Day 8: Updates

1:45pm Update
 
 The first witness called today was retired FBI hair and fiber analyst Douglas Deedrick. This longtime trace evidence expert testified in the O.J. Simpson criminal case…a lot of good that did him.

Deedrick didn’t get very far before his credentials were called into question by defense counsel David Schertler and Bernie Grimm.

At issue isn’t whether Deedrick can testify as an expert on hair and fiber, but rather a challenge on another discipline he’s expected to speak to – fiber imprint identification.  It appears that the “FII” discipline is controversial and perhaps not accepted by scientists as a full subgroup of trace evidence analysis.

An on-the-fly voir direfollowed in which Schertler and Grimm painted the “FII” field as nothing short of alchemy. They once again rolled out the National Academy of Science’s recent report on “Strengthing Forensic Sciences,” and gave Judge Lynn Leibovitz a copy for her to review the pertinent sections.

For good measure, the defense was name dropping one of their hires, celebrity forensic expert Dr. Henry Lee.  Lee himself believes “FII” in not grounded in science.

AUSA Rachel Carlson Lieber is making the case for the government to allow Deedrick to testify as a court expert on this somewhat still controversial discipline.

Just before the 30 minute break, Judge Leibovitz clearly stated the challenge: Are there accepted protocols and methodologies for FII? Is it a recognized sub-discipline of trace analysis?

It comes down to Deedrick’s expert testimony being challenged as a Frye objection to the field of fabric imprint identification, and whether or not scientific objective standards and protocols exist to provide a basis for Deedrick’s conclusions.

Did the prosecution expect this challenge?  If not, why not?  The NAS report has come up before.  This may not call for another late night…it’s possible this will get decided this afternoon after Leibovitz reviews another mountain of materials on her already crowded desk.

9:00am Update

Courtesy of William Hennessey

The trial gets underway at 10:00am in room 310 of Moultrie.

After Judge Lynn Leibovitz’ tongue lashing of the government yesterday, it’s unclear as to which witness they may call next.

Bumped from the stand was Detective Gail Russell-Brown.  If the government gets squared away on how they will present the defendants’ statements, we may see her again.

The Examiner’sScott McCabe has a good piece on Judge Leibovitz in today’s edition. One quote from last week’s testimony, concerning the needle puncture wounds, stands out.  It reads as if the judge may have made up her mind regarding one key element of the government’s case:

“Things that are unexplained, unusual, weird, that appear to be fresh injuries … are relevant,” she said. “The more unusual, the more relevant it is. …This wasn’t some person that just went into a house and inflicted three stab wounds.”

“This wasn’t some person that just went into a house and inflicted three stab wounds.”

The Hot Seat:After watching Zaborsky’s interview yesterday, one couldn’t help but draw direct comparisons between the three MPD detectives we’ve seen and heard doing the third degrees:  Norris, Wagner, and Kasul.  Norris is the street cop who was definitely not cut out for this case.  Wagner’s gay baiting of Price showed him to be pretty ham-handed and ineffectual.  Kasul on the other hand looked and sounded like a smart cop.  He’s the guy you want assigned to your case. no question.

Over the past couple days, there were plenty of seats available for anyone wishing to come down and view the proceedings.  It’s advised to get there about 15 minutes early.

Judge Leibovitz called an early lunch break.  We’ll do our best to digest the latest from this morning.

An exasperated judge broke down Deedrick’s expected testing into three separate buckets; one that the government will not introduce – a stab cut test, and two that are being challenged:

A – the Fabric Imprint Test, meaning the knife swipe on a bloody towel (A Frye challenge).

B – the Fiber Transfer Test, meaning the t-shirt wrapped around the pork loin and stabbed (A Taylor challenge).

The judge told the government that these are “reasonable challenges and one way or another you have to address them.”  Still on deck is Deedrick’s already approved testimony on “conventional fiber opinions”

Leibovitz repeatedly quizzed AUSA Carlson Lieber on Deedrick’s methodology.  “Do fiber experts do fiber transfer tests and test for transfer rates?”  She asked to see materials and articles that spoke to these tests and procedures, but the government had nothing to submit.

Carlson Lieber said that analysts like Deedrick do such experiments (sometimes one-offs like these) to conclude whether or not theories regarding what happened are consistent with the evidence recovered at the scene.  In the case of the pork loin, the test was not designed to conclusively determine which knife killed Robert, but only to rule in or out possibilities.  These tests, said Carlson Lieber, only inform Deedrick’s opinions.

Speaking of the t-shirt that Deedrick used in the testing, David Schertler rose to say that a black, thick t-shirt was used in the experiment.  Carlson Lieber said black was used to enhance visibility and that it was the closest Deedrick could fine in terms of yarn and weave.

“Either it satisfies me or it doesn’t,” Judge Leibovitz warned the government.

After the break, Carlson Lieber will attempt to lay a foundation and basis for Deedrick’s pork loin test.Noon Update

185 comments for “Day 8: Updates

  1. TK
    05/27/2010 at 9:08 AM

    “This wasn’t some person that just went into a house and inflicted three stab wounds.”

    Woah. I’m kind of surprised she would come out and say something that seems to dismiss the entire ‘intruder’ argument. But I’m glad she’s taking the needle marks seriously.

    • Hoya Loya
      05/27/2010 at 10:02 AM

      Well, it could still an intruder, but one with a more complex agenda than simple stabbing.

      The comment shows that she gets what the government is trying to prove (no surprise since she’s very intelligent) but doesn’t necessarily mean that she thinks they are proving it.

      On reflection, I think yesterday shows that its one thing if the government doesn’t prove its case on its merits but that the judge doesn’t want the case to fail now or on appeal because the government wasn’t prepared with regard to the statements. For her ultimate verdict to convincingly convict or acquit the defendants on these charges, the case needs to be presented properly.

      If the prosecution is sloppy, either Roberts family and friends will feel justice was not done or the defendants will feel they didn’t get a fair shake (even if acquitted, since gossip will still say they got away with it because the prosecution messed up, rather than because they didn’t conspire).

      • AnnaZed
        05/27/2010 at 12:24 PM

        ::sigh::

        I have been trying really hard since the day when Assistant US Attorney Glen Kirshner skipped an important evidentiary hearing to be feted for his achievements on the gridiron in his youth to hope that the government will get focused and deliver a good product. Both sides are disserved if the prosecution is disorganized.

  2. dcbill
    05/27/2010 at 9:09 AM

    How do we know what time court is in session each day?

    • AnnaZed
      05/27/2010 at 11:35 AM

      I don’t know how they know, but I know because they post it here everyday.

      • Nelly
        05/27/2010 at 12:40 PM

        The judge announces it in court.

  3. dcbill
    05/27/2010 at 12:10 PM

    Is it Frye or Daubert in the District of Columbia? The NAS report is rather sound and the prosecution should have expected this challenge, given the caliber of the defense attorneys.

  4. Miss Marple
    05/27/2010 at 12:13 PM

    i feel so bad for the wone family. first they got shafted with the shitty MPD work, now they’re getting shafted with a seemingly unprepared and disorganized legal team. ugh when will justice be served???

