Lois Goslinoski: The Wone Trial’s Canary?

Did Kirschner’s canary come out of defense coal mine alive?

Nationally-recognized, Washington-based crime writer Harry Jaffe  came out of the Wone trial gate early, hard  and fast with three verdicts: “Innocent, Innocent, Innocent.”  He doesn’t say even hedge with “Not Guilty,” but goes all in with “Innocent, Innocent, Innocent.”  Kind of has a “Mercedes, Mercedes, Mercedes” ring to it.

Why does he feel this way?

Largely because, from his viewpoint, the Medical Examiner took to many hits.

Let’s not be so hasty calling this trial.  The defense did what it had to do — riddle the ME’s opinion.  Many parts of her testimony are in question, but in several crucial ways, Goslinoski stuck her head out this week.  Directly answering a question from Judge Lynn Liebowitz she said Robert would have lived for more than “10 minutes, not many more, and “would have instinctively reacted.”  She did not back off this perch.

In stating this, this two-time faliure of her profession’s board exam disagreed with noted experts in her field, some who even wrote the books from where she draws her knowledge, and would not back down from her opinion.  The defense made note of her failures as if to say, “How dare you, you failure of your profession disagree with those whose opinions set the standard?”

Well, dare she did.  After the jump, how did Goslinoski show such great courage.

Lois Goslinoski is a canary of woman — small with a bird-like face, who speaks in such delicate chirps that even the Judge asked her to speak up.  At times, it may have felt like USAttorney Glenn Kirschner was sending her first down into the coal mine to see how his case may live in the dark poisonous gases of the defense bench.  But unlike Harry Jaffe, I believe she came out of there alive.

If Judge Liebowitz notes Goslinoski’s strong stand in a “guilty” opinion, then Lois Goslinoski will possess something more precious than any board certification.  Her opinion will have helped bring justice to an unjust situation, and her testimony helped restore a sense of moral balance in our universe.  Judge Liebowitz may hear from cardiac surgeons with their impressive board certifications that Robert died instanstly, but this logical judge will also see, how their font of knowledge is largely contained to very controlled environments — when the heart is being operated one — not in the chaotic environments of real-world knife stabbings — something Goslinoski has seen 45 time before.  Her testimony will look far better under the shining light of logic and reason.  The only time it looks bad is in the defense’s dark and damp coal mine.

Kirschner knew his canary would begin to wheeze and wobble.  Who wouldn’t when facing not only one of our nation’s finest criminal defense lawyers, but three in a row. Each of them — Bernie Grimm, Thomas Connolly and David Schertler –have been waiting months and months to question this woman on the stand.  On back up, Kirschner will be bringing Maryland State Chief Medical Examiner David Fowler.  He’ll bring his board certification, and all that is impressive, at least in the defense bench’s eyes and will fortify Goslinoski’s opinion.  And Kirschner has more state Medical Examiners waiting in hand to buttress Goslinowski.

It is early in this trial, but it is not nearly as dark as many people believe, Harry Jaffe included — especially when Kirschner’s canary sang with such courage and defiance.

— Posted by David

366 comments for “Lois Goslinoski: The Wone Trial’s Canary?

  1. Bill 2
    05/22/2010 at 10:16 AM

    Thank you, David. Many are surprised at Harry Jaffe’s rush to paint failure all over Lois Goslinoski’s testimony. One thing I’m not sure about is your reference to “Mercedes, Mercedes, Mercedes.” What is that all about? Thanks.

    • plumskiter
      05/22/2010 at 10:29 AM

      it is a quote from one of the price interview transcripts where he is describing the kind of neighborhood he lives in.

      • Carolina
        05/22/2010 at 11:13 AM

        One wonders if the “black man across the alley”‘s crack house boasted a Mercedes, as well.

        • TK
          05/22/2010 at 11:20 AM

          prolly with the ‘gold sh*t’ option package

  2. NYer
    05/22/2010 at 10:17 AM

    “Lois Goslinoski is a canary of woman — small with a bird-like face…”
    Actually, the doctor appears rather tall and willowy, based on the picture of her on the Day 4 Wrap post. Unless she’s walking next to an Oompa Loompa.

    • David
      05/22/2010 at 11:43 AM


      She is definitely a small and petite woman.


      • NYer
        05/22/2010 at 12:22 PM

        I’ll take your word for it David. But then she must be wearing very high heels in that photo. The individual walking next her (who looks like a man even) appears to be a good 3-4 inches shorter in height.

        • AnnaZed
          05/22/2010 at 12:42 PM

          I think they are on the stairs in that photo (I could be wrong).

        • New Alias
          05/23/2010 at 5:26 PM

          In real life she is petite and a bit bird-like – I think the canary descriptor is pretty accurate.

  3. emg
    05/22/2010 at 10:27 AM

    I fail to see how this case will stand or fall based solely on ME testimony. This is not a murder trial but a conspiracy and obstruction trial. It is based on volumes of circumstantial evidence. All do not have to be proved, only enough to ask the next question; “Why?”.

  4. Deb
    05/22/2010 at 10:27 AM

    I think it’s interesting that all of this “how long would he have lived/been responsive/reactiv3” questioning is based upon cardiac tamponade and presupposes the heart wound was the first wound. Yet there has been no testimony as to the order in which the wounds occurred? From what I understand, no one can tell which came first.

    • CDinDC
      05/22/2010 at 6:42 PM

      Excellent point, Deb. I hope the prosecution brings this point up.

  5. plumskiter
    05/22/2010 at 10:39 AM

    In his article/post/whatever, Jaffe wrote:

    “The facts of the case are confounding; the ones presented by the three housemates appear to be fiction, even to neighbors.”

    Does Jaffe understand that the defendants can be found guilty of obstruction for presenting fiction as fact? Respectfully, i don’t think Mr. Jaffe fully grasps the scope of the obstruction laws.

    • Carolina
      05/22/2010 at 11:15 AM

      And this is shocking, isn’t it, considering he’s a respected crime reporter?

      • former crackho
        05/22/2010 at 1:42 PM


      • MotherOfInvention
        05/22/2010 at 1:47 PM

        Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.

        • Vandy
          05/22/2010 at 3:30 PM

          He does have a point. I started to see that a few months after the site went up.

          • MotherOfInvention
            05/22/2010 at 3:39 PM

            Your concern is noted.

    • Bob
      05/22/2010 at 12:32 PM

      I agree. I don’t understand what is the importance of the secondary issue of whether Wone died immediately or whether it took him ten minutes to die from his wounds. The prosecution is not charging the defendants with murder, and so does not have to prove the details of how he died. Even if the housemates are telling the truth that there was a burglar, and even if Wone died immediately after being stabbed by the burglar, there is still the question of where the 4 liters of blood went. If the housemates cleaned up the crime scene, that is tampering with evidence and obstruction of justice. I don’t understand why the timing of the death is that important if the blood was disposed of.

      • MotherOfInvention
        05/22/2010 at 1:41 PM

        If he died instantaneously, it makes the absence of defensive wounds or signs of struggle less damning. If did not die for several minutes, then the absence of of such signs of struggle is pretty forceful evidence of incapacitation, thus further giving the lie to the defendants’ statements.

        • AnnaZed
          05/22/2010 at 2:01 PM

          Bit of a Catch-22 there for the boys though; if one accepts their theory that Robert was incapacitated immediately then one has to also conclude that he could not have cried out or moaned as Joe has described him doing. Ergo, Joe’s representations to the police are demonstrated to be false in these two particulars opening up reasonable suspicion that they are false on others.

          • CDinDC
            05/22/2010 at 6:56 PM

            it was pointed out yesterday that Joe said during his jailhouse statement that Robert moaned.

            • MotherOfInvention
              05/22/2010 at 7:01 PM

              IMHO it would be easier to get away from claiming to have heard a single moan than the total lack of any signs of a struggle. I think the defense needs the instantaneous death more, or, to put it differently, a non-instantaneous death is more damning, than the moan, which they can perhaps attribute to stress/wishful thinking/whatever. Curious to know thers’ thoughts how the trouple’s lawyers will deal with this conundrum.

              • tassojunior
                05/22/2010 at 8:58 PM

                Dying bodies make death gurgles which can sound like moans. On a battlefield of dead bodies there’s usually a lot of moaning sounds coming from bodies in fact recently dead.

                OTOH the longer the victim is alive the more blood is hemmoraged into the body and stomach.

    • tassojunior
      05/22/2010 at 1:36 PM

      Jaffe is a crime reporter not versed on “conspiracy and obstruction”. But that doesn’t avoid the fact that we’ve become a nation of “presumed guilty until proven innocent” largely because of the use of conspiracy and obstruction charges instead of actual crimes. Conspiracy was originally thought up as a way to fight serious organized crime by taking away civil rights but has been expanded, as has obstruction, to almost every type of “crime” now (ie Martha Stewart) even a “conspiracy to obstruct” which is a double extension of vagueness. If you jaywalk with others are you conspiring others to jaywalk and subject to the federal conspiracy laws and many years in prison? If you provide less than totally verifiable 100% accurate information to police are you obstructing? This is how our criminal “justice” system has lately evolved. Together with the unlimited financial resources the feds use and the meager financial resources most people could ever muster in a defense it’s become a monster which is nothing like a free society. The fed’s 90% + conviction rate is not far off from China’s and Korea’s. Is this the way we really want to live?

      Sorry if I offend people posting here but someone needs to temper what sometimes approaches a lynch mob mentality and keep a reasonable perspective. Comments urging posters to talk with Victor and get him to say this or that on here clearly cross the line on urging obstruction of justice and would make many posters conspirators to obstruct. Not that the feds would probably prosecute someone taking their side but do you really have 38 years to spare? If this trial results in not guilty and a damage suit do you really have the money to defend such a suit? Many of the comments posted about the defendants are extremely slanderous and those posting them better hope there’s a guilty verdict.

      Be careful urging for a police state where Americans are presumed guilty through conspiracy and obstruction laws, you may get what you wish for.

      • AnnaZed
        05/22/2010 at 1:47 PM

        Tasso, thank you for your post. You make some very good points.

        One part that I did not quite understand though; in urging Victor to come clean and tell the authorities what he knows how are posters who urge him in this way entering into a conspiracy to obstruct? Please explain.

        • tassojunior
          05/22/2010 at 1:53 PM

          Well that implies that Victor is not “coming clean” now. There is a real possibility that Victor just may be telling the truth now.

          • AnnaZed
            05/22/2010 at 1:55 PM

            Ah, I see your position then.

            Unfortunately, the many demonstrable falsehoods contained in Victor’s 911 call and his answers to the police forbid me from drawing the same conclusion.

            • tassojunior
              05/22/2010 at 2:18 PM

              The extent of Victor’s falsehoods will be determined by the judge and that will be decisive. But on “obstruction” be aware of it’s harm on our freedoms if it’s too broadly interpreted. It also is the reason smart people refuse to say anything to police or prosecutors voluntarily and hence weakens the ability to solve crimes. (“Don’t Talk, You Walk”)

              Are we obligated to provide nothing but 100% verifiable information even in the most extreme situations? If you describe someone as having a black sweatshirt and it turns out they had on a navy blue one do you deserve many years in federal prison for obstruction if the feds are so inclined? Extreme example but legally possible.

              The vast expansion of obstruction and conspiracy charges instead of other traditional criminal charges is too much a danger to our freedoms that so many Americans have fought and died for.

              • AnnaZed
                05/22/2010 at 2:26 PM

                I actually share your dim view of obstruction charges in many, many cases. I just happen to think that this particular case is tailor made for them and I don’t think it hinges on things like misremembered sweatshirt colors.

                • Kate
                  05/22/2010 at 3:30 PM

                  Tassojunior and AnnaZed – very interesting debate.

                  Presented with intelligence and courtesy on both sides.

                  Thank you for that. And please keep posting .. it stimulates thoughtful discussion.

                  I, too, am concerned about the current trend for obstruction of justice charges. Rather reminds me of the 1930s and the spate of income tax evasion charges.

                  In this case, however, I do believe the charges have genuine merit.

      • Eagle
        05/22/2010 at 2:19 PM

        The trouple is not presumed guilty. That is why they are being tried in a court of justice for a crime.
        Looks pretty straight forward to me.

        • tassojunior
          05/22/2010 at 3:02 PM

          People in China are tried in courts. They’re not being tried for a traditional crime (murder) but only “conspiracy to obstruct justice” which carries a much higher sentence but almost none of the normal civil rights protections.

          • Clio
            05/22/2010 at 3:08 PM

            Yes, Red China is the role model for legal proprieties: surely, you are kidding us, Tasso!

            • tassojunior
              05/22/2010 at 4:08 PM

              I meant even China has court trials. That’s not the system of justice I like to see America trending toward and being in a courtroom without normal civil rights as a defendant is not comforting.

              • Carolina
                05/22/2010 at 5:19 PM

                Again, that is a huge chip you have on your shoulder. I realize you have had problems with the police in the past, but saying all government agencies are corrupt is like saying all gay men want to jump their straight friends.

                If you truly believe no one in this country gets a fair trial, there is probably an issue that should be worked out professionally.

                • tassojunior
                  05/22/2010 at 7:45 PM

                  How snide and nasty.

                  • Carolina
                    05/22/2010 at 9:57 PM

                    Perhaps, but you’re not refuting anything, I notice.

  6. María Cardenal
    05/22/2010 at 11:15 AM

    This is really one of the weakest posts by a WMRW editor that I’ve read–tentative, self-conscious, defensive, silly overplayed canary metaphor–as they slip into a he-said/we-said with their stroke buddy Jaffe.

    If the editors would maintain more of a journalistic wait-and-see-the-evidence perspective instead of trying to call the trial as a day-by-day horse race or a tug-of-war while doing public relations cheerleading as conviction advocates, the public would be better served. I understand that’s not necessarily the intent of the editors or the website, but still.

    Report the testimony, BOTH the questions AND the answers, and rely on attorneys (more criminal, less civil) for analysis–not so much who’s winning/who’s losing, but for the strategic import of motions and witnesses. More reporting, fewer attempts at clever turn of phrase, and fewer overwrought musings on ‘justice’ and ‘moral balance’ to the universe. This isn’t student council.

    Oh and P.S.: Goslinoski? There’s a reason she ain’t workin’ on the live ones.

    • Carolina
      05/22/2010 at 11:16 AM

      I think it would be rude of me to tell you to fuck right off, so I won’t.

    • TK
      05/22/2010 at 11:23 AM

      Is your real name Dylan, Joe or…?

    • William
      05/22/2010 at 11:24 AM

      I agree that it was a weak post. I was put off a bit by the certainty that the defendants were all guilty and that the “canary” is on the side of justice. ??? But I also give a lot of credit to these guys for all the work they put in on this site. I want justice for Robert, too. I don’t know the ins and outs of the law on obstruction of justice. Is it true that if the prosecution proves someone tampered with evidence that all three of them have to be guilty? I just think that if the prosecution had something other than moral certainty (and we know where THAT gets us!) that all three of them are guilty, this would be a murder trial rather than an exercise in getting someone to crack and rat on his codefendants.

      • Bea
        05/22/2010 at 11:39 AM

        Uh, the reason Goslinoski “ain’t workin’ on the live ones” is that her chosen specialty is as a forensic pathologist who does autopsies for a living. Better, to me, than being a professional witness who prostitutes one’s opinion to the highest bidder.

        • KKinCA
          05/22/2010 at 2:49 PM

          Bea – Well said!

          • Former Sex Offense Prosecutor
            05/24/2010 at 3:54 AM

            Bea, Your comments are on the money as always. In the biz we call professional expert witnesses for the defense “whores”. From the descriptions of the testimony of Assistant ME Goslinoski upon direct as well as cross, the testimony elicted from Dr Goslinoski displayed a remarkable confidence and poise. As to her failing to pass board certification, I have dealt with Assistant MEs with fabulous paper credentials, many research papers published,etc who were unable to defend or explain their findings as to cause of death as well as manner of death in court. They would crumple like a wet tissue upon cross examination. Attempts at soliciting a cohesive narrative on direct was a process akin to pulling teeth.

            This is not a field that pays well, testifying as the defense expert is far more lucrative. ME positions typically attract applicants who are interested in the job for reasons other than money, such as a sincere desire to establish whether or not a homicide has taken place. Many of them feel that is important work, no matter how poor the compensation may be.

            The current Chief Medical Examiner of Maryland, David Fowler, who is expected to testify in this case, is not just board certified, he is double board certified, in Anatomic Pathology as well as Forensic Pathology. It seems fairly obvious that David Fowler is being brought in to overcome the potential weakness displayed in Assistant ME Goslinoski unfortunate inability to date to pass a board credential exam on 2 separate ocassions. In addition, her experience as a Deputy ME should pale compared to that of a long time Chief Medical Examiner.

