be the first to break the story. It is not a reflection on Tschida that he did not stay longer as information ceased to flow (one could imagine network managers wanting to know why he was working this for so long).

              I, for one, am hungry for information yet not at the expense of throwing this case.

              After reading the follow-up comments below, I too am left to wonder the magnitude of information that may have been inferred by the informant. The ME report would not have been released so quickly, so what did that informant know that would lead them to think this story would be interesting on a national level beyond a straight man murdered in the home of 3 gay men. Unless of course the informant was not seasoned enough to absorb the three-way relationship and BDSM paraphernalia from the house.

              • Swann Eye Leading the Blind
                04/30/2009 at 2:52 PM

                You could be right about all of that. I don’t want to make a mountain out of a molehill. It has just made me wonder for a long time now. Really, all I can say is “Dunno”.

                I only met Joe Price once, though I immediately forgot his name. My impression was not positive with the guy at all. That is the extent of my knowledge.

                • KM
                  04/30/2009 at 4:13 PM

                  SELtB,

                  Could you expand on why your impression of Price was not positive?

                  Was it what he said? The way he said it? Facial expressions, eye contact, body language? Even the way he was dressed, car he drove, or the like?

                  Any insight you have would be interesting. Thanks.

                  • Swann Eye Leading the Blind
                    04/30/2009 at 4:41 PM

                    A very bad feeling.

  45. BlondeAnon
    04/30/2009 at 3:36 AM

    As one who has never posted, Frankie’s misdirected anger has flushed me out of the shadows to say what a great and important job everyone is doing discussing all aspects and angles of this murder. I think Frankie doesn’t realize how little info and news reporting there was about this case almost from the beginning. I had been searching and googling for info without much success for quite some time when this site started. I thank the editors for putting up the site and the posters for the added info and opinion. I am originally from Vienna, VA (next to Oakton where Robert is from) and went to William and Mary. I don’t know Robert, but happened to read about his murder when it happened (I live in California, but still check up on local news). I felt badly for Robert and his wife, but immediately new something was fishy with the explanation of the murder. I was frustrated with the lack of information and reporting on this case and at first wondered if it was being covered up for some unknown reason. I am a heterosexual woman (and a rather cute one) that has no connection whatsoever to the case, and am absolutely rivetted by it. I know nothing of the DC gay community, the drug world, the BDSM world, the law firm world, etc. I don’t know what I would do without this site. It allows me to process the information that comes out about the case and fills in some huge gaps of knowledge that I have about what some of the information means. I’m here because I care, and it seems that most people on the site care. This site seems to be the best place to be for people who do care about Robert Wone’s murder, no matter what their reasons are. Frankie, do I have a good enough reason for caring about this case? Because I lived in the next town over? Because I went to the same college? Who cares why I care or anyone else cares? The point is we are all interested in this case and everyone seems to have an area of expertise that helps shed light on the info that comes up. For that I am extremely grateful. Yes, some of the posters can get catty and obnoxious, but so can my family. You take the good with the bad. There is great information on this site Frankie. I hope you actually take the time to read it before you judge.

    Oh and as for why this case as opposed to the other 90 you refer to: I think it’s because of Robert’s appeal. He seems like you average guy trying to do right in the world. He could be you or me. He spent the night at a friend’s house to accomodate his work schedule and he died…and the crime scene was cleaned up…and the statements of the occupants of the house make no sense. Why Nancy Grace and Greta aren’t all over this case is beyond me, but I’m glad they aren’t.

    • CDinDC
      04/30/2009 at 9:31 AM

      Hi Blonde….nice post. I hope we hear more from you! Some fresh insight is always helpful!

    • Anon. in Arlington
      04/30/2009 at 10:12 AM

      Great post BlondeAnon!

      In reading Blonde’s post, I wondered if this case was too much of a “hot potato” and the main stream media did not know how to handle it. Was it too “salacious” for their broadcast? It surely is not too much for the Washington Post. Or are reporters as confused and frustrated as we?

      What do readers think? Any regular readers who are involved in the media who can weigh in?

      • Swann Eye Leading the Blind
        04/30/2009 at 10:57 AM

        I spoke to Steven Tschida of News Channel Eight and ABC who had been camped out outside of my house for days on end. I actually offered him a cold drink because it was hot. We chatted in general about this case. He told me the following, which I can only paraphrase at this point because I don’t remember the exact wording —- The police investigating in the house told me you are lucky to be covering this case because when it breaks it is going to be national news due to the repercussions. They told me this is the kind of a case that can make a career.

        Well, read into this what you want, but there it is more or less as I remember it from Mr. Tschida, who was on Swann Street every day for at least three weeks.