  5. deepsouth
    05/27/2010 at 12:23 PM

    Maybe my search-fu is kaput, but I couldn’t find a single reference to fiber imprint identification or its acronym in the free online version of the NAS document by that name. Does the prosecution also get a list of the pages the defense pointed out to the judge?

    http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=12589&page=1

  6. plumskiter
    05/27/2010 at 12:33 PM

    this case does have an unusual amount of legal complexity and i am reluctant to criticize the prosecution too much as i have walked in their shoes. they are probably working as many hours a day outside the courtroom as in it, preparing the next day’s witnesses, doing research on issues that might or could come up, conferring with one another and the police, etc.

    said, however, they are well aware that the Daubert case, and its progeny, replaced Frye for setting the standards for the acceptance of expert opinions in court, and they need to be prepared to put on evidence about the field of expertise being offered for every expert witness. i don’t think they are disorganized, but perhaps have more on their plates than they can manage.

    the contention that the US Attorney’s Office has “unlimited resources” is simply not true, and ultimately three lawyers (i think there is a 3rd, although i’ve only seen two names) are carrying the burden of this case while others in the office are tending to the many many other crimes committed every day in D.C.

    • Daphne
      05/27/2010 at 12:51 PM

      Plum, I sat on the opposite side of the aisle as you, but I think we had similar challenges: lots and lots of cases and never enough time. Just because a big part ot the general public who follows this case is convinced of the defendants’ guilt of obstruction — I mean, it’s just logical, right: man mysteriously stabbed and the murder scene is immaculate except for some contrived messes — but alas, whether something is or is not logical, does not automatically correlate to bona fide legal evidence. Give the prosecutors a break: they can only work the evidence (in the legal sense)they have.

      • AkaZappa
        05/27/2010 at 4:30 PM

        The “for truth” stuff was brought up in the evidentiary hearings. Seems to me they should have been on top of that.

  7. Leonard
    05/27/2010 at 12:41 PM

    If an intruder committed the murder were they also responsible for the other “weird” , “unusual” and “unexplained” things? It doesn’t seem likely given the short timeframe and lack of forensic evidence of an intruder. But, if an intruder did stab Wone three times and wasn’t responsible for the other weird, unusal and unexplained things, who was? The govt isn’t prosecuting on the stabbing but on the latter. That could include not being forthright about sexual or drug related activites with Wone prior to the murder that they might have had knowledge of as well as cleanup afterward. Even if a fifth person were completely responsible for the sex, hypodermic marks and murder it defies logic that they could have accomplished this with both no one discovering them until just after the stabbing and without leaving a much bigger mess. I don’t expect to everknow who killed Wone including whether or not it was a fifth unnamed party. The best I can expect is a clearer picture of the three mens state of mind and perhaps contradictions in testimony that indicate willful lying in order to mislead. I’m still very concerned that one or more of these three men could be innocent and yet suffer the same fate as one or more who might be guilty.

    • Bill Orange
      05/27/2010 at 2:54 PM

      I really don’t see how one of them could be innocent and the others guilty. Joe and Dylan alibi each other for the first part of the timeframe, and Joe and Victor alibi each other for the second part. The only way for one of them to be innocent is to cut the timeframe in half and assume that the innocent party was in their room and heard nothing while the other two committed the crime.

  8. CDinDC (Boycott BP)
    05/27/2010 at 1:02 PM

    “For good measure, the defense was name dropping one of their hires, celebrity forensic expert Dr. Henry Lee. Lee himself believes “FII” in not grounded in science.”

    Does the defense team NOT realize that Dr. Henry Lee’s reputation is SO tarnished at this point, it’s hard for anyone to take anything he said with any authoritative meaning?

    • Carolina
      05/27/2010 at 2:34 PM

      Apparently not. Who would pay that man a dime? Not only is he willing to make evidence fit the theory of whomever is signing the check, it now appears he is willing to collect important physical evidence from a crime scene and then “lose” it.

      I am surprised that anyone would take him seriously as an expert at anything besides PR spin.

      • Bill Orange
        05/27/2010 at 2:57 PM

        He seems like someone who plays well in front of a jury. I would be VERY wary about putting him in front of this judge.

        • Leo
          05/27/2010 at 3:36 PM

          Exactly Bill O–he was probably hired when the defense was still thinking of a jury trial. Judge L will be aware of his shortcomings.

        • Carolina
          05/27/2010 at 4:40 PM

          I think he lost even his Jury-fu after the fingernail debacle.

  9. Farmer Ginny
    05/27/2010 at 1:17 PM

    If Mr. Wone’s body had been washed after he died, why wouldn’t the semen have been washed off? And wouldn’t there be traces of tap water in the wounds?

    Also, when the three defendants are described as looking “freshly showered” — what does that mean? Wet hair? Surely it’s not just that they were in bathrobes.

    • Carolina
      05/27/2010 at 2:35 PM

      Semen was IN his rectum. Would can assume they may have had time to wash him down, but an enema was perhaps a bit time consuming. Though heaven knows, they had the equipment handy.

      • Rapt in MD
        05/27/2010 at 3:10 PM

        I thought about this also Farmer Ginny. I seem to remember that semen was on the exterior of his groin area and his thighs. It is curious that Robert was washed off only on the upper half of his body. Very strange.

        • Rapt in MD
          05/27/2010 at 3:22 PM

          Further to my above post – I just went back to the arrest affadavit and confirmed the FBI detected semen from the exterior area as well as inside the body. It makes me wonder if Robert was bent over into a tub or shower and that’s why the lower half of his body was not cleaned. Or was he drained and then assaulted?

          • mia
            05/27/2010 at 4:24 PM

            What I could image is that whoever showed Robert would 1)move his body to either bathroom tub or patio 2)use either a hose or a hand shower to clean him while have one man lifted his upper body (at least head) to avoid wetting his hair. I don’t think they would want to literally clean his body by using hands. So it is possible there’s some “missing spots”.

        • Miss Marple
          05/27/2010 at 4:05 PM

          maybe they just rinsed and didnt use soap; seminal fluid is not completely water soluble otherwise it would completely dissolve inside the body.

    • Flood
      05/27/2010 at 2:41 PM

      I also wondered about the “freshly showered” description since none of the three mention taking a shower right before bed time.

      • ramknts
        05/27/2010 at 3:01 PM

        Also, Victor and Joe supposedly took showers after the gym, not even five hours prior.

        • Flood
          05/27/2010 at 3:05 PM

          I thought about that too, but it was a hot and humid summer evening/night and someone had to man the hot grill to cook the steaks.

          On second thought, did Joe have time to shower at the gym? He was barely there long enought to get a few sets completed.

          • ramknts
            05/27/2010 at 5:59 PM

            In his interview, Victor claims that when he got home from the gym, Joe had already showered (which he did at home AFTER the gym) and Dylan was presently in the shower. Victor then showered.

    • NIghttime Commando
      05/27/2010 at 3:08 PM

      There is one detail that I haven’t seen addressed here, although I’ve seen it alluded to.

      Much has been made of semen being found in the deceased’s rectum (although the defense will argue that this is ‘seminal fluid’, which is a common post-mortem secretion).

      One of the editors pointed out that if the semen / seminal fluid were the result of post-mortem secretion, that one would have also expected to find evidence on the deceased’s underwear, and that no such results had been reported.

      I believe it has been reported that the deceased was found wearing underwear underneath his athletic shorts.

      My question: Was it routine for the deceased to wear underwear under his pajamas or shorts at night? In DC? In August? Did the prosecution establish this as the deceased’s routine when they questioned Mrs. Wone about what he normally did—whether he showered, whether he wore his nightguard, whether he folded his clothes at night, whether he hung his towel, etc? I haven’t seen any mention of it.

      Based on my on experience, I have to say that wearing underwear under athletic shorts seems a bit unusual—particularly in a place like Washington in DC, in a room where the temperature was an issue. If this was NOT the deceased’s normal custom, would the fact that he was found wearing underwear not stand out?