            If Maryland’s current Chief ME is as good as his predecessor, John Smialek, you are in for a real treat. He will school the defense, not the other way around. Remember, he is doubly board certified in both Anatomic Pathology as well as Forensic Anatomy. Attacks upon his knowledge, credentials and experience will quite diffult. He has the goods. Fashion your seat belts when he is on the stand.

            To demonstrate how dedicated MEs are to their chosen profession, Maryland’s Former Chief Medical Examiner, John Smialek, age 57, died of an apparent heart attack while at work in his office. It was not just a day job to him, it was his passion. He started there as Chief Medical Examiner in 1986, 24 years prior to his death.

            The late Chief Medical Examiner of Maryland was not just a nationally recognized authority in forensic patholgy,
            he was also highly cognizant of his dual role that required him to not only establish cause and manner of death, but to also serve as an effective advocate of his findings in the courtroom. It is difficult to imagine that his immediate successor, his own former Deputy Chief, would be appointed unless he also shared John Smialek’s view regarding the necessity of The Chief Medical Examiner to combine an impressive CV along with a confident, at times forceful courtroom demeanor. Expect Maryland’s current Chief ME to knock this one out of the park.

            • Themis
              05/24/2010 at 12:45 PM

              To say that ME’s don’t “whore” because they are in the service of the state is flat wrong as a generalization. ME’s are supposed to be disinterested and dispassionate. When they take on the role of an advocate, which some of them do, they are doing a disservice to their profession. They are not law enforcement officers.

              Moreover, many have lucrative jobs on the side. One state ME that I had to deal with on my cases charged $400 per hour to consult with me as defense counsel on a capital murder case where the client was indigent. The state was paying me $95 per hour as defense attorney. I would be willing to bet that the ME from Maryland is not going to testify pro bono for the state.

              Nor does the fact that defense attorneys have to pay their witnesses make them “whores.” In indigigent cases, forensic specialists often receive less per hour for consulting and testifying than they would receive for doing the same work in their practice or a clinical setting.

              Defendants should be able to put up their own experts without having them maligned automatically. They should not be forced to rely on the objectivity of someone on the state payroll. Fred Zain, Joyce Gilchrist, Michael West, and Charles Harlan come to mind off the top of my head. Not to mention the cop with the mail order Ph.D. in the West Membphis Three case who testified about metal music and “the occult.” That’s just for starters. To paraphrase LeAnne Womack, there’s more where that came from.

              • Former Criminal Sex Offense Prosecutor
                05/25/2010 at 4:18 AM

                Themis-we will have to agree to disagree. Your hourly pay as a defense attorney amounted to only 95 dollars an hour. As Deputy State’s Attorney in a rural county, my highest ever yearly salary was close to less than half, $52 dollars an hour.

                So quit your belly aching.I have no idea what compensation, if any, Maryland’s Chief Medical Examiner, David Fowler is charging or if he is appearing without a fee. I expect the defense will ask him that exact question. Don’t just “assume” you know he is not providing expert witness testimony for BTW NOT the State, but for the District of Columbia.

                Ever hear this saying,”Assume” always make an ass out of you & me. In this case, just you because I am not assuming anything about his compensation, if any. I am going to withhold judgement until after he is asked that question.

                I did not write that I thought the purpose of the Medical Examiner is be advocates of the police. What I did write was that they charged with responsibilty of performing independent autospies to establish cause and manner of death as well as the ability to defend their independent findings effectively in a court of law.

                I have had distinguished ME’s from outside my jurisdiction offer to not only review the findings of the Defense Expert Witness for free, but also offer to testify against said whore without compensation.

                You have made it clear that in your experience, Defense Expert Witnesses always expect to paid at a rate you find to be too high. Doesn’t your observation about the pay buttress my statement as to why they are referred to as whores? ‘Cause you are agreeing that they are doing it for the money.

                Why do outside MEs agree to do battle for free against an Expert Defense Professional witness? My experience was that their attitude was based on dislike of seeing the same small group of people over and over again who make the National Rounds as Expert Witnesses For The Defense, resulting in a familiarity with their method of attack, as well as an awareness of noticeable holes in their CVs.

                Ever considered that the rates you were charged reflected the “hold your nose” factor? These experts seem to charge higher rates in cases where they have to hold their noses a lot in producing what the defense wants.

                Ever contacted a potential Professional Expert Witness For The Defense and have them turn you down because case review made them come to the conclusion that they agreed with the ME as to findings of cause and manner of death? Just curious how often that happens.

    • plumskiter
      05/22/2010 at 11:42 AM

      to maria cardenal: i, for one, appreciate the cleverness of the Eds. i do, however, agree with you that the evidence in a trial must be, and will be, evaluated in its entirety and that we cannot know who should prevail until all the evidence is in. but that does not prevent us from discussing each day’s developments and their meanings. i too wish we had a verbatim, q&a account of each trial day but we cannot afford daily copy and are limited by the amount of time people can voluntarily give, gratis, to covering and reporting on the trial. maria, you make several very good points and, as a criminal trial lawyer, i thank you.

    • Craig
      05/22/2010 at 12:09 PM

      Maria: If you think this is “really one of the weakest posts by a WMRW editor,” then you haven’t read many of mine. 🙂

      I guess that instead of covering the day-to-day horse race, the alternative would be going dark during the trial. Not an option.

      And in the interest of full and fair disclosure, can you please explain the 10 screen names associated with your ISP? One to a customer, please, and no games.

      Ana Falbeto, Damala Leche, To Fair and Balanced Reporting, Vellvette Rhopes, Pepa,Vontavius Dewberry, PW Herman, Jackie Ripperton, Owin’ Marshall, Bill M. Quick, AScalia

      • Deb
        05/22/2010 at 12:40 PM

        Ha! Amen.

      • MotherOfInvention
        05/22/2010 at 12:50 PM

        10 screen names?


      • cinnamon
        05/22/2010 at 12:52 PM

        Hmmm…that explains it. I thought there were an awful lot of people saying “ain’t” all of the sudden.

    • HKG
      05/22/2010 at 12:15 PM

      I’m not sure if you you’ve commented and contributed to this site before, but if not, your criticism seems overly harsh regardless. These guys have given over two years of their lives to keep the rest of us informed on what is going on here. You do that and try to write every day and make it interesting, and one might be a tad more sympathetic to your view. I’d personally try to be a little thankful first, rather than judgemental.

      In addition, I think it is very useful to hear the editors’ opinions and emotional reactions. After spending so much time with the material, I want to know what their reactions, opinions and rationales are. The latter which are not often seen by detractors of this site.

    • AnnaZed
      05/22/2010 at 1:52 PM

      I wonder what the real María Cardenal (a feisty and funny actress) would make of these posts appropriating her name.

      • Clio
        05/22/2010 at 2:13 PM

        She, like Ben Franklin, would be appalled!

        • MotherOfInvention
          05/22/2010 at 7:05 PM

          Patti once said, by way of benediction, “In art and dream may you proceed with abandon, in life may you proceed with balance and stealth.” The trouple didn’t get that distinction quite right.

          • MotherOfInvention
            05/22/2010 at 7:31 PM

            Ooops that was supposed to be in reply to someone’s comment above saying Patti Smith would not appreciate Bea’s use of the Horses photo.

            • Bea
              05/23/2010 at 4:42 AM

              I missed the comment about Patti not liking me use the album cover shot. If Patti asks me to stop, I will do so right away. I’ve seen her diatribes in concert – I would not want to be on her bad side.

              Late to the party on so many things, what with the Sock Puppet Postings.

              After an arduous travel day, and reading today’s posts in one sitting, then looking back at transcripts – the oddity of the blatant lies the trio told the police that night. Joe blathered on and on about the things that were ‘safe’ – emails with Robert and his history with Robert. But he clearly lies about the 11:43 time, and when pressed, digs deeper that he did NOT hear the time until the three were downstairs talking (interesting that he pointed out that they could not have concocted a story – who would say that?). He says that he couldn’t have known what the dispatcher said, claims not to have prompted the question (though Victor clearly says that Joe wanted the time). We hear Joe asking in the tape. We hear Victor repeat the time to Joe. Nope, Joe says to the cops later that night/morning – it did not happen.

              Joe is smart, but none of us are at our mental best when substances have been used. I’d put money on the three of them having some timeline discussed beforehand and to work backwards with the 10:30 arrival and 11:00 bedtime figured in.

              The other dead-to-nuts lie is that Dylan noticed the back door being unlocked when they were on the sofa (Dylan says it’s as he’s descending the stairs). They all make a deal out of this. Yet the reports of the ‘extended version’ of the 911 have Victor telling EMT/cops that the back door was left unlocked. That one was done in advance: who will say they noticed the door was unlocked? Let’s give that one to Dylan. He doesn’t have as many lines as the rest of us?

              The knife issue isn’t a dead-to-nuts lie like the two above – not literally anyway. It is “possible” that Victor, upon seeing Robert’s body and commencing his “hysterical” screaming, may have seen a knife and, less certain given the distance and the entire mental snapshot, MIGHT have seen it as “one of our knives” (Joe describes it as ongoing scream fest that he has to shake Victor from and to get him to pull himself together, orders him to use the phone upstairs). BUT Victor doesn’t really get the whole story down pat – doesn’t correct the dispatcher when she says ‘they left with your knife’ which could be construed as ‘just not important enough in the scheme of things’ as with not correcting her about his gender.

              More telling is the context: we think they had one of our knives. WE do? The statement Victor makes, like most of his ‘report’ to the dispatcher, clearly indicates considerable discussion, namely that there was “an intruder” and that he/they “must have broken in” and killed Robert. He doesn’t know any other identifying features of that intruder, but he’s sure it’s an intruder with ‘one of our knives.’

              Since Joe tells the cops that there is no way they had time to concoct a story, and says that they spoke to each other to say ‘what the hell happened’ only when they were downstairs as a unit, this reveals an indirect lie as we’ve discussed before.

              Joe appears to get tripped up a bit in the transcript – the VIDEO will be very helpful – when the cop stops him when he says that it’s odd that the intruder scaled OVER the fence again as he was leaving, odd that he didn’t go through the gate. The cop asks how do you know this, and Joe says, well, he could see that the gate door wasn’t open. Yet it’s not the kind of door that automatically shuts, Joe says. So Joe assumes that the intruder went through the back door because it’s unlocked yet he doesn’t assume the intruder went through the back gate because – it’s not open? That’s nonsensical. No fool is going to scale the fence a second time when all he has to do is use the door handle.

              Why is it important that the intruder NOT use the door handle? Prints, perhaps, that aren’t there. You’d think the gloved mastermind would have kept the glove on, unless it’s now covered in blood, but I think the reason is that Joe has a mental freak-out when it hits him that the gate door will have no smears and just the prints of the last trouple to leave. Or it’s just a mini-whoops that he decides is best to account for by suggesting the scale back over route.

              It’s really late – you clear minded folks can tell me why would Joe make the assumption? Here’s mine: he never thought that one through and it’s purely instinct that if the fake intruder had to come over the fence then he had to leave the same way. If it HAD been an intruder, no one in their right mind would think the intruder scaled back over the fence.

              • MotherOfInvention
                05/23/2010 at 4:55 AM

                So would that mean that the “intruder” closed the gate behind him? That would seem a little surprising, so maybe that was what prompted Joe to forego the gate for the exit of the intruder?

                • Bea
                  05/23/2010 at 12:36 PM

                  Hey Mother (and thanks, below), I understand that it would be odd for the intruder to shut the gate door – but what kind of dumb ass intruder wanting to get the hell out of dodge would climb a 9 foot gate to go over? I’d likely use the door (maybe even the front door but perhaps my getaway magic carpet is parked in the alley). Maybe the intruder is a show-off what with the feats of strength to go back over the tall gate rather than use the door or maybe he’s a moron who thinks if you came in that way, you have to go out that way. Odd that the top of the gate was still covered with “undisturbed” dirt, of course.

                  • des
                    05/23/2010 at 1:57 PM

                    bea, don’t be so silly. the intruder had on magical shoes that make no sound when running down wood stairs and that can make you leap over 9 foot fences in a single bound. no need to mess up the “undisturbed dirt” on top. sheesh….

                    • Bea
                      05/23/2010 at 2:16 PM

                      My bad, des. Or do you think the magic carpet is a ‘smart’ magic carpet that picked up the intruder at the back door thus no need to scale the fence? Magic carpet technology has come a long way since I was living in DC in the late 1980s.

                    • tassojunior
                      05/23/2010 at 2:46 PM

                      See my post above. I just walked back there and this physical stuff is totally wrong.

                  • tassojunior
                    05/23/2010 at 2:54 PM

                    The tall back gate is a roll-up ladder-rung gate.

                    • Nelly
                      05/23/2010 at 3:54 PM

                      Which did not exist in 8/2006. It was installed some time after the murder.

                    • tassojunior
                      05/23/2010 at 4:32 PM

                      If the rear roll up wasn’t there then it was open to the alley past the six foot flimsy black gate and the seven foot (at most) unpainted pressure treated fence with two foot high brick planters under it. That’s much less safe than even the way it is now.

                      The total omission of the 2nd floor deck with it’s door to the 2nd floor and the adjoining roof decks concerns me. Why have we been kept in the dark about these?

                      Personally I’m alarmed I now have to be concerned with dust on my unpainted pressure treated wood decks and fences. My eyesight is pretty good and I’ve noticed bird droppings and leaf stains which I clean and I pressure wash as much city grime off as possible but never seen dust. Visable dust on old pressure treated bare wood? Really?

                    • Bill Orange
                      05/23/2010 at 5:47 PM

                      I tend to agree with you when it comes to the grime on the top of the fence. The fact that it wasn’t disturbed doesn’t tell me much–it could’ve been baked on there pretty good. On the other hand, if the police photographed it, and then they sent someone over the fence to see what would happen to it, I might be more convinced that it shows that someone was unlikely to have jumped the fence that night. I’ve been surprised at how good the prosecution was last week, so that’s not out of the realm of possibility.

                      I have a question for you: You obviously live in the area of the house. Did you know the defendants? If so, what was your opinion of them?

                    • tassojunior
                      05/23/2010 at 6:09 PM

                      I’m a pretty well known fixture in these parts and live about a block down but don’t think I ever met them. I do know most of the neighbors extremely well. Most were a little resentful in a “gays & yuppies moving in” sort of way that probably has as much to do with jealously or length-of-residence entitlement than anything. I’ve had to deal with it a long time and can understand it and hopefully keep my own tendencies that way at bay. In fact the truth is that gays in the area are the type who bend over backward to fit in almost to the fault of self-hate. I think gay neighbors in fact do not under any circumstance want to believe they’re targets while the straight ones know it’s fact. It’s almost like a Stockholm Syndrome of trying to get on the side of those who in fact have it in for you.

                    • tassojunior
                      05/23/2010 at 6:12 PM

                      That last comment was a response to Bill Orange’s comment above. I wouldn’t have volunteered that. The treading isn’t working.

                    • Bill Orange
                      05/23/2010 at 6:26 PM

                      What’s the opinion of the rest of the neighborhood?

                    • tassojunior
                      05/23/2010 at 7:16 PM

                      Bill Orange:

                      Guppies, Yuppies and elderly whites and AA’s is about all we have.

                      Generally I try to keep my nose within a couple blocks of my home and intentionally keep away from issues outside that area so I don’t know about the rest of the neighborhood. We’re pretty chill and familial here so it’s unimaginable there would be a Gacy or Daimer type here and that’s the way it starts sounding. We live tight together with open windows and doors like a village. Few talk about it because it’s disturbing, not that it could have happened but it could have evn been imagined.

                    • Bill Orange
                      05/23/2010 at 7:49 PM


                      I don’t think this is a Gacy/Dahmer-type situation. I think this was most likely a simple crime of passion.

                    • tassojunior
                      05/23/2010 at 8:21 PM

                      KK & Bill- The two roof decks are obviously older. They were there a long time more than 4 years. The staircases in all the houses here are the same : they go up from inside the front door to the rear of the second and if there’s a second set they run parallel to the first so the stairs would open on floor 3 toward the rear. The deck in back of floor 3 has to have not just the windows but a door to floor three (Ward’s room) or it would be useless. (There would also probably be a spiral staircase up to the roof deck around there).The staircase from floors 3 to 2 would go down to in front of the door to the guest room.

                      Rooftop break-ins have been incredibly common here. Personally I see the see-through back gate, the lack of the roll up door then meaning straight access from alley unlike most houses, and the kitchen knife as pointing away from roof entry but it’s a glaring possibility from the roof decks too. Trapped intruders are especially vicious. Went a murder’s committed valuables aren’t as important as exit. Valuables in unlocked or easily opened houses are a dime a dozen around here.