        If it is true, it means there may be many reasons why this case has not gotten attention, or has gone the way it has. I leave that to the reader.

        • Anon. in Arlington
          04/30/2009 at 12:07 PM

          Thanks Swann Eye.

          Let’s hope that what investigators were hinting to Tschida is true and that the prosecution has much more to go on and a “better story” than we are led to believe at this time.

          • Swann Eye Leading the Blind
            04/30/2009 at 12:41 PM

            It’s very interesting to me that you are going in a different direction with this than I have assumed all along, sitting on Steven Tschida’ s comment for some time now. I have just assumed that it pertained to someone that would be affected by Price being found guilty. Or that Price would likely cough-up some choice info to get better treatment. Something along those lines. What you are suggesting is that somehow someone else is involved that we don’t know about, which is logically speaking related to the “intruder” explanation. I find that hard to believe, and especially hard to believe that it would not have come out already if true.
            But several people I have discussed Tschida’s comments with have pointed out that Grand Juries can keep a lot of things secret. I’m not a lawyer, but I would imagine that all of this would have to come out at trial. But, thinking somewhat conspiratorially I know, I have wondered if the pursuit of the lesser charges than murder is a way of keeping certain information from coming to light. I am someone who feels that sometimes it is not desirable for everything to come out anyways. I do not feel confident about any of these speculations or educated guesses. All I can do is swear that what Tschida told me is true. I personally am very reluctant to discuss sensitive matters, or those I suspect might be sensitive to others who might be somehow innocently related to this whole matter. That is why I have not mentioned Tschida’s particular comments before, and discussed it only with others in confidence. However,
            I feel strongly that the political change in the world is real now, and safely on its way, and that given all of this, now I can
            speak. Let me emphasize again, though that I have absolutely no knowledge as to what the Tschida’s comments might mean specifically, only a good nose for trouble
            developed over a lifetime.

            • Anon. in Arlington
              04/30/2009 at 2:32 PM

              Not sure if your questions were directed to me. I simply thought that Mr. Tschida had an inside lead that indicated there was a lot of information and physical evidence within the home that would be disclosed at some point. It also sounded as if the informant was indicating that if Tschida stick with it, he may be the first to break the story. It is not a reflection on Tschida that he did not stay longer as information ceased to flow (one could imagine network managers wanting to know why he was working this for so long).

              I, for one, am hungry for information yet not at the expense of throwing this case.

              After reading the follow-up comments below, I too am left to wonder the magnitude of information that may have been inferred by the informant. The ME report would not have been released so quickly, so what did that informant know that would lead them to think this story would be interesting on a national level beyond a straight man murdered in the home of 3 gay men. Unless of course the informant was not seasoned enough to absorb the three-way relationship and BDSM paraphernalia from the house.

              • Swann Eye Leading the Blind
                04/30/2009 at 2:52 PM

                You could be right about all of that. I don’t want to make a mountain out of a molehill. It has just made me wonder for a long time now. Really, all I can say is “Dunno”.

                I only met Joe Price once, though I immediately forgot his name. My impression was not positive with the guy at all. That is the extent of my knowledge.

                • KM
                  04/30/2009 at 4:13 PM

                  SELtB,

                  Could you expand on why your impression of Price was not positive?

                  Was it what he said? The way he said it? Facial expressions, eye contact, body language? Even the way he was dressed, car he drove, or the like?

                  Any insight you have would be interesting. Thanks.

                  • Swann Eye Leading the Blind
                    04/30/2009 at 4:41 PM

                    A very bad feeling.

  46. Nelly
    04/30/2009 at 12:20 PM

    Was that back in 2006? What has happened so that News Channel 8 & Steven Tschida have dropped interest and coverage in the case? That’s odd that he’d be camping out there for 3 weeks and now nothing. Thanks for sharing your insight.

    • Swann Eye Leading the Blind
      04/30/2009 at 12:48 PM

      Yes in August 2006. Again, I don’t want to speculate too far on this, but I have assumed the following. A lot of these reporters, like Tschida, had been told something similar. Or Tschida told the others. This may have been “off the record” which is a concept which the legal status of I have never really grasped totally. Anyways, I think this helps explain why they all spent so much time here. They sat in the heat! Often they sat on our stairs on the block. Perhaps they all thought this would be a great “get”. I don’t have any other explanation for the behavior. As you said, so much devotion, and then very little. Go figure.

      • N.M.
        04/30/2009 at 1:00 PM

        Is it your hunch that Price et al are receiving lenient treatment and are being charged on lesser offenses because one or more of them are helping the feds build a case against a bigger fish, or on a “more important” crime; or that Price et al are receiving lenient treatment and are being charged on lesser offenses because they are being protected by someone or something seen as more powerful / important?