      Conversely, if this WERE the deceased’s normal routine, would it not be inconsistent with a scenario where he was murdered, showered, dressed and staged in the guest room by people unfamiliar with his nighttime routine? How would the defendants know whether he did or didn’t wear underwear to bed?

      If he did NOT not wear underwear to bed, this anomaly should stand out. If he DID normally wear underwear to bed, doesn’t it seem somewhat improbable that the defendants would know this fairly idiosyncractic detail AND manage to get it right while staging a crime scene?

      • Bill Orange
        05/27/2010 at 3:30 PM

        I always wear underwear under shorts, even athletic shorts that I’m wearing at night. If I had just stabbed someone to death and was redressing the body, I would probably have put the underwear on without even thinking about it.

        Also, Joe Price and Robert Wone were in college together for a year, and it’s within the realm of possibility that Robert had crashed in Joe’s room one night, or vice versa, so he might know his routine.

        • Bill Orange
          05/27/2010 at 3:48 PM

          Yup. Page 56, line 25 of Joe’s police interview: “[Robert] slept on my [Joe Price’s] floor in college…”

        • NIghttime Commando
          05/27/2010 at 3:55 PM

          Either way, it’s a detail that bears being established.

          If it weren’t his normal routine and he was found wearing underwear, that suggests staging.

          But if it were his normal routine, how likely is it that Price would know Wone’s CURRENT routine, as opposed to what Wone might’ve done 20 years ago when he crashed in Price’s dorm room? Deciding to re-brief him would be nothing better than a 50-50 gamble while in the middle of the somewhat time-sensitive act of staging a crime scene. Multiplying the probabilites of the number of things Price et al would have had to have foreseen and gotten right really strecthes credulity, IMO.

          • mia
            05/27/2010 at 4:35 PM

            Why 20 years ago? they met in college and Robert was killed when he was 32. I would say 10 good yrs. Price said they’ve spend night 2/3 times before, but didn’t specify it was in college.

            • Nighttime Commando
              05/27/2010 at 5:09 PM

              20 was a typo. But 10, 12 or 20, the point stands.

              Wone crashed with Price at some distant point in the past. What is the probability that Price took note of Wone’s wardrobe preference, remembered it, correctly staged it, and that said preference hadn’t changed?

              Unless it was well-known to all of Wone’s friends, family and acquaintances that he was an adamant, confirmed, unvarying nighttime underwear wearer, okay…easier then to buy a staging.

              If it was highly unusual for him to wear underwear at night–and all the more so on a hot, summer night– that he was is an odd detail too.

              • mia
                05/27/2010 at 5:31 PM

                To qualify your arguments, there should have two assumptions: 1)They’ve only spend night together substantially a long time ago; 2)Robert did ever change his habits since then. But we couldn’t prove either of them at this point. Assuming it is the case, probably the question we should ask is what is Price’s OWN routine. It’s natural that people would subconsciously apply their own preference to others.

                • ramknts
                  05/27/2010 at 6:36 PM

                  Another assumption is that he was not ready for bed or already in bed when assaulted.

          • Bill Orange
            05/27/2010 at 7:32 PM

            I agree that it should be checked, but I’m guessing that it already has, and that Wone typically wore underwear to bed.

            As for Price not knowing the CURRENT routine, I’d argue that most men don’t change their routines that much as they age. (Although getting married is one of the things that will do it.)

            But here’s the simplest explanation: Wone was reportedly “fastidious”, and his overnight bag was likely very well-organized. If you just killed him and wanted to redress the body, you’d go through the bag. You’d take out the clothes for tomorrow and put them aside. You’d take out the clothes for tonight, and there’s a second pair of underwear in the bag–better put those on him! Whoa, there’s a mouth guard in here, too–better make sure that goes into place. As long as the contents of the bag reflected Wone’s routine, you wouldn’t have too much trouble figuring out the routine.

      • Nyer Wants Justice
        05/27/2010 at 4:09 PM

        I have wondered similar things before.
        They say Robert showered before bed – so what underwear was he wearing? Did he put back on the underwear he wore that day? Did he bring a clean pair just to wear to bed in addition to the next day’s clothing?

      • mia
        05/27/2010 at 4:32 PM

        I have read somewhere that Joe claims they had spend night together 2 or 3 times before. So it is quite possible he learned Robert’s nighttime routine through those nights.

        • whodoneit
          05/27/2010 at 5:24 PM

          To the extent defendants may have guessed correctly about Robert’s routine, the prosecution would not have asked Kathy about it and the defense would not ask because it does not know how she will answer (unless there are notes of interviews with Kathy that had to be turned over in discovery).

          • Kate
            05/27/2010 at 6:02 PM

            Cheers all – I have wondered about the underwear, as well. It is definitely a question that should have been asked of Kathy Wone.

            Perhaps it has been?

            Anyone whose been attending court recall questions along these lines? The editors have been doing such an incredible job here, but surely can’t report on everything.

            Many thanks for your discussions,
            Kate

            • ramknts
              05/27/2010 at 6:26 PM

              http://whomurderedrobertwone.com/2010/05/18/day-2-wrap/

              Nelly posted this:

              “Usually, he would pull down the comforter and sleep under the top bed sheet, like any normal person would. She said he did not watch TV in bed. Don’t remember anything being said about paying for the party.”

              It is not stated that his underwear habits were questioned.

              • Kate
                05/27/2010 at 6:30 PM

                Many thanks, ramknts.

                Hmmm, rather odd that it wasn’t addressed.

                • Kate
                  05/27/2010 at 6:32 PM

                  OOps, sorry.

                  “Not stated that his underwear habits were questioned.”

                  I’m not too sharp today.

                  • ramknts
                    05/27/2010 at 6:38 PM

                    now i’m confused! i meant that underwear habits are never mentioned either in the line of questioning or in mrs. wone’s testimony.

        • ramknts
          05/27/2010 at 6:34 PM

          Mr. Wone had never spent the night at Joe and Victor’s townhome before and maybe spent the night once when they lived on Capitol Hill. The only specific sleepovers Joe mentions are that Mr. Wone spent the night once when visiting colleges when they had just met and once when Joe was in law school.

          http://whomurderedrobertwone.com/2010/04/07/the-third-degree-price/

      • Angela Channing
        05/27/2010 at 6:24 PM

        Well, not to get too personal….but did his habit also include using a body powder? After all, he planned to stay overnight well in advance and he would have packed it if it was something needed, especially in the hot DC summer.

  10. Themis
    05/27/2010 at 1:21 PM

    Because Deedrick is being tendered as an expert witness, his report should have been disclosed in advance of the trial. If the contested testimony was in the report, which it should have been, the defense should not be challenging it on the fly. If it wasn’t disclosed in the report, they should be objecting to the nondisclosure.

    • plumskiter
      05/27/2010 at 5:22 PM

      i agree. it is difficult to understand why the issue of fiber impression expertise wasn’t identified, litigated and resolved prior to trial. seems like both sides should have seen it coming.

      • Carolina
        05/27/2010 at 7:10 PM

        Strangely, I recall hearing about The Pork Loin Guy long ago. I didn’t connect him with the OJ trial expert.

  11. CC Biggs
    05/27/2010 at 2:15 PM

    From the latest column of Jonah Goldberg in National Review online:

    A friend of mine insists that if he were the metro editor of the Washington Post, every Wone article would begin something like this: “Robert Wone, the murdered lawyer who was found with his own semen in his rectum . . .”

    That might be going too far, but it would grab attention. Instead, the only place that tidbit has been reported in the Washington Post is in a Style-section article about a great website, whomurderedrobertwone.com. The irony is palpable. The newspaper’s most interesting story on the murder case is about a website that is exhaustively reporting on the trial largely because people interested in the story can’t get what they want from their hometown newspaper.

    • Aquanetta
      05/27/2010 at 2:36 PM

      They could also mention the electric ‘milking’ device found in the residence. (Sorry, not sure of the exact name of the device). But, if your interested, gawker has a diagram. Uggg.

      • Carolina
        05/27/2010 at 4:45 PM

        E-stim, and if you’re interested, you can find online video of it’s use in animal breeding and human sexual context.

  12. Aquanetta
    05/27/2010 at 2:20 PM

    Tell me that I didn’t just read the words, “PORK LOIN” in a legal proceeding? 🙂

    • Carolina
      05/27/2010 at 2:40 PM

      That’s nothing. Did you ever see the Walter Cronkite special on the Kennedy assassination? In the end, we’re all just a side or beef or a loin of pork.

  13. Bill
    05/27/2010 at 2:31 PM

    CC Biggs on 05/27/2010 at 2:15 PM
    From the latest column of Jonah Goldberg in National Review online:

    A friend of mine insists that if he were the metro editor of the Washington Post, every Wone article would begin something like this: “Robert Wone, the murdered lawyer who was found with his own semen in his rectum . . .”

    That might be going too far, but it would grab attention. Instead, the only place that tidbit has been reported in the Washington Post is in a Style-section article about a great website, whomurderedrobertwone.com. The irony is palpable. The newspaper’s most interesting story on the murder case is about a website that is exhaustively reporting on the trial largely because people interested in the story can’t get what they want from their hometown newspaper.

    ———————————–

    I think such an introduction is salacious and should defiantly be avoided. A tabloid would use such an introduction. It hurts his family and those that are grieving over Robert’s death. Your “friend” can’t be much of a reporter or the paper that he writes for is sensational.

    • Bill Orange
      05/27/2010 at 3:08 PM

      He’s referencing Jonah Goldberg from the National Review. Which, quite frankly, is not what I would describe as an honorable publication. I think that “rabidly anti-gay” would be a fair description.

    • Bill Orange
      05/27/2010 at 3:21 PM

      I can’t find that column online. Do you have a link?

      • CC Biggs
        05/27/2010 at 3:51 PM

        After telling us the food is lousy, Bill Orange now wants a bigger portion! (I’ll see if I can find a link to the full piece.)

    • Timeline
      05/27/2010 at 4:56 PM

      That was not the first mention of it in the Post. I first learned of the e-stim device and about the semen from the Post coverage of the release of the affadavits for the arrest warrants, I believe in late 2008 if memory serves.

      • whodoneit
        05/27/2010 at 5:25 PM

        It was in the June 2009 Post on-line article, but buried.

        • Timeline
          05/27/2010 at 5:39 PM

          Really? I could have sworn it was in the November Post story, but now that I am thinking about it, I suppose we could have just known that detail from reading the affadavits themselves, as we had all read those in addition to the Post coverage.

  14. ramknts
    05/27/2010 at 3:24 PM

    Been thinking more about how Victor didn’t know about Robert’s visit…

    Victor took an early flight home, which he didn’t tell Joe until he was in a car on his way home. Earlier, Robert informed Joe he would be later than expected. Wonder what effect this had on the plan…(if there was one).

    Victor did not see Joe at the gym. When he came home, Joe was already ‘showered’ and was dressing upstairs. Perhaps Joe didn’t go to the gym or shower and instead used that time to prepare for the evening. Have gym records been checked for that day? Could prove Joe and Dylan lied to Victor early.

    At one point during dinner, Joe notes he left the water running and so needs to run upstairs to check it out. He could have used this as an excuse to fool around upstairs while Dylan kept Victor at the table.

    So weird to me still that in the 5 hours Victor is home, neither Joe nor Dylan mentions the guest staying that evening–a unusual occurrence for the household. Usually, hosts turn the bed down earlier than they Dylan did. Seems they wanted to hide it from Victor entirely (perhaps why Dylan made the bed and answered the door) but had to reveal it at the last minute.

    If Dylan and/or Joe planned to kill Robert, they might have thought to remove his body before Victor came home and report that Robert never showed.

    • CDinDC (Boycott BP)
      05/27/2010 at 3:48 PM

      Sin of omission. He should have told Victor but didn’t. Perhaps he felt dishorable about his intentions.

      Or perhaps Victor would have objected to the visit.

      I’ve always thought that perhaps Victor was annoyed with Joe and Victor and that’s why he went to bed instead of greeting Robert. And Dylan did say that he thought the commotion could have been Victor and Joe arguing. (But arguing in the hallway with a guest in the next room???)

      • Ivan
        05/27/2010 at 4:10 PM

        What time did Victor return home that night? I can’t find it anywhere.

        • ramknts
          05/27/2010 at 6:16 PM
          • Daphne
            05/27/2010 at 6:34 PM

            What time was he supposed to be home?

          • plumskiter
            05/27/2010 at 6:37 PM

            as an aside, this is a perfect example of the difficulties the government must be facing in deciding what to offer “for the truth” and what to offer as evidence of obstruction. the government played the videos primarily as evidence of the defendants’ fabrications – yet might want to use victor’s statement that he got home at 6:30 p.m. for the truth. so, i wonder if they are now going through the video transcripts and other defendant statements line by line, marking which are “for truth” and which are not. makes me glad i retired.

            • ramknts
              05/27/2010 at 6:46 PM

              Bea said once that she checked the flight schedules for that day way back when, and I think she said victor was supposed to be home around 11:00.

      • Carolina
        05/27/2010 at 4:50 PM

        Odd that Victor would have objected to a mutual friend spending a single night in their guestroom. Why would he do that?

        • ladyg
          05/27/2010 at 4:55 PM

          my best guess, is that victor just wanted a quiet evening home after his business trip. you know the face that you put on, when you really don’t want (company) anyone coming over?

          • ladyg
            05/27/2010 at 4:56 PM

            that’t why joe said that victor was “miffed”?

            • Carolina
              05/27/2010 at 7:16 PM

              I understand that, but how big of a jerk would you have to be to not even come down to say hello. Granted, they were expecting to share breakfast in the morning, but it seems positively juvenile to behave as he did.

              That makes me wonder why he was *this* miffed. After all, it wasn’t as if Robert was going to require entertaining. Bad form, all around.

        • anonymous
          05/27/2010 at 4:57 PM

          For what its worth, I still haven’t told my husband that a friend is coming to stay this Saturday and Sunday. I just know he won’t be happy about it, so putting it off as long as I can. He hates having to make chit-chat with my friends over breakfast, etc.

          • Carolina
            05/27/2010 at 7:18 PM

            But those are *your* friends; Robert was a *mutual* friend. He wasn’t staying for a weekend, there was no entertaining or chitchat, and Joe had an agenda for the short breakfast that would be held in the AM.

            Why be such a jackass, if nothing else was afoot?

            • Anonymous
              05/27/2010 at 8:28 PM

              He would feel the same way about mutual friends. He is very social — likes parties, restaurants — he just hates having house guests. I really don’t think it is all that unusual, and even assuming Victor was pissy about the house guest, I just don’t think it has that much to do with the case.

        • Manopener
          05/27/2010 at 6:46 PM

          Perhaps Victor knew something more about Wone and Price’s history then is generally known and sensed what throwing Ward into that mix could mean. But, I transgress, it is heresy to suggest that Wone may have been a part of this on this website I know.

          Its much more fun to spin endless lurid conspiracy theories then to even consider that it was all to cover a simple OD.

          • Hoya Loya
            05/27/2010 at 7:14 PM

            Manopener:

            It’s actually not heresy to speculate about “history” between Joe and Robert since we know so little in that area. It is certainly possible that Victor knew of a past interest, whether mutual or unrequited that might have upset him (all speculation of course).

            What does upset many here is the suggestion that the now-married and reportedly faithful Robert would have wanted to start or resume something with Joe that night as it is contrary to all character evidence we have. Likewise an OD, unless it was involuntary.

          • Carolina
            05/27/2010 at 7:21 PM

            There is NO EVIDENCE. None. You are doing nothing more than contributing to the ridiculous, uneducated assumption that all rape victims are sluts and any straight man with gay friends must be on the dl. It’s no wonder it’s so hard to establish legitimate friendships with straight men.

            Trust me, gay doesn’t rub off.

          • Bill Orange
            05/27/2010 at 7:23 PM

            It’s not so much that it’s “heresy”, it’s just that there’s NO evidence of Robert Wone being on the down-low. And yes, I realize that being on the down-low means that you’re keeping a low profile, but there’s been no mention of any unusual phone calls, e-mails, text messages, or anything else that would suggest that Robert Wone was leading a double life.

    • Nyer Wants Justice
      05/27/2010 at 4:25 PM

      It also seems that they weren’t too excited to see Robert. They act like they were just doing him a favor and didn’t want to hang out.
      I mean nobody even tells Victor, for some reason Dylan has to make up the bed, even after Robert called ahead Joe still doesn’t go down to get the door and Dylan has to get on clothes to let him in. Then once he arrives they just talk for a little and go to bed.

      I also find it interesting that when Wone comes to the door Dylan quickly throws on a tshirt and shorts/pants, but later on when he is awakened by the stabbing he comes out in a bathrobe.

      • ladyg
        05/27/2010 at 4:36 PM

        good point. some host they are.. they offer him water before going to bed, isn’t that what you doing in the middle of the night?

        • ladyg
          05/27/2010 at 4:42 PM

          it just seems strange. robert didn’t jog over there and i’m sure the cab ride didn’t make him thirsty. is this the norm? my first thoughts would be,is there anything i can get you.( i notice the they use we alot). so i guess the question would be can “we” get you anything?

      • mia
        05/27/2010 at 5:02 PM

        I thought about that too. Kathy said Robert was trying to “kill three birds with one stone…..catch up with an old friends”. But it seems they only chatted very briefly if he indeed arrived around 10:30 but found the 2 text messages were written in 11:05 (I could only picture Robert was alone in the guest room writing the text msg. after took shower).

        • AkaZappa
          05/27/2010 at 5:04 PM

          Allegedly there was a plan to have breakfast the next morning.

          Text messages? You mean the two unsent emails? Or am I missing something?

          • mia
            05/27/2010 at 5:11 PM

            Yes I mean the two unsent. Sorry for the misleading.

            • AkaZappa
              05/27/2010 at 5:12 PM

              No worries!

      • Carolina
        05/27/2010 at 7:25 PM

        Yet Joe wanted something from Robert. According to him, he was going to hit him up for work. I hope he planned to be a tad better host at breakfast.

        I would love to know what was said when Robert called to say he was going to be late. Did Joe tell Robert that he’d be in bed and that Dylan would be waiting up for him? Has he ever indicated *why* he didn’t go downstairs to meet his longtime friend?

        I swear, kids these days. No manners.

  15. des
    05/27/2010 at 3:42 PM

    @ramknts. I wonder if victor didn’t let Joe know he was arriving early until he was in a car coming from the airport, Because maybe he wanted to surprise him in a sense because he didn’t trust him. Maybe he has done similar deceitful things before and victor was suspicious and maybe trying to catch him in the act.
    And then Joe isn’t home once he does arrive and so he goes out looking for him to see what he’s up to.

    • Carolina
      05/27/2010 at 4:52 PM

      That is very intriguing, des.

    • AkaZappa
      05/27/2010 at 4:55 PM

      Well, except given that Joe had a profile up for seeking out other sex partners for “him and his Dom”, it doesn’t seem like fidelity was really an issue here. Victor countenances Dylan’s presence in the household but is overcome with jealousy at the idea that Joe might hook up with someone else? Doesn’t seem likely to me.

      • Bill Orange
        05/27/2010 at 7:19 PM

        Unlikely but not impossible. Victor reportedly wasn’t happy about the 3rd person in their relationship, and I’d guess he be even less happy about even more tricks on the side.

      • Carolina
        05/27/2010 at 7:28 PM

        I have a very dear friend who is in an open relationship, mostly because that’s how he wants it. His partner is okay with it, but hardly thrilled. He puts up with it as long as the play is safe and is no one they consider part of their inner social circle. In other words, strangers are okay; friends are off limits.

    • ladyg
      05/27/2010 at 5:00 PM

      that’s what i wouldv’e done.

  16. Julius
    05/27/2010 at 3:53 PM

    I still think a ninja assassin did it.

    • Carolina
      05/27/2010 at 4:53 PM

      Domestic ninja or imported?

  17. David
    05/27/2010 at 3:54 PM

    Interesting how F. Lee Baily went at Deedrick in the exact same way as Scherter. Replace “hair and fiber analysis” with “fabric imprint analysis” and shows how nothings has changed in fifteen years (expect of course now that hair and fiber analysis in now a respected aspect of forensic science)

    From CNN article:

    “Defense attorney F. Lee Bailey elicited from Deedrick testimony that the agent never obtained samples of clothing from law enforcement personnel at the crime scene and didn’t check to see if the fibers matched the dark blue uniforms of police officers.

    He also got Deedrick to acknowledge that hair and fiber analysis is a less exact science than comparisons involving fingerprints, footprints and ballistics.

    Bailey also tried to show that Deedrick is a poorly qualified expert because he has written only a few articles about forensic science and is not a member of any professional societies, such as the American Academy of Forensic Science. Bailey could be setting the jury up for a comparison between Deedrick and defense expert Henry Lee, considered one of the most prominent forensic scientists in the country.”

  18. Aquanetta
    05/27/2010 at 4:21 PM

    Planned or not… Just my opinion

    I think that most of us can agree that one or all of the three had soemthing to do with this murder. So, I’ll skip that part. So, now… was it planned or not.

    Planned:

    From what I have read, Vic wasn’t even supposed to be there except he got an earlier flight. (On a personal note: Im guilty of “coming home early” to catch a cheating partner – HEY. It works!) So, it would have been between Joe and Dylan. You just don’t say, “Hey, Im glad that your home early, you can help us kill someone. GREAT TIMING!”. And then there’s the common sense approach. These guys just don’t come across as the premediated murdering types. Im sure its in the realm of possibilities but not likely. All successful, rich, lots to lose (Well, minus Dylan, who I like to refer to as the Kato Kalen of the Wone Trial… no real motivation to do it. Further Joe and Wone were long time friends. Just doesn’t make common sense to me.

    Not Planned:

    This is the more plausible explanation for me. Whatever went on in that house, went horribly wrong. Was it consentual in the beginning (maybe/maybe not)? It seems apparent that he was drugged and strangled ? Maybe he was drugged and they though he was dead. Then paniced and started to think of ways to disguise the drug death. Then real panic and he was stabbed. We may never know exactly what happened. There would be ALOT of evidence that needed cleaning up in a very, very short period of time. Which means that if they decided to change jobs, a cleaning service would be a good choice. (Though, Im sticking with my personal explanation of that he was killed elsewhere and transported back to the residence. Thus, the lack of forensic evidence in the home.)

    On a total seperate note: I’ve heard the term ‘play mat’ mentioned several times. What exactly is that?

    • Rapt in MD
      05/27/2010 at 4:35 PM

      I keep thinking about the garden hose and the medical report that said one of the wounds was large enough to stick a finger in. Then I keep thinking that the top half of Robert’s body was washed, but the lower half still tested positive to semen on the outside of the groin area and his thighs. Even though I understand the “water soluble” argument that semen is not easy to wash off, I still feel like he may have been drained of blood through a hole in the chest, probably the one that had hit the aorta. Remember, there are some reports that Robert was alive for several minutes following the stabbing. Alive long enough to bleed out conveniently into a drain possibly?

      • csi
        05/27/2010 at 4:59 PM

        good point. I have been thinking about why the hole (one bigger than others) would be big enough to put a hand in. It could have been made for draining purposes.

        • Jo
          05/28/2010 at 3:59 AM

          Big enough to put a finger not a hand in. Per the autopsy report, all three stab wounds were “slit-like” and estimated to be 4″ to 5″ deep. They measured 7/8″, 15/16″, and 13/16″ in length. How could one appeared noticeably bigger to the EMT if they were made by the same knife with similar depth? Was more than one knife used? Or more disturbingly, did someone tried to hold one of the wound open to facilitate draining?

      • AkaZappa
        05/28/2010 at 3:17 AM

        This whole case is gruesome, but that takes the proverbial cake. Drained of blood while still alive? Turns my stomach to contemplate.

        • Jo
          05/28/2010 at 4:04 AM

          Disturbing theory indeed. Those found responsible need to spend a very long time in prison and get a taste of their own medicine.

    • Nyer Wants Justice
      05/27/2010 at 4:35 PM

      In my opinion,
      I can’t ignore the fact that there were multiple needle puncutre wounds on the body and Joe’s brother Michael was taking a phlebotomy course and missed it that night for the first time and had a key to the house…
      I don’t think Joe has a motive to kill his friend, but I can definitely see a motive to cover up for his brother. Perhaps the intruder story is based in some truth, except that they know who the intruder is, and it’s Joe’s brother.

      • Leo
        05/27/2010 at 6:20 PM

        There is no way Victor and Dylan are going to risk their liberty to cover up for Joe’s creepy drug-abusing criminal brother. They have to be covering up for each other.

        • Carolina
          05/27/2010 at 7:33 PM

          I think they believe that if they all hang together, they’ll get away with it. Would Joe cover up for Michael? I think so. He’s put up with a lot from Michael but it seems for him blood is thicker than burglary. Would Dylan and Victor cover for Joe, covering for Michael? Who knows, but it would seem so.

      • Angela Channing
        05/27/2010 at 11:32 PM

        Very interesting…I did not think that his brother could be involved. I have always thought someone else is involved and thought that if one of the housemates placed an ad in ALT.com, they would place ads on other sites…Craigs, gay.com (not sure if Manhunt was around then…) I wonder if a full forensic analysis was done on all of the pcs, phones, or any other device? I was also thinking that if it was a trick gone really bad, then they sanitized the story by making him an intruder — perhaps thinking that no one would believe them? It seems odd to have made up a whole story about an intruder.

        • AnnaZed
          05/27/2010 at 11:59 PM

          Well, short of admitting that they themselves murdered Robert what else would you have them say?

    • AkaZappa
      05/27/2010 at 4:45 PM

      A play mat is used in BDSM play to keep bodily fluids off of rugs, furniture, etc. A plastic mat.

      • Carolina
        05/27/2010 at 4:57 PM

        I’ve said this before but I can’t help repeating myself. Among all the accoutrement cataloged in Dylan’s room, I find not a single mention of a play mat. That just doesn’t seem logical. So were did it/they go?

        • Aquanetta
          05/27/2010 at 5:01 PM

          Well, you kinda answered you own question. If he was killed on it, then it was disposed of. Thus, the lack of DNA.

          FYI – Playmat… YUK!

          • Carolina
            05/27/2010 at 7:39 PM

            I’m playing dumb 🙂 I had a pretty good idea where it went!

            I have to tell you how much I love your name. I had a neighbor named Quadranette and often bemoaned the fact that she had the world’s best drag name and didn’t need it.

            • Aquanetta
              05/27/2010 at 8:33 PM

              Thanks.

    • Manopener
      05/27/2010 at 6:35 PM

      Killed somewhere else and transported back to the house? What supports that theory? Why would they do that? They would have been better off just taking his body out into the street. People get mugged around there all the time.

  19. Aquanetta
    05/27/2010 at 4:42 PM

    I did not know about the missed class part. Interesting. Surely the police has looked into his whereabouts during this time. I can see your point about Joe covering for his brother. BUT, remember, the brother physically abused Joe as a child. I’d think that he would be reluctant to cover for him. And, if he did cover for him…what motivation would the other two have to go along?

    I love all these what-if scenarios. It will be interesting who is most correct in the end.

    • AkaZappa
      05/27/2010 at 4:49 PM

      Joe talks in the interview about how his brother had put him through the wringer with his drug use, so Joe is clearly invested in Michael.

      Michael’s lover alibied him for that night.

      • Aquanetta
        05/27/2010 at 5:10 PM

        Hmmmm…. Ok, I can see your point. But, what about the other two? Maybe Joe chimed in lawyer mode and said your already liable for it, so you might as well help me cover it up. What do you think?

        • AkaZappa
          05/27/2010 at 5:32 PM

          I think Victor covers for Joe as the co-parent of his children, stand by your man, etc, and Dylan was probably involved. I don’t mean Joe was covering for something Michael did all on his own. I don’t think Joe would take the fall for anyone for something he wasn’t involved in. I think Michael may have been involved in the original plan, so Joe is covering for him as part of the larger cover up. Dylan goes along because he was perhaps also involved in the plot to exploit Robert.

      • Ivan
        05/27/2010 at 5:28 PM

        Is an alibi by a “lover” sufficient?

        • AkaZappa
          05/27/2010 at 5:33 PM

          Could be possible to cast doubt on it as coming from a biased party, but it seems to me you would need some evidence that suggests Michael’s presence at Swann St.

        • plumskiter
          05/27/2010 at 6:45 PM

          this would be a question of fact (& would more likely arise in the swann st. situation in a murder trial where michael was a defendant).

          if a defendant asserts an alibi defense and calls just one witness, his/her lover, to say he/she was with me when the crime went down, the finder of fact (judge or jury) has to decide whether the witness was credible (believable) – at least enough to create a reasonable doubt as to the defendant’s guilt. one witness can be enough. ultimately it is up to the finder of fact to decide.

          an alibi defense will usually be stronger if the alibi witness(es) are impartial and unrelated to the defendant – but often one’s alibi witnesses are one’s partner or one’s parent or child because that is who folks spend the most time with.

          • Bill Orange
            05/27/2010 at 7:13 PM

            Does anyone else thinks it’s weird (not necessarily inculpatory, just weird) the Michael Price came to the police station that morning? Wasn’t Lisa Goddard the one who picked them up? I completely understand calling Lisa. I have no idea why anyone would’ve called Joe’s unreliable brother.

            IF Michael’s alibi is bogus (and that’s a big “if”), it should be relatively easy to break. The man who alibied him is his ex, and the alibi was supposedly backed up by an entry in the ex’s journal (which actually increased my suspicions of it being bogus–who writes in their journal, “Michael and I had a wonderful time being constantly together tonight from the hours of 10 to 12.”?). All the prosecution has to do is go to the ex and say, “Look, we just want the truth. If that’s what really happened, you’re fine. If that’s NOT what really happened, we’ll give you immunity right now if you tell us the truth. And if it’s not what really happened, and you stick to your story, and it turns out Michael Price was involved, we’re going to be quite happy to shave five years off his sentence in exchange for his testimony against you.”

            • Carolina
              05/27/2010 at 7:46 PM

              You have to understand that Michael’s lover is also indebted to Joe. This is a deeply complex relationship with more twisted roots than a pot-bound pansy.

  20. mia
    05/27/2010 at 4:47 PM

    I wonder besides the semen found on his body, is there any other evidence to support the prosecution that Mr. Wone was sexually assaulted? like any laceration wounds?

    • BadShoes
      05/27/2010 at 5:03 PM

      no. Just the semen.

      • Aquanetta
        05/27/2010 at 5:12 PM

        Don’t forget the whole electonic stimulation device found?

        • AkaZappa
          05/27/2010 at 5:13 PM

          That was stowed away in a closet or drawer somewhere in Dylan’s room, no evidence it was used on Wone (though it could have been).

          • whodoneit
            05/27/2010 at 5:31 PM

            Or a different one was used on Robert and disposed of due to DNA and they forgot the 2nd one?

      • Carolina
        05/27/2010 at 7:48 PM

        And the fact that he appears to have been restrained, either physically or by drugs.

  21. dcbill
    05/27/2010 at 5:08 PM

    Anxiously awaiting the next update from the trial.

  22. ladyg
    05/27/2010 at 5:51 PM

    alittle side track here….i wonder what their doing at auntie house? i’m hope that they’re not disrespecting her home (by, doing that BD&SM mess over there).

    • dcbill
      05/27/2010 at 6:10 PM

      Yea I wonder how she would feel about the face mask with the piss funnel on it.

      • ladyg
        05/27/2010 at 7:40 PM

        that’s just nasty.

        • Carolina
          05/27/2010 at 7:51 PM

          No, apparently it was so clean that there were no fingerprints anywhere!

          To be honest, what two adults do in their home is their business, but it certainly does add a bit of color to the situation, especially when one considers the lack of defensive wounds might indicate he was restrained. One might assume a couple who enjoyed BDSM/Ds would be adept at such things.

          • ladyg
            05/27/2010 at 7:56 PM

            you’re right about that, to me it’s just soo sad.

          • Aquanetta
            05/27/2010 at 8:38 PM

            And the color is yellow!!! 😉

            • Flood
              05/28/2010 at 9:04 AM

              If I’m going to drink something yellow, I’d rather it be a cold beer.

    • ladyg
      05/27/2010 at 7:37 PM

      my bad, meant to say i’m hoping

    • Aquanetta
      05/27/2010 at 8:42 PM

      I think the word is consecrate. (ok, enough of the funny comments)

  23. tassojunior
    05/27/2010 at 5:56 PM

    Is this the first time in history a prosecutor has believed that a murderer disposed of a murder knife but then replaced it with his own knife?

    • plumskiter
      05/27/2010 at 6:46 PM

      i hate to say it (she said fondly), but that is a good question.

      • vamom
        05/27/2010 at 7:26 PM

        Wrong question, it’s not the Prosecution’s fault they have to work with the events of the evening . . . The trouple couldn’t say the intruder went into Dylan’s room, somehow found the knife in it’s case, left his room and entered another on the same floor, killed the occupant (Robert) all without waking Dylan. It’s much more likely an intruder would grab an obvious weapon, so they decide to take a similar one from the kitchen block, conveniently located by the back door, and sell that as the murder weapon.

    • CC Biggs
      05/27/2010 at 7:06 PM

      I’ve always wondered about the point of replacing the knife. If the murder weapon was the other knife in the house, all they did was swap one in-house knife for another. I don’t see how that helps them. Indeed, quite the contrary. Swapping the knifes actually hurt them by drawing more suspicion to them for apparently altering the crime scene and destrying evidence. I don’t get it.

      • David
        05/27/2010 at 7:15 PM

        If the other knife was the murder weapon it would have drawn attention to Dylan quickly and by switching knives it throws police off track from looking elsewhere, especially right after the murder.

      • Tarfunk
        05/27/2010 at 7:43 PM

        Dylan’s knife set (with the missing knife) was found in his bedroom. Assuming the murder weapon was indeed the missing knife, finding that knife with the victim, but finding the knife set in Dylan’s room, would have been virtually inexplicable given the intruder story. So you’d think they had to get rid of that knife. However, it might have been more logical to just move Dylan’s knife set to the kitchen, where an intruder could have grabbed it instead of the kitchen knife that was used. But I recall seeing Dylan’s knife set as a boxed set that had a closing cover, i.e., three utensils lying horizontally in a closed box. I don’t recall anyone commenting on whether the knife that was found upstairs was part of the kind of knife block found in most kitchens, i.e., one that could easily be grabbed. If that was indeed the case, then moving Dylan’s set to the kitchen wouldn’t have made any sense for the story being developed. What intruder would stop to open a closed box that might contain knives when there were a bunch of knives in plain view?

        So there doesn’t seem to be a logical way to explain the use of the missing knife. Hence, it’s ditched and the kitchen knife replaces it.

        • Tarfunk
          05/27/2010 at 7:52 PM

          Although just having written that, it appears to me that it would have been just as easy to ditch Dylan’s boxed set of knives entirely. You’d be left with a murder scene without a murder weapon but that wouldn’t be a first.

          So Tasso is still winning on this one, I think.

          • plumskiter
            05/27/2010 at 8:43 PM

            wonders never cease (she again said fondly).

            • vamom
              05/27/2010 at 9:36 PM

              It was probably done to give more credence to the intruder story. On the 911 call, Victor says they think the intruder had one of their knives and lo and behold, the police find one missing in the kitchen block. Perhaps they thought if the kitchen knife was found near Robert, it would lessen the chance they would search for the murder weapon around the house.

              • wonewatcher
                05/27/2010 at 11:16 PM

                It is odd. I assume the knife wasn’t introduced to the scene till after the sex play/torture events went awry. Remember that it was used only to inflict severe wounds that the attacker must have assumed would be fatal. There was no other reason for the knife to be there in any other capacity, including during the sex play/torture.

                Thus, Dylan and/or the others would have had to go to great pains to retrieve the knife from Dylan’s closet in his room in order to use it to cover up the sadosexual episode. It stretches credulity to think that — while they were presumably in a panic as Robert was apparently gasping or dying — Dylan and/or the others would have thought far enough ahead to plot out the use of his personal knife on Robert, the disposal of the knife and its replacement with the kitchen knife.

                • AkaZappa
                  05/27/2010 at 11:18 PM

                  If they were in Dylan’s room, using his restaints and toys, then using his knife might make sense. Then they swapped the knife in the hurlyburly of what came next.

                  • wonewatcher
                    05/27/2010 at 11:23 PM

                    I’ll buy that. So, per Joe’s original story, is it conceivable that they moved Robert’s incapacitated body from the kitchen to Dylan’s room before he died, stabbed him there, then moved him to the guestroom?

                • Carolina
                  05/28/2010 at 6:36 PM

                  Why would you suppose the knife wasn’t involved in the sexplay? Now you’re going to make me reread Joe’s alt.com profile. Was there knifeplay listed?

                  • AkaZappa
                    05/28/2010 at 6:40 PM

                    Sex play with weapons is sometimes also referred to as “edge play”. I don’t remember seeing it in the Culuket laundry list, but I could be wrong.

          • DavidR
            05/27/2010 at 9:58 PM

            Just maybe the knife was lost some time ago. Just because the prosecution ordered a replacement one and it is about the size they need to fit the wounds does not mean that knife was used.

            The boxed set was found in the closet (tucked away). So are we assuming that based on these facts it is the knife that was used?

            Why open the set to use that knife when so many others are already available in the kitchen? I think that missing knife is a wild goose chase and just used to imply it was used and there, in my mind anyway, isn’t any proof that is the case.

    • Carolina
      05/27/2010 at 7:53 PM

      Is it the first time a murderer took the time to wipe blood on all but the sharp edge of the knife?

  24. tassojunior
    05/27/2010 at 6:22 PM

    BTW the Washington Examiner today has a photo of that “only a ninja could get over” rear fence and the “impossible to see through” back gate taken from the back door:
    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/Wone-crime-tech-says-no-evidence-of-break-in-94939979.html

    Waiting for the photo the MPD unintentionally took of the upside down garbage can they found next to the ninja fence.

    • ramknts
      05/27/2010 at 6:55 PM

      Tasso…I know you love harping on about this point, and I agree that maybe the backyard wasn’t impenetrable (nevermind the rear gate which did NOT exist at that time), but there is no evidence of anybody scaling the fence. Also, it really doesn’t matter now if someone saw that door unlocked from the rear (I mean, come on…) and scaled the fence. It still makes no sense whatsoever why nothing was stolen, someone was stabbed, and the scene was mostly undisturbed if an intruder did enter.

      • tassojunior
        05/27/2010 at 7:31 PM

        I don’t disagree with any of that and you said it very civilly, thanks. That’s too rare in these parts.

        It would be easier to let the prosecution go down this path of ninja-proof fence, opaque gate, soil in planters, visable dust on top of fence, murderer substituting own knife, etc. and look like fools but that’s not what I’m after.

        The suspicion comes from nothing else being disturbed or taken. That can only easily be explained by a trapped intruder or a 4th person or that the defendants did it. Getting over that fence when your’re facing 30 years for murder is believable. The upside-down trash can photoed next to the fence is a big problem for prosecutors.

        • Carolina
          05/27/2010 at 7:55 PM

          So answer those questions. Or just make up something, as is your wont.

        • Carolina
          05/27/2010 at 7:56 PM

          Let’s ask this one– how do you know what was introduced? Were you at the bench when they were admitted into evidence?

        • CDinDC (Boycott BP)
          05/27/2010 at 8:00 PM

          so, if the “intruder” stood on top of trash can, wouldn’t the “intruder” have to touch the top of the fence in some manner to get over, which would disturb dust?

          Yes, of course.

          The point is NOT that the fence is “ninja proof”, it is that no one could get over without leaving evidence that they had done so.

          • ladyg
            05/27/2010 at 8:09 PM

            the “intruder” was a well shaven, bootie wearing ninja.

            • ladyg
              05/27/2010 at 8:10 PM

              clean shaven, bootie wearing ninja.

    • Carolina
      05/27/2010 at 7:54 PM

      You don’t want to address that rat question, do you?

      • KKinCA
        05/27/2010 at 8:37 PM

        Carolina and CD who hates BP: Why oh why are you wasting your time here??? You can’t get blood from a turnip, as my mom would say! But actually, the exchanges are kind of amusing!

    • Carolina
      05/28/2010 at 6:37 PM

      You can see if the door is locked from outside the gate? At night? Really?

  25. safa
    05/27/2010 at 6:26 PM

    I was just wondering if the medical examiner stated what was the actual cause of death for Mr. Wone? Did he have a heart attack or something before the stabbing?

    • Tarfunk
      05/27/2010 at 7:08 PM

      The autopsy says the stab wounds to the torso caused death.

  26. des
    05/27/2010 at 6:30 PM

    i was at the courthouse today. carlson lieber was not having a very good day. she and the judge seemed to be on different wavelengths – they didn’t seem to understand what the other was trying to get at. and this seemed to put her (carlson lieber) off her game.
    shertler sounds just like casey kasem to me. victor looks like he’s aged about 15 years since 2006. you could just tell that he has a lot of mental anguish. dylan looked more or less the same. joe has aged too – he looks about 15 years older than his age, and imho kinda like a red-faced stuffed turkey (sorry, i had to go there).
    dylan and victor were paying attention to the proceedings but joe was doing something with a lot of papers in his lap – not really paying much attention.

    • Manopener
      05/27/2010 at 6:39 PM

      Joe Price was never an attractive girl and she has not aged well.

      • Bill Orange
        05/27/2010 at 8:11 PM

        True confession: I had a small crush on him back in the early 90s and would probably have made a pass at him if I had been out at the time. Suffice it to, I’m now much happier than before about the fact that I didn’t come out of the closet until after college.

        • Aquanetta
          05/27/2010 at 8:50 PM

          Ok, call me FREAK !! But, I think Joe’s a little HOT. The other two….NOT. Though, I can see piss funnels, play pads, and other various equipment making our first date very, very uncomfortable for me. ROFL

    • plumskiter
      05/27/2010 at 6:48 PM

      do we know much about carson lieber’s experience? how long in us attorney’s office? how many prior trials? also, is there a third prosecutor, and, if so, who? thanks in advance for trying to answer these questions if you can.

      • des
        05/27/2010 at 7:10 PM

        i don’t know any of the answers to your questions, i’m sorry. but i’m sure there is someone here (cddc?) who will remember/know/find out.
        she did seem a little insecure at times to me – especially when being confronted/questioned by the judge, but i know nothing about law and lawyers.

      • David
        05/27/2010 at 7:10 PM

        The third attorney, or rather the second since he has been associated with the case longer, is T. Patrick Martiin.

        David, co-editor

        • plumskiter
          05/27/2010 at 8:46 PM

          thanks.

    • ladyg
      05/27/2010 at 7:52 PM

      was mrs. wone, present? the reason why i asked, because she has to sit/listen to all of (experiment w the pork loin), how the knife was plunged into her husband. i would have to leave.

      • DonnaH
        05/27/2010 at 10:32 PM

        The editors have made no mention of Mrs. Wone being present following the completion of her testimony, though they have noted the presence of a few relatives of the defendants.

        • des
          05/28/2010 at 9:54 AM

          she was there yesterday.

  27. Themis
    05/27/2010 at 7:44 PM

    Rachel Carlson Lieber has been an AUSA since at least 2004 and was working on the anthrax case in 2006. She has done trial and appellate work. So this is not her first go round at the rodeo.

    But as has been said there are a lot of things that can throw attorneys off of their game, including other cases and the sheer amount of work done that has to be done during the trial. And as I have said before, at some point during the trial both sides and the judge will have a bad hair day. BTW just google to find the info. I’m on my iPhone so I won’t bother with links.

    • BenFranklin
      05/28/2010 at 7:28 PM

      So Ms. Lieber’s resumé may already include harassing an innocent citizen like Dr. Steven Hatfill & a stunning, record-setting loss to Thomas Connolly.

      “I learned a couple things. The government can do to you whatever they want. They can break the laws, federal laws, as they see fit.”

      –Steven Hatfill

      • Themis
        05/28/2010 at 9:53 PM

        I saw nothing to say that she was a driving force prosecuting my Hatfield. Just evidence that she signed some pleadings.

Comments are closed.