                    • KKinCA
                      05/23/2010 at 8:27 PM

                      Thanks tasso, especially for the info re: the stairs. The drawings were obviously unclear in that regard. Your idea of a roof top break-in is interesting. But it still begs the question as to why Joe, Victor and Dylan would assume that the intruder came in the back patio door. In any event, I think it’s interesting to hear from someone familiar with both the structural details and the culture of that neighborhood. I appreciate your unique knowledge and thinking, so thank you.

                    • James
                      05/23/2010 at 8:36 PM

                      Because they heard the “chime”…the chime indicates someone used a door.

                    • tassojunior
                      05/23/2010 at 9:00 PM

                      My theory is that like eliminating the front door being unlocked or the victim having company, the defendants also by statement eliminated the decks as entries and I don’t see guilty persons doing this, especially with the spate of rooftop intruders at the time. Seemingly eliminating the more believable and notorious possibilities they chose the rear door which is less believable until you actually see the see-through rear gate and realize the roll-up gate wasn’t there then.

                    • James
                      05/23/2010 at 10:47 PM

                      But wouldnt this mean they lied about hearing the chime?

                    • Bill Orange
                      05/23/2010 at 10:54 PM

                      It’s possible the chime also goes off when the window opens…

                    • CDinDC
                      05/23/2010 at 9:00 PM

                      Back in 2008-2009 there was a series of rooftop breakins. Typically gaining access through skylights or rooftop trap doors. These breakins were burglaries as well. The defendants home was not burglarized even though there were valuables inches away from Robert Wone’s body.

                      As a on again, off again resident of Dupont Circle, I can tell you car breakins and muggings are more frequent than rooftop burglaries.

                      Here’s an article about it.


                    • tassojunior
                      05/23/2010 at 9:21 PM

                      But car break ins often happen every few minutes. The story mentions 8 rooftop intrusions in one week around Swann Street but there were dozens over years between 14th and 18th. One of the intruders was arrested recently. Trapped intruders can be vicious and there was widespread rooftop panic here for a while. A contocted story would have IMHO taken advantage of this panic.

                    • AnnaZed
                      05/23/2010 at 9:29 PM

                      You seem to be saying that they should have told a different lie from the one that they told, or that if they were lying they would have said something different ~ um, that’s interesting.

                    • AnnaZed
                      05/23/2010 at 10:04 PM

                      Here’s a picture of the back gate (pretty much like you are seeing it now I would imagine) with the separate roll-up gate some distance away from the wooden gate making an enclosure for the car (a detail that you failed to mention earlier):


                      That was all open back then, and Joe opined that the “intruder” must have climbed on his car to scale the fence. So, Joe believed that a person could not scale that fence (flimsy or not) without climbing on something. That is the way it looks to me as well.

                      No evidence of anyone having climbed on the car or moved and climbed on the rubbish bins was found by investigators at the time of Robert’s murder.

                      BTW, something appears to be wrong with the reply function on the site. I was replying to Tasso above, and am now again.

                    • tassojunior
                      05/23/2010 at 11:22 PM

                      It was here I was repeatedly told the roll up gate was new. It does look new. And it seems like I remember it not being there too long ago too. But it’s also clear in the photo that the black gate has spaces and is see-through to the back door.

                    • CDinDC
                      05/23/2010 at 10:05 PM

                      That’s an exaggeration.


                    • plumskiter
                      05/23/2010 at 8:29 PM

                      ward’s room was on floor two. joe and victor slept on floor three.

                    • tassojunior
                      05/23/2010 at 9:10 PM

                      Sorry I confused 2 and 3 above. The deck is outside Ward’s room on floor 2. A spiral staircase would have to go from floor 3 to the roof deck. The staircase from floor 3 to 2 would land in front of the guest room door.

                    • AnnaZed
                      05/23/2010 at 9:51 PM

                      Tasso here is a diagram that show the egress from the 3rd floor roof deck:

                      The second floor pictures and the diagram don’t show a deck on the second floor at all and the photo (I think) shows the back alley and fence tops outside of Dylan’s window. This seems to be a fairly recent photo because I (think) can see the top of the roll-top gate outside the window and that wasn’t there when Robert was murdered.

                      You were just there can you clarify for me at all. Is it hard to tell which deck is attached to which floor (as I imagine it might be) from your vantage point when you were in the alley? Thanks for all of your efforts and time.

                    • tassojunior
                      05/23/2010 at 10:44 PM

                      I checked the diagram and photos and the smaller deck may be behind the master suite but there is clearly an upper deck above the master suite too and both look old. Access to the upper deck is not shown. It probably appears outside the 2nd floor because usually around here “basement” apartments are mostly above ground. In the rear this one appears, according to the diagram, totally below ground in back. Kitchen additions when they were added in the 80’s (1880’s) were sometimes one story and sometimes two stories. I guess this was 2 story.

                      The alley is public and a photo of the back would certainly help people understand the double decks and see-through gate etc. Call me stubborn but I tend to just go look instead of trusting diagrams or descriptions.

                    • AnnaZed
                      05/23/2010 at 10:57 PM

                      “I checked the diagram and photos and the smaller deck may be behind the master suite but there is clearly an upper deck above the master suite too and both look old. Access to the upper deck is not shown.”

                      Maybe there is a deck now, but when the WaPo article was made there was just a roof.

                    • CDinDC
                      05/23/2010 at 10:48 PM

                      Here’s the WaPo graphic showing no deck outside Ward’s room on floor 2.


                    • AnnaZed
                      05/23/2010 at 9:04 PM

                      Dylan’s room and the guest room where Robert was killed are both on the second floor (floor 2).

                    • KKinCA
                      05/23/2010 at 8:19 PM

                      @ tasso – I can’t find your post re: the decks and logistical issues re: your 3rd floor deck entry scenario with the intruder silently passing the sleeping Joe and Victor and then navigating the stairs, going down to the kitchen to get the knife, back up the stairs, etc. Sorry, but it is difficult to navigate all these threads. Off to watch the Laker game! But I’ll be back (can’t resist!).

                    • Bea
                      05/23/2010 at 5:48 PM

                      Tasso, no need to worry about your fence unless you plan to concoct a story about an intruder going over them. FYI, don’t know what “in the dark” you’re talking about. Not hard to figure out – and do you think the prosecution is supposed to spend the first week of trial pointing out the things which really bug you? I’m sure the defense will do what they can with adjoining decks and roofs if there’s any merit there whatsoever. Perhaps you should talk with them to make sure they’re catching everything you’ve caught.

                    • tassojunior
                      05/23/2010 at 7:34 PM

                      Bea, I’m sure they know they had two roof decks, a see-through back gate, and an old pressure treated wood plank fence and don’t need my help. I wonder if police or FBI ever noticed it or wanted to.

                    • KKinCA
                      05/23/2010 at 7:40 PM

                      I have been looking for you, tasso. Please see above posts from Bill Orange and me. I don’t know if there were two roof decks in August, 2006. But assuming that is true (and the Washington Post drawing is inaccurate), I would very much appreciate it if you would please address the questions in our above posts at 6:57 (Bill Orange) and 6:55 (mine), which are in the thread following the link to the drawing of Joe’s house. Thanks very much.

              • MotherOfInvention
                05/23/2010 at 4:56 AM

                And, Bea, great analysis. Henry James enjoined writers to “Be one upon whom nothing is lost!” He would have been happy with you!

                • Clio
                  05/23/2010 at 11:07 AM

                  Brilliant, Bea: both Patti and Henry are pleased with this analysis! The most damning for these charges: “we” think that “they” had one of “our” knives. Is that the imperial “we”, or is that the conspiratorial “we”? Oui, oui!

              • whodoneit
                05/23/2010 at 10:18 AM

                I have seen little discussion here on why the intruder didn’t leave any trail of blood behind as he left. At a minimum he/she would have gotten blood on his/her hands or gloves. Yet neither blood on door handles or fences nor bloody gloves were found. The intruder also would have carried two knives – one he/she brought in and used for the murder and escaped with and the other the one he/she grabbed from the kitchen and wiped blood on when he was finished before disappearing into the night.

              • BadShoes
                05/23/2010 at 11:50 AM

                “we think they had one of our knives”

                great catch.

              • Bob
                05/23/2010 at 4:05 PM

                The intruder was apparently a ninja hired by the Chinese government to assassinate Robert, not an ordinary burglar.

              • tassojunior
                05/23/2010 at 5:50 PM

                The rear black gate has a deadbolt lock. I’d assume it’s a double-keyed deadbolt which takes a key to open from either side.

                • Bea
                  05/23/2010 at 5:52 PM

                  Not according to Joe who said that the intruder could have gone through it and can’t figure out why he didn’t. In the transcript.

                  • Bea
                    05/23/2010 at 5:52 PM

                    Whoops – that was meant for Tasso’s comment that he’s sure there’s a double key deadbolt on back gate. Wrong.

                • AnnaZed
                  05/23/2010 at 6:04 PM

                  In spite of Joe’s contention that the intruder could have just gone out the gate I think that you are right that the gate had at that time what is called a “deadbolt” that would require a key from either side to open it. I think it’s in the police report somewhere.

    • Eagle
      05/22/2010 at 2:20 PM

      Well, then you can start a competitive blog.
      Let us know the site.

      • CDinDC
        05/22/2010 at 7:19 PM

        That would be fun.

      • Clio
        05/22/2010 at 7:21 PM

        Yes, such a blog could feature massage tips from Dyl, marketing suggestions from Victor, and legal advice from Culuket.

        Aunt Marcia’s Corner could be a regular column giving updates about the social lives of her boys, while play-by-play analysis could be given by a triumvirate of the former Lisa Goddard, Jule Gardner Banville, and one of the female administrators of the trouple’s Defense Fund. It could be dedicated to a search for “the real killers.”

        And, it won’t probably materialize because even the most die-hard trouple supporters think that the defendants may have done something wrong that night. Ya think?

        • Bill Orange
          05/22/2010 at 7:39 PM

          Again, I feel the need to address the comment about Lisa Goddard. She’s a good person, and there’s NO indication that she had anything to do with this. Friends of hers called her and asked if she could pick them up from the police station, and she did. And she’s maintained a good relationship with those friends, even while other mutual friends have come to the conclusion that they’re guilty and have walked away from them. At worst, I think that she’s naive for standing by her friends when the evidence suggests that they were involved in the killing of another one of her friends. For all we know, she’s working behind the scenes to convince one of them to come forward and tell the truth. The spite that you have against her is totally unwarranted.

          • AnnaZed
            05/22/2010 at 7:43 PM

            I would agree with this Bill O. I think that both she and Sarah M. do get treated shabbily here sometimes.

            • Clio
              05/22/2010 at 9:23 PM

              Well, let’s hope that both Lisa and Sarah are working behind the scenes (in tandem or alone) to persuade the “real killers” to come forward, but I for one am not holding my proverbial breath.

              Naivete goes only so far.

              • Bill Orange
                05/22/2010 at 9:42 PM

                Sarah Morgan moved out the next day, didn’t she? I can’t imagine a more decisive move than that.

                • Clio
                  05/22/2010 at 10:07 PM

                  True. But why did she clear out immediately? Disgust at what had happened, fear for her own safety, or fear of being implicated in some way? I trust that her upcoming testimony will help to answer those questions.

                  • Eagle
                    05/22/2010 at 10:57 PM

                    I do not know Sara’s reason for moving out immediately after the crime.
                    However the house became a crime scene, subject to search warrants. I doubt if anyone could live there some time.

                    • tassojunior
                      05/23/2010 at 12:05 AM

                      The FBI took over the house and pretty much ripped it apart for a long time.

            • Eagle
              05/22/2010 at 11:00 PM

              Yes, and the treatment of both women is not justified from the facts.

              • AnnaZed
                05/23/2010 at 12:10 PM

                Yes, I have not liked the way either of these women have been characterized here sometimes. I have been, for some reason, particularly annoyed by the continued jokes and ugly references to Sarah M.’s weight, which I think are uncalled-for.

                Still, both are attached to these events whether they like it or not. It is not unreasonable for people speculating about this crime to wonder about collusion on the part of tangential parties. Michael P. has certainly been openly speculated about, not least by me. Now, his history of drug abuse and petty crime makes him a softer target (call it an occupational hazard) but still.

                • New Alias
                  05/23/2010 at 5:43 PM

                  I agree 100%. Comments about Sarah Morgan’s personal life and appearance are completely uncalled for. Speculation that has a basis in fact about her behavior as it relates to this case is fine, but the ‘fag hag’ meme is homophobic (no matter who tosses it around), sexist and cruel.

    • sigmund freud
      05/22/2010 at 5:52 PM

      Maria: How do you solve a problem like Maria, I mean Joe P.

    • BenFranklin
      05/23/2010 at 11:01 AM

      The case crumbled with Goslinoski. To read the desperate pandering that suggests otherwise reveals the bias of this blog.

      It may be over before the end of the week.

      • Clio
        05/23/2010 at 12:13 PM

        “Desperate pandering”? To whom, Ben?

        I agree with you on one thing: the screenings of the videos may seal the fates of the defendants this week. We are all ready for those close-ups, Mr. Kirschner!

  7. Bill Orange
    05/22/2010 at 11:24 AM

    I think Jaffe got spun–well–by the defense team. They obviously didn’t cooperate with him much, if at all, for his original article. I would guess that they thought that he was just going to publish a rehash of things that were already known. I’m guessing they were caught off guard when Jaffe reported that a close friend of both Price and Wone–Tara Ragone–had believed Price to be innocent for years, but then changed her mind when she saw parts of the prosecution’s case. It’s a pretty devastating PR blow when one of your own friends goes on the record and says you’re guilty.

    There’s also another possibility here. Jaffe is a skilled crime reporter and probably has a lot of experience in getting both victims and perpetrators of various crimes to open up to him. His blog post may just be a “source greaser” that he’s using to try to gain more access to the defense team. Given how over-the-top it is, I think this is a distinct possibility.

    • dcbill
      05/22/2010 at 11:51 AM

      I wonder if Jaffe has ever covered a bench trial before. I feel quite certain that the judge in this case can weigh the evidence without being swayed too much by defense bluster. Actually, there is very little doubt in my mind that, when she sees the totality of the evidence being presented here, she will rule guilty, guilty, guilty.

      • NYer
        05/22/2010 at 12:29 PM

        I agree dcbill- and as someone pointed out, Jaffe is supposed to be “nationally recognized” -but his piece either is confoundingly short-sighted, or he’s deliberately trying to sensationalize the events of the trial day and write something controversial.

    • AnnaZed
      05/22/2010 at 1:06 PM

      I think Jaffe is a heck of a writer, really good. I think he’s playing a longer hand then might be immediately clear from this one piece.

    • Eagle
      05/22/2010 at 2:03 PM

      I agree that Jaffe may have been spun by the defense team.
      The Washingtonian itself took the position that the Wone killer may have committed the perfect crime?
      The May cover teaser has the title “Did Robert Wone’s Killer Commit THE PERFECT CRIME?”
      I was not surprised that Jaffe went the way he did.
      We will see where he goes before it is over.

  8. cjh78
    05/22/2010 at 12:04 PM

    This is not a plug on any kind, but I thought some readers of this site might be interested in the following:

    Scott Higham and Sari Horwitz, authors of Finding Chandra, will be appearing today at Politics and Prose at 3:30 pm. I am not sure if they will be discussing that case or just signing books. Yet another DC murder that I’ve been fixated on.

    • tassojunior
      05/22/2010 at 12:59 PM

      A very important companion case as it’s in the same neighborhood, the same prosecutor’s office and same murder squad. In that case, like this, the police and prosecutors immediately jumped to a conclusion and refused against all common sense and evidence to back down or even consider the possibility of another killer or look for one.

      • cjh78
        05/22/2010 at 1:33 PM

        I agree that the case is similar in that investigators made some major flaws. Other than that, the two cases are quite dissimilar.

        • Clio
          05/22/2010 at 2:20 PM

          Tasso, your use of false analogies is quite amusing. Is anyone ever guilty of anything in your Panglossian world?

          • tassojunior
            05/22/2010 at 3:21 PM

            Same neighborhood, same police dept., same prosecutor, same sex-tinged murder, same publicity, and unfortunately same jump to conclusion immediately and refusal to consider alternatives. False analogy?

            I’m certainly not naive or optimistic having had a lover murdered here and having had to deal with too many unsolved murders of gays and single women in the same neighborhood.

            • Carolina
              05/22/2010 at 5:28 PM

              Publicity? You must be watching and reading different news than I.

            • cjh78
              05/22/2010 at 6:41 PM

              I disagree with your comparison of the two cases.

              Sorry to hear that your lover was murdered, but it doesn’t mean your dick is bigger than mine or anyone’s on this site.

              I don’t have a problem with bringing a different view to the table; it’s the vitriolic nature of your comments that turn many off here.