        • Swann Eye Leading the Blind
          04/30/2009 at 1:09 PM

          I don’t know. That’s what I really should say. But as to hunches, I think you are getting real warm, if not red hot.

          But one of the lawyers on this site would have to answer if such things are possible legally. I don’t really have clue about that part. But what I can say is that Joe Price looked awfully OK and confident when I saw him on TV the other day. Then people who were there said he was laughing and carrying on in the hallway. It made wonder about all of this in light of what I had heard from Tschida.

          • CDinDC
            04/30/2009 at 2:09 PM

            More interesting stuff.

            My thought is that even if someone else murdered Robert, and they are covering for someone else (and not each other), the charges would be the same. conspiracy, etc. Big fish or little fish, it would just add one more smelly fish to the mix.

            • CDinDC
              04/30/2009 at 2:42 PM

              But then again, not to be a nay-sayer, it could have been just a couple of cops speaking out of school….making personal observations about what THEY thought would be a “Nancy Grace style” story.

              • SheKnowsSomething
                04/30/2009 at 2:56 PM

                CD,

                I agree with your final take on this thread. I’m sure there are a few members among DC’s finest who think they have solved a crime before all of the evidence is gathered, examined and weighed by a jury in a court.

                • Kenspeckled Souckar
                  04/30/2009 at 3:11 PM

                  Good point SheKnowsSomething.. Also, giving an explanation like that
                  would save the police a lot of work
                  doing all that mundane police work
                  for a crime committed by three garden variety nuts. A number of people in the neighborhood were convinced that the police were having a party in there, watching porn and getting drunk. Maybe they thought they had it all figured out before they did. It would be terrible if that was why they were so sloppy.

                  • Anon. in Arlington
                    04/30/2009 at 3:20 PM

                    Yeah, why did it take so long to tear the house apart? It is not as if it were a mansion. A nice sized home, but not a lot of space to study.

              • Corcoran Cutlet
                04/30/2009 at 3:05 PM

                I agree that that that is one likely explanation for the whole matter. It also accords with what you see of police often on TV being interviewed. Exaggeration seems part of their playbook. If the simplest explanation is the right one, that may be the correct one. People love to think they will get 15 minutes of fame. I always wonder –why??

  47. Nelly
    04/30/2009 at 12:20 PM

    Was that back in 2006? What has happened so that News Channel 8 & Steven Tschida have dropped interest and coverage in the case? That’s odd that he’d be camping out there for 3 weeks and now nothing. Thanks for sharing your insight.

    • Swann Eye Leading the Blind
      04/30/2009 at 12:48 PM

      Yes in August 2006. Again, I don’t want to speculate too far on this, but I have assumed the following. A lot of these reporters, like Tschida, had been told something similar. Or Tschida told the others. This may have been “off the record” which is a concept which the legal status of I have never really grasped totally. Anyways, I think this helps explain why they all spent so much time here. They sat in the heat! Often they sat on our stairs on the block. Perhaps they all thought this would be a great “get”. I don’t have any other explanation for the behavior. As you said, so much devotion, and then very little. Go figure.

      • N.M.
        04/30/2009 at 1:00 PM

        Is it your hunch that Price et al are receiving lenient treatment and are being charged on lesser offenses because one or more of them are helping the feds build a case against a bigger fish, or on a “more important” crime; or that Price et al are receiving lenient treatment and are being charged on lesser offenses because they are being protected by someone or something seen as more powerful / important?

        • Swann Eye Leading the Blind
          04/30/2009 at 1:09 PM

          I don’t know. That’s what I really should say. But as to hunches, I think you are getting real warm, if not red hot.

          But one of the lawyers on this site would have to answer if such things are possible legally. I don’t really have clue about that part. But what I can say is that Joe Price looked awfully OK and confident when I saw him on TV the other day. Then people who were there said he was laughing and carrying on in the hallway. It made wonder about all of this in light of what I had heard from Tschida.

          • CDinDC
            04/30/2009 at 2:09 PM

            More interesting stuff.

            My thought is that even if someone else murdered Robert, and they are covering for someone else (and not each other), the charges would be the same. conspiracy, etc. Big fish or little fish, it would just add one more smelly fish to the mix.

            • CDinDC
              04/30/2009 at 2:42 PM

              But then again, not to be a nay-sayer, it could have been just a couple of cops speaking out of school….making personal observations about what THEY thought would be a “Nancy Grace style” story.