              • tassojunior
                05/22/2010 at 8:49 PM

                Excuse me but I’m extremely civil and reasonable, which you obviously wouldn’t understand.

                You on the other hand seem extremely vile. Size of Dick ?????

                • Carolina
                  05/22/2010 at 10:01 PM

                  Again, try to SAY something. You don’t. You repeat ad nauseum the same tired saws, but won’t reply to any point that is raised.

                  • tassojunior
                    05/23/2010 at 12:06 AM

                    And the point is the size of my dick?

                    • Clio
                      05/23/2010 at 12:04 PM

                      Touche, Tasso. Emily Post, however, would not approve of this ribaldry in any correspondence, I am afraid.

      • Lee
        05/22/2010 at 4:36 PM

        Our boys in the trouple killed Chandra? Say it ain’t so, Tasso. (n.b., the use of the word “ain’t” is an allusion to the Black Sox scandal and not evidence that I’m Harry, Gaga, Mike, Ernie, or whoever.)

        • AnnaZed
          05/22/2010 at 5:15 PM

          Oh no! (see my post above Lee) har!

        • Carolina
          05/22/2010 at 5:29 PM

          Nor Ms. Palin! And what a relief that is.

  9. Angela Channing
    05/22/2010 at 12:12 PM

    Pardon my ignorance as I have been only following this trial at a high level. However, there are some things that are very troubling about Ward, Price and Zaborsky.

    Presumably, Mr. Wone arrived at the house at 10:30pm and was reported dead at 11:49pm. That gives very little time for incapacitating the victim, the sexual assault and for the murder and clean up to actually take place. What kind of monster (probably on drugs) takes that opportunity to do that to a close friend in the first place in such a small window of time? To me, either the sexual assault was premeditated because they knew in advance of his arrival or it was done spur of the moment.

    Wouldn’t a more rational person ask if one was interested in a sex game, and after hearing no, offer an awkward apology? There is no way in the world that Mr. Wone consented to any of the sexual acts perpetrated on him.

    Then, they stage a convoluted cover-up that is a cross between CSI and Murder, She Wrote? Okay, so Dylan is stoned when the cops are there and that leaves Price and Zaborsky to plan the cover up, which runs a high risk of being discovered by authorities?

    If they were so cunning, why not dispose of the body and his belongings and claim he left their house the next morning and was never heard from again? I don’t mean to be too speculative, but they could have dumped the body into a nearby river, the bay, or the ocean for that matter. Do they really think people are stupid enough to believe the intruder story in light of the sexual assault evidence?

    To me, they truly believe that if they obstruct together, they are making a strategy for reasonable doubt. These are disturbed individuals to think they could fool the authorities in this way.

    Poor Mrs. Wone, to lose her beloved husband at the hands of a supposedly good friend must be devastating beyond belief.

    Sorry for ranting and thank you for listening.

    • HKG
      05/22/2010 at 12:21 PM

      I think they couldn’t do that after one of them (presumedly Victor) screamed so loud that the neighbors heard him.

      • Angela Channing
        05/22/2010 at 12:36 PM

        That is very likely, which makes me wonder if Victor was the least involved, why he did not roll during the investigation. If Mr. Jaffe’s analysis is correct, this might be the only opportunity for any form of justice. Sorry for my long rant.

        • AnnaZed
          05/22/2010 at 1:12 PM

          Many people on this site think that Victor’s knowledge of what happened is only partial and quite possibly limited to what Joe has chosen to tell him. His ties to Joe not only as domestic partners but also parents to two young sons by the same mother are profound. I don’t know what it would take to make him turn but it would seem so far that threat of incarceration is not enough.

          I think the he knows that they will be found guilty of these charges but prefers that to an unequivocal finding of murder and accessory for Joe and himself. I think that he will take his medicine (a jail sentence) rather than face his son and tell him his part in this wicked thing. He might take his secrets to his grave based on that.

          • dcbill
            05/22/2010 at 1:48 PM

            I think what it would take for Victor Zaborsky to man up and tell what he knows would be morals and a conscience. How can he sit there and cry when he hears himself on the 911 recording yet be so oblivious to Cathy Wone’s tormented grief?

            • interestedobserver
              05/22/2010 at 6:00 PM

              Totally agree. Usually during the hearings/trial, we have seen Victor smiling and laughing at moments. I think it’s disrespectful. How would he feel if Joe Price was the victim and the defendants were carrying on the way they have?
              I had about as much sympathy for him when I read that he was crying in court as during his fake acting during the 911 call…

              • MotherOfInvention
                05/22/2010 at 6:01 PM

                Crocodile tears.

                • interestedobserver
                  05/22/2010 at 6:09 PM

                  Even the EMT who testified said that his observation of Victor’s crying was that it was not genuine.

                  • MotherOfInvention
                    05/22/2010 at 6:24 PM

                    And to the extent that it may have been genuine, he could very well have been crying for himself and the monstrous situation he found himself in.

                  • tassojunior
                    05/22/2010 at 7:42 PM

                    That’s a conclusion not an observation. The EMT and the patrol officer obviously already had the case figured out.

                    • KKinCA
                      05/22/2010 at 8:57 PM

                      Tasso – Do you completely reject intuition and the experience of the EMT and police first on scene? Or should it be discounted in all contexts(in criminal courts and beyond)?I ask this with all respect.

      • tassojunior
        05/22/2010 at 12:54 PM

        Do you think the scream couldn’t have been Wone’s or the attackers’?

        • Lynne
          05/22/2010 at 2:54 PM

          Do you think the scream couldn’t have been Wone’s or the attackers’?

          If Wone had screamed: presumably the defendants would have heard Wone’s scream and thus come out of their rooms in time to catch a glimpse of the attacker.

          If the attacker had screamed: same possibility as above but with the added wonderment of why would the attacker scream at all?

        • NYer
          05/22/2010 at 3:38 PM

          I think it possible that the scream could have been either Wone’s, the attackers’ or even a third party, such as someone walking into the sight of Wone after the attack (e.g., Victor). In any instance, it is a damning detail for the defense- since the scream happened between 19 and 49 minutes BEFORE the 911 call- a very long time.

          • AnnaZed
            05/22/2010 at 3:43 PM

            Well, yes. I would call this the most damning piece of evidence of all and the neighbors held very firm on their remembrance of when they heard the scream.

            • tassojunior
              05/22/2010 at 5:51 PM

              But then if you firmly believe the scream occurred there (in the guestroom through Ms. Thomas’s wall) doesn’t that count out the theory that the murder occurred on the patio and blood was drained there?

              Firmness in testimony is usually the result of years of practice testimony. Why the ME’s testimony is so startlingly vague.

              • MotherOfInvention
                05/22/2010 at 6:05 PM

                The scream is believed to be Victor, discovering Robert’s fate. That the body was in the guest room when he screamed does not mean it wasn’t somewhere else first. I don’t have a strong conviction about where the deed was done. I do find the patio unlikely, as it is outside and therefore so exposed.

                • tassojunior
                  05/22/2010 at 7:38 PM

                  Ms. Thomas never identified the scream as being Victor’s.

                  • MotherOfInvention
                    05/22/2010 at 7:41 PM

                    If it wasn’t Victor’s, it’s mighty strange that everyone slept through it, when she heard it through the wall. And since Victor says he screamed, and that was the only scream they heard, seems to be an inevtiable conclusion.

                    • tassojunior
                      05/22/2010 at 9:11 PM

                      Wasn’t the rear door chime what was supposed to have awaken them and wouldn’t thatbe in the masterbedroom? A screama floor away might not be as awakening. Screams and loud yells happened in this neighborhood24/7. We’re next to a couplehundred nightclubs.

                  • CDinDC
                    05/23/2010 at 3:11 PM

                    So, since no one else in the house said they screamed, it would have had to have been Robert. Which means they delayed in calling 911. Which means they are guilty of the crimes at hand.

              • New Alias
                05/23/2010 at 6:36 PM

                This aspect of the case doesn’t have anything to do with the ME’s testimony. She did not testify about the location of the killing (2nd floor vs. outdoors).

                • New Alias
                  05/23/2010 at 6:37 PM

                  Sigh. This reply was meant for Tasso’s comment about the ME being vague.

      • Also from the Post Story
        05/22/2010 at 2:22 PM

        Why not? I’ve screamed on losing a video game.

        • Alice
          05/22/2010 at 3:57 PM

          I think the difference is that when you scream b/c of a video game or something like that, you don’t have anything to hide, so don’t think to much about it. But if you scream b/c your roommates committed murder and plan to cover it up, you immediately think that you have to have a good reason for the scream for the police.

    • Cecily
      05/22/2010 at 12:53 PM

      I have thought like you and I think they were high on ecstasy and that caused them to assualt their friend. I don’t have any experience with drugs but from what I have read and crimes I have seen on TV it seems like that drug can make you do some crazy stuff you wouldn’t otherwise do.

      • MotherOfInvention
        05/22/2010 at 1:05 PM

        Ecstasy is known to make people exude warm, “positive” emotion. Not saying it can’t affect people in other ways, but that it would affect more than one of them in a similarly unusual way seems unlikely. The incapacitation seems like it would have required some amount of premeditation.

    • MotherOfInvention
      05/22/2010 at 12:56 PM

      If they used an inhalant like cholorform, the incapacitation could have been instantaneous. Then maybe backed it up with injections.

  10. Der Schwanendreher
    05/22/2010 at 12:53 PM

    I would like to add something related to the discussion the other day about the doctor being credentialed as an Osteopath. As was pointed out, in most ways it makes no differences because D.O.’s have the same powers as M.D.’s .

    But in one way it does make a possible difference and it shows the seriousness of the opinion with which she maintained her perch , as you say. As a de facto matter Osteopaths fall into two categories these days. You have a portion of them for whom Osteopathy was, to put it charitably, a fall back way of becoming a physician. For these, when they didn’t quite get into M.D. school, the similarly high standards of Osteopathic training of an D.O. school looks pretty inviting.

    In saying this I want to be 100% clear that the standards at D.O. are just as high, or often higher, in the opinion of many, including mine. But let’s put it this way, few are as prestigious as M.D. schools. And prestige is a common motivator, as it connects with earning potential, allegedly.

    Then there is the other group who enroll because they are deeply in tune with Osteopathy per se. But the difference that is meaningful here is not the standard, but the philosophy. I am saying the obvious here, but it bears making distinctive, that probably the majority in D.O. schools are those who believe deeply in the profound philosophy of Osteopathy.

    It would make no sense to go into the complex details here of the diversity of opinion amongst Osteopaths as to what this constitutes. But what is shared in common is the conviction that there is a fundamental rhythmic “Motility” to the human body. One could translate this fundamental Motility as a sort of instinctual, pre- volitional and autonomic pattern of internal reaction and movements. Or in common parlance “instinctive”. I think this goes to the heart of why the D.O. on the stand stood so strong in her views.

    She is grounded in a profound societally licensed medical philosophy which she learned in D.O. medical school! From this point of view, far from having not done well under the lawyer’s scrutiny, I think she remarkably remained consistent to a very objective and reliable viewpoint.

    • dcbill
      05/22/2010 at 1:57 PM

      I think another thing to understand about Osteopathy is the committment of D.O.s to the medically underserved, such as the rural and inner city poor. I went to a small university in Appalachia where there was an Osteopathic medical school. The school turned out many fine doctors who then practiced in the surrounding communities, forgoing the huge incomes they could have earned elsewhere.

    • FeFe
      05/22/2010 at 8:02 PM

      Yes. She strikes me as someone whose work lives in reality with no penchant for imagination. Her characterization of prior contact with all defense counsel as one of answering questions, which she again demonstrated on the stand shows, to me, she does not lead their direction nor want to. An honest witness.

      As for pro or con for any perspective it will only be accurately judged against all other testimony in the end.

  11. MotherOfInvention
    05/22/2010 at 1:00 PM

    Catch this in the comments section of Jaffe’s article, from a certain “j.p.”? (listed as Jordan in the attribution line)

    Oh no, Mr. Jaffe! Now you are going to lose your reserved media seat at the lynching party!!! Jokes aside, thank you for being much more discerning than the other journalists and journo-wanna-bes “covering” the trial and for pointing out that mystery doesn’t necessarily equal conspiracy.

    Posted by: Jordan P., May 22, 2010 12:14:05 AM

  12. cole
    05/22/2010 at 1:10 PM

    I am not sure I agree with this assessment. Neither David, Lois Goslinoski’s or Jaffee know for sure who is and who is not guilty. So I don’t know why Goslinoski’s insistence on one point of view is “courages” or a move towards restoring “moral balance” to the universe. Moral balance and justice will be served when the real killers are found and dealt with. If the Goslinoski is wrong, then her sticking to her guns isn’t courageous it is stubborn, prideful, and stupid. It won’t restore balance to anything, but could result in a huge miscarriage of justice. I am not saying she is or isn’t right, but I don’t think David was on sound ground calling her courageous.

  13. Clio
    05/22/2010 at 1:53 PM

    While we the people all wish that our canary had better credentials and stage presence (she really needs a makeover!), I’m sure that Lynn is quite aware of the motives of the medical Hessians called to rebut our dear Dr. G. “Mercedes, Mercedes, Mercedes” is the mantra for those mouths for hire!!

    And, I am doubly sure that Lynn may feel a twinge of sisterly solidarity, while witnessing the defense’s assault on Dr. G.’s vita and knowledge (gained through practical experience) via a sausage fest of “experts.” Tread lightly here, Tom, because it is the women (whether biological or cultural) of this case (including your own client) who will decide the final outcome!

    • New Alias
      05/23/2010 at 6:31 PM

      She looked like a serious, hard working professional. In other words, she looked fine. She does not need a “makeover” any more than the men who questioned her. Let’s not go all Robin Givhan here.

      I concur about the judge – I thought her body language when speaking to the ME was quite sympathetic, and her tone respectful. She seemed a bit dismissive / annoyed with the defense.

  14. Leonard
    05/22/2010 at 3:19 PM

    For a group of guys who appear to have been very much into alternative sexual world, I would have expected at the very least a goodly number of toys. An old friend of mine who was into the same scene died recently and I had to cleanup the place. There was a whole walk in closet converted into a play room complete with a swing, chains from the ceiling etc. I guess the remodel on Swann St was in a more conservative taste with no secret hidden play room. Let’s hope the police were thorough in their search.

    • cinnamon
      05/22/2010 at 4:17 PM

      Look in the legal documents on this site. In the search warrants, you will find a very long list of toys that were found in the house.

      • Carolina
        05/22/2010 at 5:37 PM

        But again, let me point out there were no play mats. That’s just not logical, and I speak as someone who knows a thing or two about their necessity.

        • DonnaH
          05/23/2010 at 4:06 AM

          It may be that a play mat was among the things disposed of. Though we don’t know for sure where Robert was murdered, one possibility that occurs to me is that he was placed onto a play mat in the guest room and murdered there. (There were indications of blood around the guest room that had been cleaned up.) He could have then been carried downstairs to the patio in the mat (which might explain why no blood was discovered between the guest room and the patio).

          • MotherOfInvention
            05/23/2010 at 4:11 AM

            I just can’t see them taking a body outside, except if they were taking it away. But taking it outside to clean it? Way too risky.

          • Carolina
            05/23/2010 at 9:58 AM

            My point, exactly.

  15. jmes
    05/22/2010 at 3:53 PM

    Anyone know who the likely witnesses are next week?

  16. dcbill
    05/22/2010 at 4:23 PM

    How crowded has the courtroom been this week? Is there any chance for your average Joe spectator, like me, to grab a seat and watch the proceedings? Thanks!

    • interestedobserver
      05/22/2010 at 6:02 PM

      dcbill: After the first day, there have been seats available. Not sure if the overflow courtroom is still being used, but I would say that your chances of getting a seat are very likely.

      • New Alias
        05/23/2010 at 6:32 PM

        Overflow room was available on Friday.

  17. tassojunior
    05/22/2010 at 5:04 PM

    If this was the prosecution’s main medical witness they are indeed in trouble. In one appearance she virtually killed the switched knife, missing blood and cleansed body accusations. The prosecution can try to overcome this but it’s going to be an effort.

    The dumb move of putting the patrol officer on to say that Price “looked” at Ward as if to shut him up must have made the judge wonder how naive they think she is. I would have been extremely insulted at such a stunt.

    As easy as it is to get a conviction for conspiracy or obstruction, much less conspiracy to obstruct, this should be a cakewalk for the prosecutors. And in this case they’ve spent an intensive four years and tens of millions of taxpayer dollars to the exclusion of many other cases. Acquittals in all federal cases are well below 10%, much less “conspiracy to obstruct” cases which are almost never lost.

    • Carolina
      05/22/2010 at 5:41 PM

      You may keep talking this line, but please explain why Victor says the assailant took the knife, or how Dylan came to notice the backdoor was unlocked while seated in such a way that he couldn’t SEE the lock. Or how the other defendants claimed the door had been left unlocked before Dear Dyl noticed it. Something, anything besides your railing against the government.

      • MotherOfInvention
        05/22/2010 at 5:50 PM

        Alas, this one may be a one-trick pony.

        • Carolina
          05/22/2010 at 5:51 PM

          Then I shall put on some Paul Simon and speak of it no more! 🙂

      • tassojunior
        05/22/2010 at 5:59 PM

        Do we know that Victor knew the knife was in the guestroom? How in the world does this jive with the theory that the 3 had a uniform contocted story? If there were a rehersed story and especially a planted knife wouldn’t Victor’s statement seem stupid.

        • MotherOfInvention
          05/22/2010 at 6:09 PM

          Whether he knew the knife was in the guestroom, it is not at all clear how he could have come to believe that the knife was missing. If he didn’t know the knife was missing, why would he assume one their knives was used?

          • tassojunior
            05/22/2010 at 6:32 PM

            I think the only reasonable deduction is that Victor saw the knife and recognized it as one of theirs since I don’t imagine an inventory search of the kitchen took place. His call saying an intruder “took” it probably didn’t mean the intruder took it away when he fled. Interpreted that way would seem to disprove any uniform practiced story.

            • MotherOfInvention
              05/22/2010 at 6:37 PM

              I guess it depends on exactly what Victor said. Plumskiter says below that Victor says the alleged intruder “left with one of our knives”, and that the 911 operator repeated this.

              Is there are a transcript of the 911 call anywhere?

        • Bill 2
          05/22/2010 at 6:28 PM

          While it may appear that the three had a uniform concocted story, there’s nothing indicating that it was all in place before Victor dialed 911. Bits and pieces could have been whispered and added until they were taken out of there by police.

          • tassojunior
            05/22/2010 at 6:33 PM

            Switching murder knives is a pretty rememberable thing.

    • plumskiter
      05/23/2010 at 6:01 PM

      tasso, your source for the statement that the prosecutors have spent “tens of millions of taxpayer dollars” please?

    • New Alias
      05/23/2010 at 6:45 PM

      @ Tasso – I believe the ME testified that she never stated an opinion on which knife was used in the attack. ME made it clear that it was beyond her scope of expertise to conclusively rule out a particular knife. Defense knows this – they were trying to make it sound as though the prosecution had suggested the knife switch theory to her. I believe it was at this point that the judge asked the defense whether it was their intent to put the prosecution on trial (in other words, stop flirting with irrelevancy and get to the point).

      I don’t know why you have the idea that a 90% conviction rate indicates that a conviction for conspiracy or obstruction is “easy” to get. Prosecutors cherry pick their cases – they tend to go forward only with cases they have a good chance of winning. In other words, your statistic is in large part the result of selection bias.

  18. whodoneit
    05/22/2010 at 5:14 PM

    Ask your doctor friend if tissues in tbe body have absorbed the blood if he died immediately on the first wound? Or does the absorption of the blood in the tissue only occur while alive?

  19. plumskiter
    05/22/2010 at 5:32 PM

    i encourage everyone to listen to the 911 call and to do so several times. every time i listen to it, i realize new things. victor says and the operator repeats that victor thinks the assailant left with “one of our knives”.

    that is just plain odd. no one had been downstairs to the first floor/kitchen at this point, supposedly, so how could anyone, let alone victor, think that a knife was gone. plus there was a knife on the bedstand beside robert, so why was victor talking about a missing knife (off script perhaps?). victor’s statements on the tape about the knife are most curious.

    • Carolina
      05/22/2010 at 5:42 PM

      To be fair, it’s not like Victor had a lot of time to rehearse.

      • MotherOfInvention
        05/22/2010 at 6:25 PM


    • James
      05/22/2010 at 9:29 PM

      This is such a good point and I agree completely…without having been downstairs, it’s impossible that he would have known it was one of their knives. Impossible. I think he was rattled and was trying to hard to start selling the story. Even more odd is the way he states it to the operator….as though the stabbing wasn’t bad enough, this intruder had the nerve to take one of our knives! Unreal.

  20. Carolina
    05/22/2010 at 5:50 PM

    According to my doctor friend, having no evidence of spray is highly unusual, but he doubts there could be three liters spilled. One, two, maybe, but the rest would be, in his words, “a dribble here, a drop there, it adds up.”

    • Clio
      05/22/2010 at 6:57 PM

      Alligator clips, how charming! The photos must be of Bruce Weber quality, then. I wonder if they will be eyecandydvds’ first exclusive run: money may be scarce right now for Team Price, who, I am certain, are not staying at the Four Seasons.

      • MotherOfInvention
        05/22/2010 at 7:03 PM

        Maybe the Dyl and Joe were border with all of their expensive toys and had gone on a DIY kick, office style.

  21. JusticeForRobert
    05/22/2010 at 6:28 PM

    It has been an interesting week thus far. While, I think it is much too early to second guess how the Judge may rule, I will give the editor’s much credit for giving Robert a voice at a time when so few wanted to listen.

    It matters not if you agree or disagree with the style in which the editors choose to communicate, they are not obligated to anyone here but themselves. For those who are most critical, perhaps you can establish your own blog, put in the work, money and time.

    Once completed, observe how well you manage to please everyone. My guess, you may find it impossible. It is my hope that this trial will bring about truths. Truths that will bring about justice and peace for Robert’s family. We will not know all of those truths until the final gavel goes down.

  22. Craig
    05/22/2010 at 7:08 PM

    Mother: Goslinoski spent some time talking about internal hemmoraging and said that was part of her calculations, in particular, the absorption of blood into soft and connective tissue.

    I’ll check my notes to see if she indicated an amount, but I think that was included in the overall 2000ML that she measured.

    • MotherOfInvention
      05/22/2010 at 7:08 PM

      Good to know. I will pass that back.

  23. CDinDC
    05/22/2010 at 7:27 PM

    Wake me when it’s over.

  24. tassojunior
    05/22/2010 at 7:29 PM

    Has any mention yet come up of the skylight and if there is one? In the neighborhood we’ve had dozens and dozens of burglaries through rooftop skylights over this time. Other than the Wone case it’s been the main concern around here. I know at least one of the skylight burglary intruders was finally caught not too long ago. In this expensive a renovation I’d be surprised if there aren’t opening skylights. I assume there aren’t any or that they are fixed or this obvious possibility would have come up already.

    • New Alias
      05/23/2010 at 6:53 PM

      tasso, as I’ve stated elsewhere, those are DAYTIME burglaries. Most if not all of the rooftop burglaries were committed by one guy in the DC justice system’s catch-and-release program. He’d commit a few burglaries, get caught, go to jail for a few days and then be released – repeat, repeat and rinse. In general, burglars who enter through an open door or window, or pry open or break a closed door or window, on any floor, so so during the daytime when they believe the residents are not at home — either at work, school, or elsewhere. They are crimes of opportunity.

      A burglar coming in through a skylight would probably have dropped right into JP and VZ’s bedroom.

  25. Daphne
    05/22/2010 at 7:33 PM

    I do agree that most of the posters on this site believe in the defendants’ guilt (to one degree or another), but I’d hardly describe it as a “cheerleading squad for the prosecution” or a bunch of vigilantes. Perhaps if this poly-poster objectively looked at the facts, he would come to a different conclusion.

    Having said that, I also note that, should the defendants be found not guilty, I cannot imagine they would be truly exonerated in the eyes of the public that has followed the case. I would forsee some kind of Lizzie Borden/OJ Simpson pall hanging over them in this town forever.

    • Clio
      05/22/2010 at 9:57 PM

      In the (seemingly unlikely) event that the defendants all would be found not guilty, I think that they would retreat to southern Florida where Joe and Victor have bought a home and where Dyl has practiced as a massage therapist. No pall would follow them — except, perhaps the specter of “the Maryland campaigns” of the civil suit.

      • Hoya Loya
        05/23/2010 at 8:32 AM

        The unusual thing about this case is that an acquittal will not clear the defendants of the murder nor will a gulity verdict establish that they did commit the murder.

        In theory, this should provide incentive for at least one of the three to plead and tell what they know and have not told (per Joe’s email to his friend — see Jaffe’s Washingtonian article), especially if they are innocent of murder, since that would be the only way they could clear their name(s) through this particular proceeding.

        • NYer
          05/23/2010 at 9:04 AM

          But they currently face 30+ years, yet are still sticking to their story. If they haven’t cracked yet at the prospect of facing a such a sentence, it seems unlikely they would when found guilty.
          So, I think that they must in effect lack the opportunity to plead here. I posted yesterday that I think I read somewhere on WMRW the theory that Kirchner is driving the hard bargain; without the ability to charge someone with murder in this case, no one will be able to plead out of it.

          • Daphne
            05/23/2010 at 9:24 AM

            I don’t know. I wonder if, as the specter of prison becomes more real, someone might decide that it’s time to break from the Manson family.

          • Hoya Loya
            05/23/2010 at 10:09 AM


            That’s what is puzzling — in the face of jail or a non-acquittal acquittal they are still not talking. Doea that mean they are guilty of something and in some sort of pact? Or that they truly are innocent and know nothing that can help them out of that bind?

            Would they have covered for a murdering intruder, known or unknown, in fear that they would be blamed by homophobic police regardless? Could they have inadvertently aided a known intruder and fear aiding and abetting convictions? Could the intruder have been related to other illegal activity in which they would be implicated (perhaps drug-related)?

            • AnnaZed
              05/23/2010 at 10:36 AM

              I don’t think their failure to plead means much at all (yet).

              First, after the crime there was every reason for these men to believe that there simply would be no repercussions beyond the chagrined or suspicious reactions of some people. Dylan seems to have actually believed that he could simply move to Florida and hang out his shingle as a prostitute erotic masseuse with none the wiser.

              Even when things started to break apart and Eric Holder called them out from the press conference and Kathy sued them the continued process of breathing free air quite possibly felt or seemed like the end of the story to these men. Nothing, but nothing can be said that would overestimate the value of each and every second of daylight and freedom and the hope that it brings. Anything could happen; the government could simply withdraw its case (it’s happened before), the defense team could succeed at dismantling every inconsistency in the mens’ story ~ Harry Jaffe thinks that they already have done so (I think that the temperature at any trial can be taken on any day and that most defendants hold out hope to the 9th hour), there could be an earthquake or a hurricane and the courthouse could be blown down ~ anything really can happen.

              I thought when the defense waived the jury trial that someone was about to plead, now I think they will wait until they see how things look once the evidence has all been presented. I also think that the government is not interested in any plea specific just to these charges; they want information about the murder. Still, I’m not sure if they will trade freedom from incarceration for even that at this point.

          • plumskiter
            05/23/2010 at 10:36 AM

            two points.

            1. it is entirely conceivable that one or more of the defendants is waiting to see the outcome of the obstruction case before deciding to cooperate. roll the dice; see if you can beat the obstruction case; if found guilty, explore cooperation before sentencing. this is a common scenario. this option does generally require, however, that the defendant not testify in his own defense because his value as a future cooperator goes way down or even disappears once he testifies falsely in his own defense.

            2. while many defendants choose not to plead without having a plea agreement in place with the prosecution, any defendant has the right to plead guilty without an agreement at any time. sometimes defendants choose to plead without an agreement because they want the benefit at sentencing of having admitted guilt (or, in the terms of the federal Sentencing Guidelines of having “accepted responsibility”) at sentencing but do not want to cooperate or testify against others.

            • NYer
              05/23/2010 at 12:35 PM

              Plum (and Anna and Hoya)- you all make interesting points.
              I personally think that defendants have to be insane to opt for that “roll-the-dice” strategy and plea after a loss in this case in hopes of a more lenient sentence- I imagine J. Leibowitz probably would NOT be sympathetic in sentencing to the individual who wants to come clean, after taking everyone through this arduous trial process. (Unless, of course at that point, they simply decide to just do the right thing and tell the truth. But the reality is- they seem incapable of doing THAT.)
              So, I think it’s as I stated earlier; what’s likely happening here is Kirschner is stolid on the plea issues- the obstruction charges are unconditional, period. And so they went to trial because a plea bargain wasn’t an option.

              • Bill Orange
                05/23/2010 at 7:05 PM

                I tend to agree with you here. I think that Kirschner’s case is much more solid that I was expecting it to be, and I think his attitude is that any deal is going to require a guilty plea to the current charges and a minimum of a few years of jail time. Nobody’s going to be offered a free ride.

        • Former Criminal Sex Offense Prosecutor
          05/23/2010 at 6:51 PM

          Hoya Loya,
          I do not practice law in your jurisdiction. Please advise me as whether or not the status of a registered domestic partnership in D.C. conveys the same privilege of spousal immunity as it does in the traditional “man & wife” marriage. Put another way, is it possible that Mr. Jaborsky may have knowledge that cannot be used without obtaininng an express waiver of spousal immunity from Lawyer Price?

          • plumskiter
            05/23/2010 at 6:59 PM

            you didn’t ask me, but i’m going to jump in here. first, there was a lengthy discussion of the “marital privilege” and its application to this case several days ago on this site which you can search for. second, if a marital privilege applies, it has two facets. any partner to a marriage can testify if he/she wants to. the other partner cannot prevent a willing partner from doing so. third, a partner who testifies may not reveal the content of conversations that were exclusively between him/herself and the other partner.
            so, one partner may testify but may not be able to get into certain conversations if they were private. see other post for application of these rules to domestic partnerships in d.c. and elsewhere. my recollection is that the law is developing and evolving in this area as domestic partnerships become legal in more jurisdictions.

            • Bill Orange
              05/23/2010 at 7:01 PM

              But if a third part were present (i.e., Ward), the privilege fails, correct?

              • plumskiter
                05/23/2010 at 7:02 PM


          • plumskiter
            05/23/2010 at 7:01 PM

            p.s. to FCSOP – given your expertise, i trust that you understand the distinctions between the two facets of marital privilege, and i did not intend to imply otherwise. just set the whole thing out for the benefit of anyone else who might be curious.

            • Former Criminal Sex Offense Prosecutor
              05/23/2010 at 8:15 PM


              Thank you for your quick response. The law is still evolving, you say, maybe 1 of the issues Lawyer Price was pursuing in his pro bono work? My inquiry is based on the thought that if the scream the neighbors heard that many on this site believe was made by Mr. Jaborsky, Mr. Jaborsky may not have any independent actual knowledge of the circumstances of murder other than what his Registered Domestic Partner Lawyer Price told him privately OUTSIDE the presence of Kindly “Uncle Dylan”.

              Discovering Mr. Wone’s already stabbed & dying body, Mr. Jaborsky screams & becomes hysterical. His Registered Domestic Partner, Lawyer Price pulls him aside, tells him that now is not the time to get into this because we need to get the place cleaned up before we notify the authorities. We will talk about this later, alone, when there is more time, but not now.

              In that possible chain of events, (I do agree with those who suspect Mr. Jaborsky is the screamer), Mr. Jaborsky is equally guilty of all charges faced by Team Trouple in the current trial. To make a deal, the Prosecution wants someone to come forward with both the information & admissible testimony necessary to put on a murder trial, not an obstruction of justice case.

              Mr. Jaborsky may not be in a position to provide admissible testimony as to how the murder took place, as he came upon the crime scene after the killing took place, and screamed when he saw Mr. Wone. With the compressed timeline, there was a more urgent need to cleanup, dispose of evidence, get rid of the murder weapon & to develop a script for Team Trouple to relay to the authorities as opposed to getting into a long & painful conversation about the exact details of what had occurred with someone who was screaming & hysterical.

              In my jurisdiction, if this is what happened, the private communications regarding the details of the murder after the fact between a man & wife would not be admissible without an express waiver by Lawyer Price of Lawyer Price’s spousal privilege. If the law is unclear as to whether or not this applies to Registered Domestic Partners in D.C., Lawyer Price would most certainly raise it as an issue, should his Partner Jaborsky seek to make a deal. That gums up all the works, if the privilege is denied, the appeals will go on forever. If the privilege is upheld, the testimony does not come in & the prosecution is back to square zero. Just my thoughts as to why there may be no room for a deal. All comments welcome.

          • plumskiter
            05/23/2010 at 8:27 PM

            just did a quick google search to confirm my recollection that in some jurisdictions, including the 6th Circuit where I practice, there is a crime-fraud exception to the confidential marital communication privilege. so that could come into play also.

  26. MotherOfInvention
    05/22/2010 at 7:36 PM

    Seems like the comments at the very bottom of this post are no longer being visually integrated into the threads from which they originated?

  27. CC Biggs
    05/22/2010 at 8:03 PM

    Victor’s 911 phone call supports the view that the call was scripted and he was in on it. On the call, Victor says he is afraid that the intruder may still be in the house, and yet he requests only an ambulence — and not the police. Huh??!! If he honestly believed that a killer might still be lurking inside his house, he of course would request the police. Victor did not do this. Also, note that Victor starts crying dramatically the moment the EMT people arrive — that is to say, the moment when witnesses arrive who could see how distraught Victor is. It’s an acting job, and a bad job at that.

  28. MotherOfInvention
    05/22/2010 at 8:19 PM

    What is the story with Diane Durham? Do we know if she will testify? If not, why not?

    • Daphne
      05/23/2010 at 10:30 AM

      Yes, inquiring minds want to know.

  29. FeFe
    05/22/2010 at 8:52 PM

    For journalist buzz and pushing glossy mags, there’s nothing quite like creating victims out of the living. Ever notice that? Crime victim’s rights aren’t media sexy.

  30. 05/22/2010 at 11:56 PM

    Were traces of blood found anywhere in the house? Hard to believe that a corpse could have been dragged from the patio to the bedroom without leaving some evidence of a
    trail of blood. Even if they managed to wipe it up, wouldnt there be residue that forensics would
    find? Do we know if that is part of the “botched” examination?

    • tassojunior
      05/23/2010 at 12:12 AM

      The FBI confiscated the house and pretty much tore it up for months including taking up floorboards.

      • Bill Orange
        05/23/2010 at 12:59 AM

        And we really haven’t seen the reports from that yet, other than the mention that they didn’t find any evidence of blood or cleaning agents in some of the pipes. Frankly, I wonder how thorough they were if they couldn’t find soap in a shower drain, but maybe I’ll be surprised.

        I realize that you think the police didn’t do a good job investigating this crime, but I’m curious as to what you would have done differently. You’ve compared it to the Chandra Levy murder, in which the police focused for a long time on her boss, who had nothing to do with her killing. But that doesn’t mean that they shouldn’t have asked him questions in the first place, and it seemed reasonable for them to zero in on him when the police found out he was lying through his teeth about whether or not he was having an affair with her.

        When the police catch you lying during a murder investigation, you can expect them to pay more attention to you. Gary Condit became a prime suspect in the murder of Chandra Levy because he was sleeping with her and then told a bald-faced lie about it, not because the police were incompetent.

        • tassojunior
          05/23/2010 at 2:09 AM

          I would have at minimum expected a good search for fingerprints to determine who had been in the house and if there were prints of any unexpected person, especially a known criminal. If there were even a remote possibility that there were a home intruder who committed a murder it’s flabbergasting not to secure the area and at least take good fingerprints, much less shoe prints, dna samples, and fiber samples.

          I’m personally convinced the reason was that as soon as the medic and responding officers saw the S&M toys and bondage stuff in a gay house they considered the case obviously solved and all efforts from that time on were to prove that case to the exclusion of any other. Knowing many of these folks I can completely understand how an uber-straight police type seeing bondage equipment and a dead body can jump to that conclusion.

          From the “come to jesus” interrogation, I think that night or the next day, it obvious the theory of the case was set in stone almost immediately and actions after that were only toward proving that case, nothing more. I’m sure nothing contrary to that case was looked for.

          And unfortunately the Chandra Levy case was handled the same way by the same police and the same prosecutors in the same neighborhood. I was involved on the fringe of that case and there was an arrogant attitude by the prosecutor that they could not possibly be wrong even when overwhelming evidence to the contrary came out and right up to the guilty plea of the killer.

          Of course Conduit should have been a suspect but all other possibilities should not have been foreclosed so soon and for so long. With the murders of other women joggers close by and knowing Levy had gone to jog on that same path that should have at least been an obvious possibility that should have been explored.

          • MotherOfInvention
            05/23/2010 at 2:38 AM

            I don’t think the bondage stuff was found right away, IIRC. It certainly isn’t mentioned in any interviews. Also, they did search for fingerprints, and did find a few prints that belonged neither to the trouple nor to Robert. Their were NO shoeprints in the back, including in the garden where the “intruder” would have landed. Also the dirt on top of the fence was not disturbed.

            • tassojunior
              05/23/2010 at 3:16 AM

              I’ll have to look at that rear but I assume the “landing area” is brick or concrete- almost every house around here is. Most houses have 1 inch thick board fences and many are jagged stockade fence tops. Again, I don’t know what that one is. I will say that city grime doesn’t come off for much less than sandpaper if that.

              Shoe prints or debris from dirty shoes can often be detected even on hard floors and if none were searched for it tells me it might be because the suspects were barefoot or in slippers.That guestroom should have been printed and dusted from top to bottom as well as the front and rear doors.

              I guess the question is how much they searched for anything that would prove anything counter to the theory they assumed and whether they tried to match any fingerprints they did recover.

              • MotherOfInvention
                05/23/2010 at 3:30 AM

                I seem to remember that the discussion of the landing area was that it was dirt, but I am not sure about that. In any case, prints were sought in the back, and none were found.

                So the intruder scaled the nine foot high fence, came in the back door which was (fortunately!) unlocked, grabbed a handy knife from the kitchen, went up the hardwood stairs and no one heard him, walked past te door to Ward’s room, entered the room where Robert was sleeping, stabbed him three times producing three pristine wounds with no sign of a struggle, producing wounds that were a consistent four inches deep with a knife that had a five inch blade, injected Robert with something at various points, and got back down the stairs with no one seeing him or hearing him, removes nothing from the house, goes out the back door, does not walk out the gate but instead rescales the nine foot fence and disappears into the dark night with no one seeing or hearing anything?

                In a word: ludicrous.

                • tassojunior
                  05/23/2010 at 9:23 AM

                  But the prosecution’s theory is much, much more implausible and contrived. I don’t believe it either.

                  • Daphne
                    05/23/2010 at 9:26 AM


                    • tassojunior
                      05/23/2010 at 10:13 AM

                      Obviously however sexy just too bizarre.But mostly the defendants’ talking with policeagainst interest if they were guilty. Smart guiltypeopleclam up. Always.

                • NYer
                  05/23/2010 at 9:53 AM

                  Excellent post M.O.I.- and I’d also add this ninja-like intruder did all this, while supposedly alerting the residents to his/her presence with the door chime and RW’s scream, after which 19-49 minutes elapsed before they decided to place a call to 911. Absolutely ludicrous indeed.

              • MotherOfInvention
                05/23/2010 at 3:40 AM

                Also, there is no Reply button on your scream comment, so I’ll respond here. Joe heard the chime, but Victor claims to have been asleep for it, i.e. was NOT awakened by it. They both, IIRC, claim to have been awakened by the low grunts/screams (both claimed there was more then one of these, and yet the defense wants to establish instantaneous death to take out the absence of struggle=incapacitation argument), and then of course there is Joe saying he heard Robert moan while he was applying pressure. Dylan, of course, heard no grunts or screams in the room next door because he had taken Lunesta.

                THen there was the story Joe told Diane Durham about first finding Robert in the kitchen/patio area, which differs with all his later pronouncements.

                • tassojunior
                  05/23/2010 at 9:48 AM

                  Is the intruder chime in the master bedroom where it should be? That’s a sound you would immediately distinguish and that would disturb you. Truthfully, screams and loud yells around here do not. There’s many nightclubs and bars close and drunken patrons park on the streets. It is a quiet day when I hear fewer than a dozen loud yells or screams. And sound from a floor below with well insulated ceilings is pretty muffled in my house. I can certainly hear shrieks much more from outside through windows.

                  If Durham testifies fine but as implausible as the prosecution’s current case is adding to that that after they drugged and raped him they dragged him down to the patio to clean the body and back upstairs to the bed or that they raped him on the patio or any other combination of the prosecution’s case and the Dunham story just makes the theory much more implausible. I don’t know what happened and it may not be exactly that the housemates said but I’m pretty certain it’s not the theory the prosecution is putting forward. It’s already way too crazy lacks motive and common sense just says the defendants talking to police so much and admitting so much against interest is not what a guilty party does.

                  • AnnaZed
                    05/23/2010 at 10:12 AM

                    “It is a quiet day when I hear fewer than a dozen loud yells or screams.”

                    Inside your house?

                    • tassojunior
                      05/23/2010 at 10:15 AM

                      Again, through insulated ceilings and floors sounds are very muffled.Not through windows.

                  • Hoya Loya
                    05/23/2010 at 10:17 AM

                    The prosecution is not currently claiming that Robert was drugged or sexually assaulted (or restrained for that matter or that the defendants killed Robert), only that the defendants altered the crime scene and obstructed the investigation.

                    • tassojunior
                      05/23/2010 at 11:56 AM

                      No.The ME report and the case is still he was injected with drugs, raped,and killed.

                    • Hoya Loya
                      05/23/2010 at 12:42 PM


                      From the prosecution’s opening statement: ““The government will show these three defendants covered-up, orchestrated and misdirected with respect to the homicide of RobertWone.”

                      That’s all. Please go back and read the day one post to refresh your recollection of what is in and what is out in this trial before making broad statements. Thanks!

              • AnnaZed
                05/23/2010 at 10:11 AM

                “…I will say that city grime doesn’t come off for much less than sandpaper if that.”

                Oh Tasso, you disappoint.

                Let’s just call that a reach and move on.

                • CDinDC
                  05/23/2010 at 10:31 AM

                  His/her posts are filled with exaggerations and outright untruths.

                  I can’t even deal with reading his tripe.

                  • tassojunior
                    05/23/2010 at 11:59 AM

                    Truth isn’t always convenient or sexy. Reasonableness is never titilating.

          • Bill Orange
            05/23/2010 at 10:13 AM

            I think everyone agrees with you on the crime scene investigation. And we really don’t have all of the details of what was looked at. We know the FBI went through the place, and I haven’t seen a single report from the FBI lab on this case, so it’s entirely possible that they have a lot more evidence than we know about.

            But yes, the crime scene should have been studied much better. What infuriates me about this case is that the botched evidence collection could mean that either three innocent men were wrongly charged, or three guilty men might go free.

            As to the direction the investigation moved in, I think that the police obviously DID consider other possibilities. It’s a bit hard to follow up on a silent phantom who vanished without a trace, but we know that the police eventually made their way to Michael Price, which tells me that they were definitely looking at other angles.

        • 05/23/2010 at 12:14 PM

          “I realize that you think the police didn’t do a good job investigating this crime, but I’m curious as to what you would have done differently.” I don’t know if you were referring to me, but I myself don’t know whether the police didn’t do a good enough job; my reference to “botched” is how the media has already characterized the investigation, due to loss of some evidence and the possible spoliation of other evidence. I am curious to know if perhaps blood evidence was lost or spoiled, since there has not been any reference to it. Maybe it is being held back, but I imagine that the defense would have already learned about it.

          That being said, if someone killed Robert in the bedroom and fled out the back, or killed him in the patio and moved him to the bedroom, you would expect to see some blood somewhere else other than where the stabbing occurred — footprints, fingerprints on door handles, etc.

          • Hoya Loya
            05/23/2010 at 12:34 PM

            There may have been blood trace in just such places, but thanks to misapplication of Ashley’s Reagent we’ll never know.

            One exception: the Ashley’s findings may be admissible to the extent the reagent was applied to non-porous surfaces. We’ll see.

    • Bill Orange
      05/23/2010 at 1:02 AM

      We know the crime scene was contaminated, but I don’t think we know how bad the contamination was. And several people have pointed out that BDSM enthusiasts usually keep a supply of “party mats” to keep various body fluids from getting on the carpet.

    • MotherOfInvention
      05/23/2010 at 2:03 AM

      Yes, Ashley’s Reagent was applied to the floors and walls in the guest room prematurely and the blood trace results were tainted.

    • KV
      05/23/2010 at 11:25 AM

      There seems to have been an eariler post that cadaver dogs ‘alerted’ on the patio drain (for blood?) and the same with the dryer lint trap. Maybe someone else can confirm/refute that? Wouldn’t that be a key piece pointing to complicity?

      • Bill Orange
        05/23/2010 at 12:16 PM

        I doubt it. The defense should be able to keep cadaver dogs out of the trial–you can’t really cross-examine a dog. And if there was really blood in the drain, they should have been able to find traces of it, or at least evidence of cleaning solutions.

        • KKinCA
          05/23/2010 at 12:25 PM

          @ Bill and any criminal attorney readers – If the prosecution wants to introduce the cadaver dog evidence, could the dogs’ “handler” police officers testify as to the results?
          @ Eds – are any of those police officers on the prosecution’s witness list?
          Thank you.

        • Hoya Loya
          05/23/2010 at 12:26 PM

          Its been decided already that the cadaver dog alerts will not be admitted in this trial.

          • KKinCA
            05/23/2010 at 12:29 PM

            Thank you. I am having trouble remembering every detail on this site, and am grateful for your sharp mind and memory!

  31. John Grisham
    05/23/2010 at 4:35 AM

    Joe has a pig-like face. What conclusions can we draw from that?

    • MotherOfInvention
      05/23/2010 at 4:58 AM


      • John Grisham
        05/23/2010 at 2:45 PM

        “Lois Goslinoski is a canary of woman — small with a bird-like face, who speaks in such delicate chirps.”

  32. FeFe
    05/23/2010 at 10:56 AM

    This is a very telling bit of testimony I think:

    “The placement and orientation of the wounds is what struck me immediately,” Lois Goslinoski, deputy medical examiner for the District, testified. “They were all oriented in the same direction … and I’m used to seeing irregularity indicating movement” by either the victim or the assailant.”

    Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/crime/Paramedic_-Wone_s-friends-were-acting-strangely-94543089.html#ixzz0olT5JxMO

    Also, video coming next!

    “Prosecutors this week will play video of the police interrogations of three men accused…”

    Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/Wone-trial-will-spotlight-interrogations-94624689.html#ixzz0olSaLcTI

    • Clio
      05/23/2010 at 11:22 AM

      “Video killed the radio star,” as the early 1980s pop tune went … let’s hope that video also solidifies a verdict in Lynn’s mind!

    • AnnaZed
      05/23/2010 at 11:59 AM

      This bit I am not clear about. The Examiner says:

      “To make the point during opening arguments, Schertler produced what he said was the missing knife that prosecutors had theorized was the murder weapon.”

      Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/Wone-trial-will-spotlight-interrogations-94624689.html#ixzz0oljQa9n4

      I thought he told the court that the knife was in Seattle, not produced the actual knife (and frankly wondered why if they knew where it was they didn’t produce it). Do I have this important fact mixed up?


  33. plumskiter
    05/23/2010 at 10:58 AM

    to tassojunior. i know i will regret getting into this with you, but i can’t resist because you make so many sweeping assertions of “fact” that are completely wrong. You say “Smart guilty people clam up always.” This is so not true, and i speak as a person with over 30 years experience prosecuting and defending federal criminal cases.

    Smart people do not clam up even when their smarter lawyers tell them to. People of all levels of intelligence, and often really bright people, think that they can talk their way out of things and many, many of them try to. Your statement quoted above is simply wrong.

    • Bill Orange
      05/23/2010 at 11:16 AM

      And “clamming up” in this case would have raised suspicions immediately. Someone was found stabbed to death in their guest bedroom. A smart guilty person is NOT going to meet the cops at the door and say, “The body’s on the second floor, and we’re invoking our right to remain silent.”

    • tassojunior
      05/23/2010 at 12:16 PM

      There’s a reason Miranda says “anything you say can and WILL be held against you”. If you’re a target and you say it’s Monday, it will be held against you. If you say it’s Tuesday it will be held against you. Here the defendants voluntarily said the front door was locked and Wone was alone, a huge admission against interest taking away the most obvious ingress possibility and motive. I can’t believe a guilty person would ever eliminate the most obvious possibility of another murderer so fast so voluntarily. There’s a reason the kids say “Don’t Talk, You Walk” and why people are refusing to cooperate with police. That doesn’t help solve crimes.

      • Hoya Loya
        05/23/2010 at 12:24 PM

        I think you need to brush up on “admissions against interest.”

        This might help:

        • tassojunior
          05/23/2010 at 1:10 PM

          How do you explain that a guilty person immediately foreclosed the most obvious possibility of another person present ?

          • KKinCA
            05/23/2010 at 1:15 PM

            Isn’t the suggestion of an “intruder” the “possibility of another person present”? This suggestion was made by all 3 defendants.

            • Bob
              05/23/2010 at 4:12 PM

              Yes. The intruder was a ninja with the assignment to assassinate Robert Wone.

              • AnnaZed
                05/23/2010 at 4:53 PM

                Bob, your funny has been registered; are you awaiting applause or online “LOLs” before you stop repeating it?

          • Bill Orange
            05/23/2010 at 1:19 PM

            For starters, it wasn’t “foreclosed”. They all went out of their way to say the back door was unlocked. And if you were going to fabricate an intruder, you’d be likely to say that they came through the back door rather than the front, because as you yourself have pointed out, it’s a fairly busy street, and there’s an outside chance somebody may have been in a position to see the front door the whole time.

            In addition, it’s entirely possible that there WAS another person present who was invited in through the front door, which would add an additional reason to discourage the police from talking to people who might have been in a position to see the front door.

            • tassojunior
              05/23/2010 at 2:04 PM

              But the most obvious assumption for most people would be that the victim had someone else with him or that he left the front door open and had been followed. Immediately excluding the most believable possibilities, or any possibilities, doesn’t seem right for a guilty person.

              They easily could have said they thought he had someone with him or that the front door was not locked and proving otherwise would be virtually impossible. They certainly would have at minimum left that possibility open by not saying he was alone and they locked the front door.

              • AnnaZed
                05/23/2010 at 2:09 PM

                Tasso, that’s a tad too circular for me. The defendants said that Robert arrived alone, maybe a cab driver can testify to that ~ I don’t know.

                So, are you saying why would they say that if they were guilty? Ummm, maybe because they thought it so demonstrably true that there was no way around it. Why did they not claim that the front door was unlocked too (maybe); because who would believe that?

                • tassojunior
                  05/23/2010 at 4:09 PM

                  I think if the possibility he were not alone or he had left the front door unlocked were still present we wouldn’t even have a case. It is only by the defendants’ assertion otherwise that the focus narrows so much.

                  • Bill Orange
                    05/23/2010 at 5:41 PM

                    I disagree. The police would have looked at the defendants even if they’d left all of the doors wide open that night. They became the focus of the investigation because someone turned up dead in their bedroom and their stories didn’t make any sense, not because they said they lock their front door at night.

              • Bill Orange
                05/23/2010 at 3:04 PM

                He was dropped off by a cab, so the cab driver presumably would have been able to say if someone was with him and might have been able to say if someone followed him in. So there would be potential witnesses to contradict that story. And it wouldn’t explain the 90 minute gap between Wone’s arrival and the 911 call.

                • tassojunior
                  05/23/2010 at 4:03 PM

                  You overestimate DC cab drivers.

                  • Bill Orange
                    05/23/2010 at 5:42 PM

                    You’re probably right, but I’ve been in a lot of cabs where the driver is jotting things down on a clipboard when I got in our out of the car. It’s not hard to imagine them with a little form that lists the number of people they picked up and dropped off at any location.

                    • doug harwood
                      05/24/2010 at 2:11 PM

                      Are you serious regarding the little form?The little form is referred to as a manifest and is required by law. D.

                  • CDinDC
                    05/24/2010 at 2:21 PM

                    And why would that be Tasso?

              • cinnamon
                05/23/2010 at 4:07 PM

                If he had someone with him, they would be asked to identify that person.

  34. Clio
    05/23/2010 at 12:38 PM

    Editors, are you detecting an increase in the volume of hits and posts to this blog since the opening of the trial? It does seem that the word is getting out after all, given the sudden appearance of sock puppets and genuine newbies alike.

    • AnnaZed
      05/24/2010 at 3:01 PM

      What I’m detecting is a vast increase in the number of comments dedicated to complete irrelevancies; numbering in the hundreds (literally) in just 4 days. It’s quite impressive actually.

  35. Bill Orange
    05/23/2010 at 1:09 PM

    FYI: New thread up top.

  36. David R
    05/23/2010 at 2:31 PM

    What was the significance of searching 5119 Lee Street in NE? Lot’s of stuff was recovered there including plastic sheets amongst other things but it does not seem that any of these guys own the property nor has it recently been sold accordong to DC Gov records.

    I am still mystified as to the blackberry that was not imaged by the FBI. Supposedly at 11:05PM he sent an email to his wife saying he had showered and was going to bed. At 11:07 sent an email to another party about a lunch the following afternoon. To me I would have sent a txt msg to the wife. Apparently neither email was ever sent.

    I don’t want to get into graphic detail but also apparenly an expert will be called about ejaculation. Why drug the guy so he is incapicated and then stick this metal prod into him to induce an orgasm and then in what manner were those fluids then inserted into him. It’s all rather gross to me and they are assuming he was shocked electrically since they did recover items from the closet that could do these things.

    So Wine arrives at 10:30 and they have a glass of water in the kitchen and then all retire to bed. That makes no sense. If I have a friend stay ove taht I have known for years but don’t see often why not sit down in the living room and talk a bit. Catch up etc.

    This is going to be unpopular I think but what if Wone was a participant in some way? I mean honestly at that time of night Oakron is a straight shot out 66 and he is home with his wife in say 40 minutes.

    So perhaps this was set up. There is something that is done that involves some sort os asphixiation right before ejaculation which intensifies that event. Maye he participated but then it went too far and he died then and there. So I dunno we have these 3 upstanding guys, good professionals never in any trouble with the law now freaking out and thinking 2nd degree murder or 3rd ior manslaughter as they try to explain the mistake.

    I can’t believe all these guys were there and stabbed Wone three times and that’s why none of them are talking. I-d be scared shitless unless they are thinking they are taking the lesser of all evils. #8 years and out maybe in 15 for good behavior? As opposed to 2nd or 3rd degree murder or manslaughter?

    I know I am rambling but the time line to me is crazy, Wone arrives has some water and says “I’ve been thinking about his all day lets get busy? and then the events ensue.

    Crazy I know but so is the idea that there was an intruder. I also read the fence was 7 feet as opposed to 9 as people keep saying and it isn’t much of a difference but it is some.

    And a last point they did find traces of blood outside near the rear entrance to the basement appartment. And the dryer that the clothees were in, They say there was traces of blood in the lint trap. Was the dryer still warm.

    The semen found on and in Wone could it have been present before he arrived at 10:30 from an earlier encounter? How do they know he was proded and it occured at 1509 Swann?

    Ther ejust ins’t time for all of this and cleaning the body especially if he wrote the emails at 11:05 and 11:07. Sure any of the other three could have but I don’t see them doiong that really.

    • Hoya Loya
      05/23/2010 at 2:59 PM

      Sexual assault, including the speculation about the probe, semen, etc. is not part of this trial.

      As for Robert’s possible participation, we’ve been over and over this point. There is no evidence and nobody has ever come forward from Brooklyn, W&M or D.C. to say he was on the DL. Even the defendants insist he was absolutely straight and his whereabouts prior to 10:30 are accounted for (dinner and CLE with another not-for-profit GC, a visit to the night crew at the office and a taxi to 1509.

      Even if was was secretly bi, he did not ask to be stabbed three times — which both prosecution and defense agree was the cause of death, not an OD, asphixiation (autoerotic or otherwise) or electrocution (as Ben originally speculated, hence his using the screen name of the famous kite flyer).

      It’s not that this opinion, which you are not the first to express, is unpopular, it is that it is unsupported by any known facts and without factual support tends to fit the “blame the victim” meme.

  37. tassojunior
    05/23/2010 at 2:43 PM

    Let’s Get Some Physical Facts Straight

    I just walked back to look at the rear of the house. None of these things are true. Sheer baloney.

    On the back by the alley is a roll-up gate that’s made out of stainless rungs and is a perfect ladder. Inside that is a totally bricked parking spot for two cars. After that is a thin unpainted pressure treated wood fence with lattice of top about 7 feet high at most. The gate is a wooden one shorter than the fence with about one inch spaces between the boards so you can see through. The wood on it is 3/4 inch thick and painted matte black. Inside that the small rear yard is completely bricked.

    This “landing prints” and “dust” stuff is red herring and baloney.

    Most startling is the back of the 3rd floor (probably 2nd floor of main unit) is a pressure treated deck with two unbarred windows into the rear of what I assume is the guest room as it would be at the top of the house’s stairs. On top of the house is another pressure treated deck which adjoins neighboring roof decks. Anyone who couldn’t get into the windows in that back guest room in 5 minutes, either climbing the roll up gate or coming down from the roof is in really bad shape or not very motivated. And we’ve had many many rooftop break-ins here.

    • AnnaZed
      05/23/2010 at 2:46 PM

      Tasso, relax and get your facts straight; the roll-up gate wasn’t there when Robert was killed.

      • AnnaZed
        05/23/2010 at 2:47 PM

        The men didn’t claim that anyone got in through a window. Dylan was supposedly sleeping right there. Even drugged he would notice that I think.

      • tassojunior
        05/23/2010 at 3:01 PM

        So it was completely open to the alley with just that flimsy fence and gate?

        • AnnaZed
          05/23/2010 at 3:06 PM

          Yes, and the “flimsy” fence and gate were undisturbed, unmarked, unscratched, unbroken and unscathed when inspected and covered with a considerable undisturbed dusting of city dirt and pollen. The flowerbeds were undisturbed and evidence of dirty shoe prints or other expected evidence of entry via the fence was not found to be present. The patio hose was out on the flags as photographed in the crime scene photo.

          • CDinDC
            05/23/2010 at 3:16 PM

            Spring pollen was present on the tope of the gate. That shows no disturbance of any kind since spring.

    • AnnaZed
      05/23/2010 at 2:55 PM


      • galoon
        05/23/2010 at 9:12 PM

        Doubled. over. laughing.

    • AnnaZed
      05/23/2010 at 3:00 PM

      As you can see, the yard was not then “completely bricked.”

      You need to relax I think and try to make you contribution count here. Take some time. Do your homework. You are making an ass of yourself and I don’t think that you are an ass.

      • tassojunior
        05/23/2010 at 3:07 PM

        The 2nd floor rear deck with a door and two windows to the back room where there as was the roof deck I’m sure. Those aren’t new. Why hasn’t anyone mentioned this 2nd floor deck and the roof deck. We’ve had too many rooftop break ins here.

        I’m making a ass by not accepting whatever I’m told?

        • AnnaZed
          05/23/2010 at 3:11 PM

          Dylan was (supposedly) asleep right behind those second floor windows. The other men were upstairs so would perhaps have noticed intruders on their deck.

          I am just saying that you aren’t taking the time to review what is available to you to support your contentions. That combined with your strident, practically hysterical proclamations is making you look foolish, which I am convinced that you are not. So, in that sense you are not doing yourself credit.

      • tassojunior
        05/23/2010 at 3:18 PM

        And I just looked at the photos you cited and the rear yard was completely concrete except for the corner planters. The corner planters make it about a 5 foot leap over the lattice top fence. The rear gate is the same flimsy open-board black matte one.

        Is the back room on the rear Ward’s or the guest room? There are no photos of it and it has a door and two windows to the rear second floor deck.

        All this “nine foot rear gate” stuff is just not true.

        • Nelly
          05/23/2010 at 3:50 PM

          I respectfully disagree. The back gate was clearly more than 6 feet high when I saw it in person. The guest room was the one in the front facing Swann St. The back room was Ward’s. As I recall, there was no deck out on the 2nd floor. It was on the 3rd floor or higher. There are pictures of the back of the home floating around online and on this website somewhere.

    • Craig
      05/23/2010 at 3:11 PM

      The roll-up security gate was not installed in August 2006. The wooden gate has ornamental lattice over it making it taller than the fence IIRC. The landing prints refer to the flower beds on the other side of the wooden fence, completly undisturbed by anyone scaling the fence, according to police. In other words, even if the fence was scaled, the flower beds showed no footprints.

      Also, according to authorities, the top rails of the fence were also undisturbed around the entire fence’s perimter we’ve heard. It was these elements that may have demonstrated to police that there was no forced entry into 1509 that night.

      And I believe that the door’s gate is actually metal, with wooden slats covering it FWIW. As far as other access points, 1509’s previous owner told us that the property was “impenatrable.” Most million dollar plus homes in that ‘hood are, epecially when the security system is engaged.

      • tassojunior
        05/23/2010 at 3:32 PM

        That’s just not the way it is physically. I can walk out and look pretty easily. The back matte black gate may have metal cross slats but the boards are clearly thin wood and have one inch seperations. It shows in the realtor photos you posted. The gate is no more than six feet tall at most. The fence with lattice top may be seven feet but DC code is usually 6 feet. And how does dust show on unpainted pressure treated wood?

        Anyone scaling that fence would not drop on the bushes but more likely on the concrete ledge of the corner planters. They’re not flower beds but 2 foot raised brick planters with shrubs in them. And those planters make the scaling of the fence less than 5 feet. If the roll-up gate wan’t there then this would be one of the most easy houses around here to break in.

        And why no photos anywhere or mention of the 2nd floor deck with a door and two windows to the back of the second floor or the adjoining rooftop decks? Sorry this seems a little strange from the physical descriptions I’ve been reading.

        • des
          05/23/2010 at 3:44 PM

          since it is so easy for you to go to the house, could you maybe go and take pictures for all of us of the back of the house and the back deck, roof deck, etc.?
          and i don’t mean to sound flippant but you could also try to scale the fence yourself and see how easy it is. maybe even take a picture from the inside to prove you could do it as easily as you imagine.

        • Craig
          05/23/2010 at 3:48 PM

          Tasso: Are you sure you were looking at the right property?

          Flower beds or raised concrete planters are pretty much the same thing. Anyone either climbing or vaulting over that fence would’ve more than likely landed in them, and in turn made impressions in the soil, and then would’ve tracked soil on the patio and inside the house.

          An intruder, even a skilled breaking and entering guy, landing on the beds’ concrete ledge is too much a stretch even for this unlikely chain of events. It seems unlikely a B&E guy would ascend and descend a fence that way, unless of course, he was indeed that much talked about Ninja.

          And as far as DC Code, 8 foot fences are hardly the exception. There are enough property photos and floor plans online for you to be able to better aquaint yourself with the exact layout of 1509. For example, the guest room faced Swann Street and Ward’s room did not have roof deck access.

          • tassojunior
            05/23/2010 at 5:06 PM

            If you look at the rear of the house there is clearly a deck outside the 2nd floor with at least two windows to the second floor. There has to be door access too or this deck would be unusable. Of course if this were Ward’s room it makes it less likely he wouldn’t have noticed an entry but not far fetched that someone could have entered that way when he wasn’t in his room earlier, and possibly hidden in the guest room. A trapped intruder is a real danger.

            The concrete ledge on the two foot high planters is the only reasonable jumping point as the planters have shrubs in the photos. And this was supposed to be the way of egress, not necessarily ingress. With the many rooftop burglaries I’d suspect the 2nd floor deck from the roof deck much more for ingress.

            I think people who have tried putting higher than 6 foot fences up between neighbors have found the hard way that 6 is the limit but I have no doubt there are numerous ones in fact a bit higher. The black gate is certainly shorter. Getting out that way whether over the short gate or from the planters over the fence or a neighbor’s fence doesn’t in fact look very hard. I think I could do it in a pinch (but won’t, don’t anyone ask).

            Honestly after reading the fence stuff so much when I finally got up and went to actually look I was shocked at how different the rear looks from the alley than what’s been described. Especially the decks. And the stuff about visable dust on old unpainted pressure treated wood just blows my mind.

    • Bill Orange
      05/23/2010 at 3:18 PM

      An intruder entering through the skylight or the windows on the second floor doesn’t seem very plausible to me. First of all, they say they heard the door chime. I guess it’s possible that they were either mistaken or that the security system also makes the same noise when a window or the skylight are opened. But then you have an intruder on the second or third floor, who then goes downstairs to the kitchen, ignores the laptop and the expensive television, gets a knife, goes back upstairs, stabs Wone, and then soundlessly exits the house. Does that really seem very likely to you?

      • tassojunior
        05/23/2010 at 5:24 PM

        The knife in the kitchen does make it seem like a trapped intruder would have more likely come through the kitchen back door than through the 2nd floor which seems easier unless the back door were indeed unlocked the entire night.

    • New Alias
      05/23/2010 at 5:12 PM

      Buddy, I think you might have looked at the wrong house.

      • New Alias
        05/23/2010 at 5:22 PM

        Sorry, Bill, that comment wasn’t meant for you; it was meant for tasso junior. And if he is in fact looking at the right house, I think he’s gotten the second and third floors confused. A deck *on top of the second floor* – on the second floor roof – leads into the *third* floor. A deck on the roof of the main part of the house would also be accessed through the third floor. For there to be a deck leading into what was Dylan’s room, it would have to be situated on top of the kitchen.

        The third floor is where JP and VZ slept.

        Further, rooftop break in burglaries do not take place late on weeknights, when residents are most like to be home. They take place during the day, when burglars believe no one is home. Breaking in when you know people are home is a “home invasion” robbery, which I can’t recall ever happening in the neighborhood.

        I’d put money on that being an 8 foot fence. Don’t get me started on zoning enforcement in DC.

        What is truly ridiculous about the break in story is that a would-be burglar would never have been able to see a kitchen door left ajar. The fence is way too high, and it is solid. There’s no direct line of sight from a person standing in the alley to the kitchen door. The burglar would have had to jump the fence out of pure speculation that perhaps a door was left ajar. Ridiculous.

        • tassojunior
          05/23/2010 at 5:40 PM

          No,the rear black gate has at least one inch spaces between boards and makes it very easy to see the back door from the alley. It’s not a solid gate.

          And there is both a roof deck atop the top floor and another roof deck atop what must be the kitchen addition in the rear with access to what is either the 2nd or 3rd floor of the main unit.

          I was shocked too when I walked behind in the alley and saw the back door through the rear gate. Not what I’d read at all.

          • KKinCA
            05/23/2010 at 6:31 PM

            Tasso – Below is an article I found that shows the lay-out of the house at the time of the murder, and Dylan’s room is depicted facing the back patio, with the guest room in the front. It also shows an area on the 3rd floor that could be a patio if a wall and the two existing window were replaced with doors. Dylan’s bedroom is directly on top of the 1st floor living room – it doesn’t seem that there is room for the deck. I thought that you might find this helpful. Thanks for your efforts going to the house.


            • tassojunior
              05/23/2010 at 6:44 PM

              Wow, that is great. Thanks.

              The entire roof over Ward’s room is a deck with railing and so is the entire roof of the house over the master bedroom. The transom over the rear black gate is no longer there.

              The deck over Ward’s room has to have a door into the 3rd floor or it would be useless. And anyone coming in from that deck would go downstairs straight to the entrance to the guest room.

              Thanks again.

              • KKinCA
                05/23/2010 at 6:55 PM

                You are welcome. Maybe I am misunderstanding you, but it appears that any deck built on the third floor would have been directly off the third floor bathroom (where Joe and Victor were sleeping that night). So assuming that (a) on that night there was in fact a built out deck that adjoined the master bathroom, and (b) the intruder scaled the patio gate as you have described without leaving any evidence and without attracting attention of any neighbors, the intruder would have to land silently on the deck, open the door into the house silently, walk through the bathroom and Joe and Victor’s bedroom, open the bedroom door, close the door, walk silently down the hardwood stairs, pass Dylan’s room, walk across the room between Dylan’s room and the guest room and then enter the guest room. I would appreciate your comments regarding this scenario. Thanks.

              • Bill Orange
                05/23/2010 at 6:57 PM

                Are you sure? I can’t figure out where the stairwell is in relation to the door to the deck. I can’t tell if you would come from the deck straight to the stairwell, or if you’d come into Price and Zaborsky’s bedroom and THEN have to go to the stairwell.

                In any case, if we assume an intruder came in that way and followed the stairs down to the guest bedroom where Wone was sleeping, we’d also have to assume that he then made a U turn in the dark, went down another flight of stairs to the first floor, made another U turn, walked past a laptop and a flat-screen television, entered the kitchen, selected a knife, retraced his steps to guest room, stabbed Wone, a silently exited the house. Doesn’t seem very likely to me.

                • KKinCA
                  05/23/2010 at 7:05 PM

                  I think we are on the same page. It appears to me that the stairs from the 3rd to 2nd floors go down towards the back of the house and end at that grey rectangle shown to the left of the words “WASHER/DRYER”. It also looks like the master bedroom includes the bathroom (ie, there is no separate entrance to the bathroom from the 3rd floor landing) – so if the deck was built adjoining the bathroom, the intruder would have to go through the bathroom AND the bedroom to go downstairs. I may be wrong and I welcome any other interpretation of the drawing. Thanks.

                  • KKinCA
                    05/23/2010 at 7:32 PM

                    Tasso – are you still out there? I can’t speak for Bill Orange, but I am interested in your reactions to Bill’s post, as well as mine, both above. I really appreciate your input and opinions – it forces me to dig into the extensive documentation regarding this case, and I always learn something from that exercise. Thank you!

                    • tassojunior
                      05/23/2010 at 8:01 PM

                      My reply is at bottom- the thread’sgetting too skinny up here. Thanks.

              • New Alias
                05/23/2010 at 7:16 PM

                Thus your comment: “And there is both a roof deck atop the top floor and another roof deck atop what must be the kitchen addition in the rear with access to what is either the 2nd or 3rd floor of the main unit.” was in fact incorrect.

                There is no roof deck above the kitchen. The deck you have in mind is *above* what was Dylan’s room; it adjoins what was JP and VZ’s bedroom.

                Dylan’s former room is in the back of the house (the alley side). The guest room where Mr. Wone was found is in the front (the street side).

  38. CDinDC
    05/23/2010 at 3:13 PM

    Tasso says: “A screama floor away might not be as awakening.”

    Then how on earth did they hear “uhh uhh uhh”?

  39. tassojunior
    05/23/2010 at 6:15 PM

    Mea- It must have had a single key deadbolt at that time if he was right. But there’s a deadbolt and a double keyed one only makes sense outside.

  40. Clio
    05/23/2010 at 7:03 PM

    Tasso, in your opinion, were the members of the trouple suffering from “almost a” Stockholm Syndrome? Did that make them do the things they did on 08/02/06? Are you kidding us, again?

  41. Bill Orange
    05/23/2010 at 10:25 PM

    Tasso, I still don’t understand the trapped intruder theory. Someone breaks in on the second or third floor. But the knife was in the kitchen, so they would’ve had to go downstairs. At that point, they’re not really trapped anymore. What not just grab the laptop and walk out the door?

  42. Bea
    05/23/2010 at 11:02 PM

    Very good point, James (Bill, the window possibility was not mentioned when Joe described the security system during interrogation). The defendants themselves were clear that the intruder entered through the back door and exited there too. In the interrogation transcripts, the defendants are adamant that the front door was indeed locked. I recall reading that the windows were inspected and tested (how, I don’t know) to ensure that the breach had not occurred there. Same with skylights and roof entry, so Tasso I don’t know the new interest in mode of entry. Can you educate me?

    As for the double-key deadbolt door on the back gate, it’s not what Joe said during interrogation. He’s asked point blank and he doesn’t mention this as a reason why the intruder hadn’t gone out the back gate. He says his reasoning is based solely because the door is shut even when pressed a bit, says that it would not make sense for the intruder to go over the fence but indeed that what had to have happened. He must’ve thought it more strange that the intruder would have closed the door behind him than for the intruder to go over. Doesn’t to me, but he was either caught in a position he perceived as threatening veracity, he was high and forgot that reasonable answer, or he knows that the double-key deadbolt just isn’t the case.

    And if he wants to claim he’d simply forgotten this during interrogation, it sure seems an odd thing to forget. Unless he’d given someone a key to go in and out (stated that one key is used for all locks) and he didn’t want to ‘go there’ – referencing Michael perhaps – as he does say a few contractors have keys.

  43. tassojunior
    05/23/2010 at 11:15 PM

    At risk of implying the Post could ever be wrong, that upper deck doesn’t look less than four years old and those rooftop decks are critical to houses in that block because of the view of the Masonic Temple on S which is a replica of the Tomb of King Mauseleus, one of the 7 wonders of the ancient world. A nice house there not taking advantage of that view is inconceivable.

    Anyway the important thing is there is a deck outside whatever floor that has stairs leading down to the guest bedroom door.

  44. AnnaZed
    05/23/2010 at 11:19 PM

    After searching and searching I feel like a crazy person. Wasn’t there a website, a real estate website and a post here with a link to it that has many more pictures of Swann St (one in my memory involving a poster of Maria Callas) or am I insane? CD do you remember this?

    • CDinDC
      05/24/2010 at 8:03 PM

      AnnaZ, I do, indeed, remember that. I believe the individual that directed us or posted the link wasn’t a regular contributor to the site. And I think your recollection of it being a real estate website is correct.

      • AnnaZed
        05/24/2010 at 8:22 PM

        Then the link is buried in the comments somwhere?

        ::Sacré bleu::

      • CDinDC
        05/24/2010 at 8:47 PM

        I haven’t been able to find that website either, AnnaZ.

        Here’s the photo of Dylan’s bedroom wall that looks over the back. No door. No patio.

        If you blow up the photo to 300 or more percent, you can see the pagoda archway on the patio and the neighbor’s rollup garage door.


        • AnnaZed
          05/24/2010 at 8:52 PM

          Thanks CD (lack of patio deck noted, har!), I still want to look at those Maria Callas pictures again and am frustrated.


        • New Alias
          05/24/2010 at 9:00 PM

          Anna, CDinDC, please don’t get sucked in by Tasso. He is full of it – I don’t think he even lives in the neighborhood.

          (1) the gate was made of heavy metal. this was noted by JP himself – you can find it the transcript of his interrogation (the first session). He was asked by detectives if the gate might have swung shut on its own, and he answered no – it is heavy and you have to shut it.

          (2) there isn’t a lower roof deck, there was no lower roof deck, and there never has been a lower roof deck, ever. If Tasso really lived down the block, he would know there is no lower roof deck, because he’d be able to see this with his own eyes. Instead, i think he’s just going by the WaPo drawing.

          As for proof that there wasn’t a lower roof deck in August 2006, I was at the court house today. During a break in the trial I walked out of the courtroom through a small vestibule where, on one side, the secure room for storing defense and prosecution exhibits is stored. The door was open and a group of guys from either MPD, the US Atty’s office, or a mix of both were having a chat. There on a table next to one of them was the scale doll house / model of 1509. Then and there I kind of stuck my head in, adopted what I hope was a beguiling expression, and, pointing to the lower roof on the doll house (where, incidentally, there is no deck), asked if there had been a deck there in August 2006. Several of them answered at once – “no.”

          The fence is standard good quality wooden fence of the sort Long Fence installs. It is not rickety, worn, thin, or anything else of the sort. You cannot see between the wooden slats, only the slats of metal gate.

          It became quite clear today that the only story JP told the police – and he was rock solid certain about it – was that the chime was the intruder coming in (not out) through the back door (not the front, not the basement, not anywhere else). If you go back to the transcript you will see that the detectives offered alternatives – perhaps someone came in through the front; perhaps someone had a key; perhaps the chime was the intruder exiting and not entering. JP didn’t go for it. He was emphatic that the chime was the intruder coming in through the back door.

          End of that story, I hope. I’m not engaging with Tasso anymore.

  45. New Alias
    05/24/2010 at 3:39 PM

    I have conclusively settled the question of whether or not there was a deck on top of Dylan’s former room, the lower roof of 1509.

    I asked a relevant party here at the court house – a real live official familiar with all the evidence – whether or not there had ever been a deck on the lower roof – the roof on top of Dylan’s former room. The answer is no = there was no deck. There never was a deck. That is all.

    There is a deck at the equivalent location on 1511. Perhaps that is a source of confusion.

    • plumskiter
      05/24/2010 at 3:59 PM


    • Bill 2
      05/24/2010 at 4:04 PM

      Thank you for correcting some of the misinformation that’s being rained down on this forum by someone trying derail everything to bolster his grudge against DC police. It’s time to end his attempts to lead this forum into a trial of DC cops instead of the real purpose of WMRW.

    • tassojunior
      05/24/2010 at 4:10 PM

      Here’s the WaPo diagram showing it if you don’t believe what I saw again a couple minutes ago:


    • tassojunior
      05/24/2010 at 5:07 PM

      Alias this is what you just said a few comments up yourself:

      “There is no roof deck above the kitchen. The deck you have in mind is *above* what was Dylan’s room; it adjoins what was JP and VZ’s bedroom”.

      If you’re not blind I’d suggest looking instead of relying on what “high officials in the courthouse” tell you. That is incredibly dumb.

  46. ramknts
    05/24/2010 at 5:18 PM

    i am excited at the prospect of a new path for the intruder, but it has just as many flaws as the intruder entering from the rear.

    re: a deck off of the third floor bathroom that led to stairs to the second floor. one would assume that door was locked. if it wasn’t, mr. price and mr. zaborsky would have heard the door open or shut given that it is all part of one large room. if i heard a chime late at night and knew my bedroom had a door to the outside, i would worry someone was in my room unless i knew that door was locked.

    if the intruder entered that way, they ran down two sets of stairs (one un-carpeted) into the kitchen for a knife instead of burglarizing the first floor and leaving via one of the exits.

    question: why would they run to the kitchen and then run back to the guest bedroom and stab someone? if they ran into mr. wone, who was finishing up his shower, etc., then they would have stabbed him right there. then, it would appear the intruder cleaned up the area where the stabbing took place, picked mr. wone up, and placed him in the bedroom. they then left via a window or door that did not chime on his/her way out.

    • tassojunior
      05/24/2010 at 5:30 PM

      I doubt this is the means an intruder would have taken either if it were a short stay, which we’d assume it was. ( A trapped intruder’s a different thing). But for a made-up story this seems a better choice since the door from that deck (which high officials and Alias insist is not there) leads down to the guest room.

      It’s more a matter of how far from reality, obvious physical reality, prosecutors and their friends have gotten. Disturbing.

      • ramknts
        05/24/2010 at 6:13 PM

        Still, logic presumes that if the defendants are lying and did make up a story, they may have reasons for avoiding a deck-entrance story just as they may have reasons for using the back-entrance story. For example, they may have thought an intruder would be more likely to have been seen on the deck or that one would be more likely to believe an intruder grabbed a knife if they passed through the kitchen than if they had to go to the kitchen and backtrack to Mr. Wone’s bedroom.

        You simply cannot conclude that since the defendants did not choose the most likely (if you consider that more likely) entrance of the intruder that they did not fabricate a story.

        • tassojunior
          05/24/2010 at 6:44 PM

          I don’t jump to conclusions either way, I’m just saying what would have been the most obvious stories. In fact it would have been best to have said absolutely nothing and leave all possibilities open. Or say Wone may have had a guest, say the front door was unlocked, unlock the back gate and certainly don’t substitute one of your own kitchen knives. These are 3 incredibly smart guys. And then they handed all these statements to police voluntarily?

      • KKinCA
        05/24/2010 at 6:54 PM

        @ tasso: I have read all of your posts and have sincerely tried to engage you in debate regarding some of your arguments, and I even pointed you in the direction of the WaPo illustration of 1509 Swann, but my patience has worn thin. You wrote: “It’s more a matter of how far from reality, obvious physical reality, prosecutors and their friends have gotten. Disturbing.” This indicates to me that you haven’t read the interview transcripts or listened to the 911 call. If you are at all interested in debating the details of this tragic situation, I recommend that you follow Hoya Loya’s suggestion that new readers do some research before joining in the conversation. Most of the regular posters are ignoring you, and that is your loss as they really know the details of this case and have educated me so much since I found this site about 10 days ago.

        • tassojunior
          05/24/2010 at 7:22 PM

          First I’ve never made comments on the “transcripts or 911 call”.

          Second I keep getting engaged with attacks over simple physical things that I can easily look out and see but which don’t jive with “high officials”. That tells me the leaders of the pack are not doing simple observation or looking at their own posts. Do you really think in California you know more about the ground here than I do whose lived here in the next block nearly 50 years? That’s the type attitude that wears patience.

          • KKinCA
            05/24/2010 at 7:40 PM

            Oh Tasso – I have repeatedly thanked you for sharing your observations and opinions as a neighbor of the defendants, and I have never suggested that I know anything about the 1509 Swann house – other than the WaPo illustration, which you helped me to understand.
            I suggested that you listen to the 911 call and read the transcripts if you really want some examples of “how far from reality, obvious physical reality” the defendants appear to be that night, and perhaps even as of today.
            And BTW – I am one of those AAs whom you claim are allegedly abused and discriminated against by law enforcement. In my personal experience and from hearing the stories of hundreds of recovering alcoholics in countless AA meetings over the years, it is primarily those active (non sober) alcoholics and addicts who get the attention of law enforcement, when they are, shockingly, actually breaking a law! [gasp!] DUI, public intoxication, etc. But I digress. No need to respond.

          • Hoya Loya
            05/24/2010 at 7:47 PM


            Your analysis of 1509 is thorough, but please note:

            There were no signs of a break-in upstairs and the defendants claimed that the intruder came through the kitchen door because it was left open. Any analysis that deviates from these two facts . . .

            • KKinCA
              05/24/2010 at 7:59 PM

              Thanks Hoya. That should be the end of the discussion re: alternative/better ways for the defendants to lie to the police about how the alleged intruder entered the house (I hope).

            • tassojunior
              05/24/2010 at 8:33 PM

              I understand that and the kitchen knife doesn’t mesh with upstairs entry easily. But as you may recall I mentioned it along with other vunerable entry/exit points and questioned in a common-sense query why they would not have said something to at least leave these more likely entry points open. In fact their biggest mistake was excluding other possibilities by voluntarily making statements.”Don’t Talk, You Walk”.

          • CDinDC
            05/24/2010 at 7:55 PM

            Tasso, do you think you are the only person that has ever lived in Dupont Circle? Personally, I find your analysis of the neighborhood a bit hysterical.

Comments are closed.