              • SheKnowsSomething
                04/30/2009 at 2:56 PM

                CD,

                I agree with your final take on this thread. I’m sure there are a few members among DC’s finest who think they have solved a crime before all of the evidence is gathered, examined and weighed by a jury in a court.

                • Kenspeckled Souckar
                  04/30/2009 at 3:11 PM

                  Good point SheKnowsSomething.. Also, giving an explanation like that
                  would save the police a lot of work
                  doing all that mundane police work
                  for a crime committed by three garden variety nuts. A number of people in the neighborhood were convinced that the police were having a party in there, watching porn and getting drunk. Maybe they thought they had it all figured out before they did. It would be terrible if that was why they were so sloppy.

                  • Anon. in Arlington
                    04/30/2009 at 3:20 PM

                    Yeah, why did it take so long to tear the house apart? It is not as if it were a mansion. A nice sized home, but not a lot of space to study.

              • Corcoran Cutlet
                04/30/2009 at 3:05 PM

                I agree that that that is one likely explanation for the whole matter. It also accords with what you see of police often on TV being interviewed. Exaggeration seems part of their playbook. If the simplest explanation is the right one, that may be the correct one. People love to think they will get 15 minutes of fame. I always wonder –why??

  48. Nelly
    04/30/2009 at 12:20 PM

    Was that back in 2006? What has happened so that News Channel 8 & Steven Tschida have dropped interest and coverage in the case? That’s odd that he’d be camping out there for 3 weeks and now nothing. Thanks for sharing your insight.

    • Swann Eye Leading the Blind
      04/30/2009 at 12:48 PM

      Yes in August 2006. Again, I don’t want to speculate too far on this, but I have assumed the following. A lot of these reporters, like Tschida, had been told something similar. Or Tschida told the others. This may have been “off the record” which is a concept which the legal status of I have never really grasped totally. Anyways, I think this helps explain why they all spent so much time here. They sat in the heat! Often they sat on our stairs on the block. Perhaps they all thought this would be a great “get”. I don’t have any other explanation for the behavior. As you said, so much devotion, and then very little. Go figure.

      • N.M.
        04/30/2009 at 1:00 PM

        Is it your hunch that Price et al are receiving lenient treatment and are being charged on lesser offenses because one or more of them are helping the feds build a case against a bigger fish, or on a “more important” crime; or that Price et al are receiving lenient treatment and are being charged on lesser offenses because they are being protected by someone or something seen as more powerful / important?

        • Swann Eye Leading the Blind
          04/30/2009 at 1:09 PM

          I don’t know. That’s what I really should say. But as to hunches, I think you are getting real warm, if not red hot.

          But one of the lawyers on this site would have to answer if such things are possible legally. I don’t really have clue about that part. But what I can say is that Joe Price looked awfully OK and confident when I saw him on TV the other day. Then people who were there said he was laughing and carrying on in the hallway. It made wonder about all of this in light of what I had heard from Tschida.

          • CDinDC
            04/30/2009 at 2:09 PM

            More interesting stuff.

            My thought is that even if someone else murdered Robert, and they are covering for someone else (and not each other), the charges would be the same. conspiracy, etc. Big fish or little fish, it would just add one more smelly fish to the mix.

            • CDinDC
              04/30/2009 at 2:42 PM

              But then again, not to be a nay-sayer, it could have been just a couple of cops speaking out of school….making personal observations about what THEY thought would be a “Nancy Grace style” story.

              • SheKnowsSomething
                04/30/2009 at 2:56 PM

                CD,

                I agree with your final take on this thread. I’m sure there are a few members among DC’s finest who think they have solved a crime before all of the evidence is gathered, examined and weighed by a jury in a court.

                • Kenspeckled Souckar
                  04/30/2009 at 3:11 PM

                  Good point SheKnowsSomething.. Also, giving an explanation like that
                  would save the police a lot of work
                  doing all that mundane police work
                  for a crime committed by three garden variety nuts. A number of people in the neighborhood were convinced that the police were having a party in there, watching porn and getting drunk. Maybe they thought they had it all figured out before they did. It would be terrible if that was why they were so sloppy.

                  • Anon. in Arlington
                    04/30/2009 at 3:20 PM

                    Yeah, why did it take so long to tear the house apart? It is not as if it were a mansion. A nice sized home, but not a lot of space to study.

              • Corcoran Cutlet
                04/30/2009 at 3:05 PM

                I agree that that that is one likely explanation for the whole matter. It also accords with what you see of police often on TV being interviewed. Exaggeration seems part of their playbook. If the simplest explanation is the right one, that may be the correct one. People love to think they will get 15 minutes of fame. I always wonder –why??

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *