Day 19: Wrap

Summer Heat, German Knives and Ninja Turtle Sandboxes

The trial began today promptly, as is Judge Leibovitz habit, at 9:45am with defense attorney Bernie Grimm advising the court that setting up a video Skype call for one of the defense experts was not an issue anymore.  The witness would be on a plane and at the courthouse by tomorrow noon-time.

Dr. Henry Lee departs the courthouse

The first witness of the day was the famous Dr. Henry Lee, the direct led by Bernie Grimm. After a lengthy introduction of Dr. Lee’s credentials, particularly citing Dr. Lee’s role as a distinguished professor and director of the Henry Lee Institute of Forensic Science, he was accepted an an expert witness in the areas of blood pattern analysis and crime scene reconstruction.

In defining blood patterns, Dr. Lee went on to define the general term of a “blood smear” stating that that term encompassed three types of blood patterns: 1) touch sometimes with movement, 2) swipe and wipe (example – knife dipped into ketchup and wiped) and 3) contact stain which involves two surfaces with direct contact transfer of the blood.

In his testimony, Dr. Lee indicated that his examination of the crime scene towel identified three significant blood stains – 1B, 2 and 3.  Dr. Lee also applied the reagent tetramethylbenzidine, a presumptive test for detecting  one part blood in a million to enhance his  research.  The stain labeled 1B was described by Dr. Lee as about six inches long, the heaviest portion being a direct contact stain, which could be from applying pressure to a surface.

The Towel. Exhibit E

He felt that portions of the stain could have been made from fingers that were involved in applying pressure.  Lighter portions of the stain were most likely made from movement while pressure was being applied.  When questioned as to the type of surface that the pressure was applied to, Dr. Lee stated that it could be a body or it could be a table.  He also stated he did not feel the blood from 1B could have been used to transfer blood from the towel to the knife found at the scene.

The stains labeled 2 and 3 were thought to be secondary transfer of the blood, with the area 3 stain showing some smearing, but no definitive pattern.  These would have been the result of the towel coming into contact with a bloody surface, but without any indication of pressure being applied.  When shown a crime scene photo of the rolled up towel on the floor next  to the sofa bed, Lee felt these stains were consistent with a transfer from the folds in the towel.

The testimony then moved onto the bloody knife found at the scene.  Dr. Lee indicated that the blood smear on the knife was common in stabbing, and also pointed out numerous hairs near the base of the blade and fatty tissue on the surface of the knife. The appearance would not be consistent with blood applied to the knife from a towel. He noted that there were multiple stabbing with the knife because of the multiple smears and unevenness of the smears. Dr. Lee’s comments  on the prosecution’s witness, Douglas Deedrick, was that his exemplar knife to demonstrate how the blood pattern could be a result of wiping and dabbing the knife with blood from a towel was not similar to the blood pattern on the crime scene knife.

Dr. Lee also examined the fitted sheet, pillow case, pillow, mattress pad, and t-shirt.  His observations concluded that the two larger stains on the sheet were most likely from blood flow from Robert’s body, some flowing towards his next towards the pillow, and some flowing down the front and onto the sheet.  No movement of the body was evident in his observation.  Dr. Lee estimated that about 100 cc’s of blood would have made these two stains, about 1/40th of total blood volume.

Prosecutor Glenn Kirschner proceeded with his cross-examination of Dr. Lee.  When asked about the volume of blood found at the scene, Dr. Lee stated that there was no struggle – less struggle from the victim results in less blood, while if there was more of a struggle, generally more blood is apparent.  He reiterated that he felt the stains were made by less that 100 cc. of Robert’s blood, and the stains on the towel were from as little as 5-10 cc. of blood.  Lee also felt that even if the towel were used to apply pressure, that 5-10 cc. would have made the stains.

Upon examining the t-shirt, Dr. Lee concluded that the some stains existed from the stabbing and flow of blood, but the extensive staining of the rest of the shirt was a result of the transport of Robert’s body and subsequent medical intervention. As to the blood on the t-shirt, Dr. Lee said that he did not know whether to expect blood on the back of the t-shirt.

On cross-examination about the knife, Dr. Lee reiterated that three separate stab wounds would produce three separate patterns on the knife.  When asked if applying blood from a towel could reproduce these patterns, he said it could be reproduced but “…that is faulty science.”  When comparing the crime scene knife to the test knife submitted by Douglas Deedrick, Dr. Lee stated that certain patterns were from air in the blood forming a spot when drying as when a bubble breaks.

When asked to comment on the amount of blood on the edge of the knife, whether it could have been applied with a towel, Dr. Lee said he did not know.  When asked why the amount of blood on the knife edge was hard to see in the photographs, Dr. Lee said that was most likely from the illumination and reflections when the photograph was taken, prompting Judge Leibovitz to comment “…so you are saying this is an illusion”.  Lee then conceded there was indeed blood on the knife edge, but less than on the surface of the blade.

On redirect from defense attorney David Schertler,  Lee said that only about 10% of stabbing cases showed defensive wounds of the approximately 1000 he has reviewed.  The victim could have been sound asleep, restrained, or incapacitated if the perpetrator was a martial arts expert who knew critical pressure points.

To Lee, the three precise wounds, depth, and proximity were not surprising.  When asked about transferring blood from a towel to a knife, Lee conceded, “I cannot not rule that out 100% that the transfer could not be done, but it would be a lot of transfer and one would expect it to clean off any hairs.” Lee felt Deedrick should have conducted more types of tests.  Redirect from Bernie Grimm elicited a comment from Lee that it would be difficult to transfer hairs and fatty tissue from a towel to a knife.  When asked if the crime scene showed evidence of staging, Lee replied, “No.”

The next witness of the day was Dr. Vincent DiMaio. After review of his credentials, Dr. DiMaio – board certified in anatomical, clinical and forensic pathology – was admitted as an expert in forensic pathology. On a side note, Dr. DiMaio (like Dr. Henry Lee) testified in the trial of Phil Spector for the murder of  Lana Clarkson; Dr. DiMaio taking the position that Ms. Clarkson pulled the trigger on herself, committing suicide.  Spector is now behind bars.

Dr. DiMaio reviewed the autopsy and medical examiner’s records of Robert Wone. He indicated that he saw nothing unusual in the three stab wounds inflicted on Robert, that the lack of fish-tailing was not unusual if there was absence of movement from the victim or if the victim and the perpetrator moved in the same direction as the wounds were inflicted.  On the lack of defensive wounds, Dr. DiMaio stated that a majority of stabbing victims (about 60%) do not exhibit defensive wounds as written in published medical literature.  He felt nothing else could be concluded about the stabbing and that a medical examiner could not arrive at any definitive conclusion, since “some victims drop and some keep on going”.

On the depth of the wounds and the length of the knife blade, Dr. DiMaio said that variable in the depth also included the victim’s breathing and heart beating at the time of the stabbing, and the force of the knife as it penetrated tissue.  His conclusion that the knife found at the crime scene was consistent with the wounds since the width of the blade was consistent with the wounds themselves.  He felt that no other conclusions could be drawn.

As to the bruising at the wound site on Robert’s sternum as brought up by the prosecution witness Dr. David Fowler, DiMaio commented, “This could be a result of chest compression during CPR,” and could not be interpreted. The same for the amount of blood in the abdomen, the volume is not an indicator of how long the victim lived after the stabbing.  His summary of the scenario was, “…victim asleep in bed and stabbed three times from above.”

On cross-examination by Glenn Kirshner, DiMaio admitted that no cases “come to mind” that had three identical wounds through different types of tissue.  When pressed on the statistic that 60% of stabbing victims show no defensive wounds, DiMaio stated the source was a paper published from Turkey.  When asked about reflexive reaction from the victim, DiMaio said, “possibly, but not if unconscious.”

On re-direct from David Schertler, DiMaio stated “…no pathologist can say whether the victim moved or did not move…victim was most likely asleep when the stabbing occurred and all else is speculation.”  Judge Leibovitz asked for clarification, “Are you talking voluntary or involuntary responses?”  Dr. DiMaio said, “Voluntary only,” whereupon Schertler asked if there could have been reflexive response in this instance. DiMaio: “would not expect reflexive.”

Diane Ward, the mother of defendant Dylan Ward, was the next witness called by the defense. Nervous and weeping, Ms. Ward testified that the taped address label on the cutlery box set was her handwriting.  The label was addressed to a John Gisdovich, of Oregon, the second husband of Needham Ward’s (Dylan’s father) mother with a return address of a Box in an APO, New York NY.  Ms. Ward stated that she must have sent the knife set to her mother- and father-in-law sometime between 1978 and 1981 when she and Needham were living in Germany.  Needham was stationed in Germany at that time.

After the death of her mother-in-law, Needham’s sister, Sue, most likely sent the knife sent back to the giver when settling her mother’s estate.  At the time, Ms. Ward stated that she most likely put the set away, and could not recall a date when she gave the set to Dylan.  When asked if she recalled that not all three implements were in the box, she said that she is certain that she kept the small knife to “fill-in her knife block” which was missing some knives, concluding that the set was incomplete when she gave it to Dylan.

After Dylan was arrested, one of her other sons, Josh, told her about a cutlery set that was missing a knife that was cited in the investigation.  She then put her initials on the knife she thought was the one missing and sent it to the attorneys.  She also sent a second Wustoff knife that was similar, because she could not tell which was the one from the set.

When asked why the handle of the knife that fit the set, that she forwarded to the attorneys, was worn and tarnished, she said it was because she washed it in the dishwasher.  On cross examination, prosecution attorney Rachel Carlson Lieber asked if Ms. Ward had perhaps purchased several knives in Germany and sent them to friends and family as gifts, to which Ms. Ward replied affirmatively.

The babysitter and housekeeper for Gregory Ingram nearby at 1511 Swann Street, Ms. Glenda L. King, was the next defense witness. At the time of Robert’s murder, Ms. King had been the babysitter and housekeeper for about 1 1/2 years.  On the day of August 2, 2006, Ms. King said that she put the garbage from 1511 out in the alley, locked the gate, and went home to Annandale, VA somewhere between 2:00 and 2:30PM.  On August 3, 2006, Ms. King said she heard a news report about a robbery at 1509 Swann Street and decided to come into to town to make certain that 1511 had not been burglarized.  Upon arriving at 1511 she noted several policemen in and around 1509.

After checking 1511 and noting there had been no break-in, she inspected the back yard and noticed that the sandbox, located next to the fence between 1511 and 1509, had its turtle cover crushed. She stated that the sandbox was always covered to prevent animals and water from getting into it.  She then notified the police working at 1509 and showed them the sandbox with the inverted cover.  When asked if she knew when the photographs of the backyard of 1511 and the sandbox cover were taken by the police, Ms. King stated she did not know when they were taken or what the police activity had been at the time.

On cross-examination by Glenn Kirschner, Ms. King stated that the sandbox was maybe 1 1/2 feet high, and acknowledged that the chair next to the sandbox was considerable higher. Several questions regarding the fences at 1511 and 1509 as to their height and composition compared to those installed since 2006 were asked, with Ms. King confirming that the fence depicted in a 2006 police photograph as the fence at 1511 at that that time.

Tomorrow’s defense witness will be Dr. Nijam, fresh off a flight from London.  Dr. Nijam will not arrive until noon, and to productivity use the available morning time, the trial will reconvene at 10:30AM to discuss prosecution witnesses for rebuttal and the possible admission of new photographs taken by Douglas Deedrick after hearing defense witness Nicholas Petraco’s testimony.

189 comments for “Day 19: Wrap

  1. Bea
    06/21/2010 at 9:35 PM

    Thanks for the comprehensive report – full day. Can you give us impressions of how Lee and DiMaio were received as compared to Fowler and Deedrick? From words on a page, it seems strange that she allowed Deedrick to be kicked around so much when neither of these witnesses got the third degree on experiments/standards (or did they?). You rock.

  2. susan
    06/21/2010 at 9:40 PM

    Could any other knife from that Wusthof set have made an incision like the ones in Mr. W? If not, how amazingly coincidental that the one knife missing from the set could do that.

    • Carolina
      06/22/2010 at 8:08 AM

      That is a very good point.

  3. Pshep
    06/21/2010 at 9:43 PM

    I was in court today. Nice to meet Gloria and David. Here are some classic Lee moments that were not highlighted by the editors:

    1. When asked if his resume that was being entered into evidence (approximately an inch thick stack of pages” was accurate, Lee was clear that it was missing a few awards that he recently won and the “17 speeches” that he gave in the last couple of weeks. Didn’t anybody teach this guy that if you want someone to read your resume, you need to keep it to one page?

    2. At the beginning of cross, after the Defense had already established Lee’s credentials, Kirschner went down all of the forensic disciplines that Lee had been certified an expert witness in, including footprint analysis, tiretread analysis, DNA analaysis, etc. Basically, if there is a buck in it, he’ll add it to his quiver – a one-stop-shop for all of your reasonable doubt needs!

    3. Kirshner also asked him how much he was being paid for his testimony. Lee wanted to make it clear that the fee was being paid “to his institute”, not to him, personally. Alas, the figure was $10 – $20 thousand.

    4. On cross Lee would not concede the point to Kirschner that wiping a knife blade edge toward the wiping (opposite) palm was more dangerous to the wiper than wiping it blunt edge toward the wiping palm. He indicated that the wiper could accidentally stap himself in the forehead when going for the wipe. You gotta give it to this guy – he knows which side is writing the check and he will not concede one inch to the other side.

    After hearing his and Di Maio’s testimony today, my new friend David, said it best – “I’m beginning to think that this forensic science is BS.” Well said.

    • commonsensewillprevailihope
      06/21/2010 at 9:46 PM

      Not conceding an obvious point…and gratuitously adding a bizarre martial arts hypo —what a jerk, and how is that good for the defense, one wonders…….

    • Tarfunk
      06/21/2010 at 9:55 PM

      I agree. A 4-year-old could tell you that wiping the sharp edge of a knife against your hand might be more dangerous than wiping the blunt edge. I still don’t understand why he was not willing to concede that, other than that it might explain why there was blood along the spine of the knife but not the cutting edge (i.e., the so-called “optical illusion.”) I guess you get what you pay for.

      • Carolina
        06/22/2010 at 8:12 AM

        I have personally made this mistake and I can tell you, I’ll take the forehead risk next time.

        Here, wanna see my scar? Seven stitches!

    • CC Biggs
      06/21/2010 at 9:59 PM

      Lee Chinese, Lee play joke, Lee make pee pee in prosecution’s coke!

      • interestedobserver
        06/21/2010 at 10:21 PM

        WTF is this? Are you commenting on the race of any of the other experts in this case, whether they are for the prosecution or the defense? The victim here was Chinese American and with all the pro bono work he did (for all different races), I hardly think this is appropriate.

    • Bill Orange
      06/21/2010 at 10:11 PM

      “After hearing his and Di Maio’s testimony today, my new friend David, said it best – “I’m beginning to think that this forensic science is BS.” Well said.”

      In that case, I’d say they were very effective defense witnesses, because that’s exactly what the defense wants you to think.

      • commonsensewillprevailihope
        06/21/2010 at 10:28 PM

        Bill O — my take is different. The defense which is well-funded can always come up with experts to dispute just about anything, so the defense witnesses need to be, i would think, more impressive than the prosecution experts, and present compelling alternative scenarios. Otherwise, you are left with quarreling experts, which is what roughly may be the case here, and which must be something any experienced judge has seen countless times. So the judge falls back on common sense and reasonable judgement, which in this case is devastating to the defendants because, basically, their overall scenario (silent, teflon, speedy invisible intruder) scenario is so absurd.

        • commonsensewillprevailihope
          06/21/2010 at 10:30 PM

          However, I would add, none of us who are not int he courtroom can really evaluate the critical element of demeanor so assessments of credibility and impact are second or third hand.

          • Former Criminal Sex Offense Prosecutor
            06/21/2010 at 11:33 PM

            True, but even those who are in the courtroom have differing opinions about what they have seen & heard. Example,a very nice long detailed post from a courtroom observer today stated very clearly that Diane Ward was NOT crying or weeping as she testified. “Michael” still writes that she was weeping. Who is correct?

            This is why all prosecutors hate eyewitness testimony as opposed to physical evidence. The Battle of The Experts at least involves the same real pieces of evidence that cannot change in say color or size from one person’s memory to another person’s completely different recollection.

            • Michael
              06/22/2010 at 12:51 AM

              Upon taking the stand, Diane Ward started to break down and was offered tissues several times by the attorneys and the clerk of the court. When asked by one of the attorneys if she needed to pause, she sniffled, “No, I am just a ninny.”

              I felt how difficult it must be for a parent to take the stand to testify in case like this involving one of her children. Neither the tears nor nervousness were feigned. When the judge allowed Ms. Ward to stay in the courtroom after her testimony, she was appropriately comforted by her husband.

              Michael, co-editor

              • Former Criminal Sex Offense Prosecutor
                06/22/2010 at 1:39 AM

                Please don’t be offended, I meant that as a rhetorical question, not a literal one. No one is “correct” or “incorrect” in their observation of another,it is their observation only.

                This site still reads at the top, “Diane Ward, the mother of defendant Dylan Ward, was the next witness called by the defense. Nervous and WEEPING, Ms. Ward testified..”(emphasis added).

                Now you have stated that she was NOT weeping. My point was the same as Econo-girl writes, “Today at the Robert Wone murder trial, little Econo-Girl sat in the middle of family members for people on trial for killing him.

                ‘This is a combination of sloppy police work and a cruel prosecutor,’ opined one man. Just shows you that there really are two sides to every story.”

                My experience is that there are more than 2 sides to any story & your perception of what you saw & heard in court today is no less valid than Econo-girl’s, even if they are not the same. And that is why prosecutor’s prefer physical evidence to eyewitness accounts.

                Sure, you have to deal with the Battle of The Experts, but the evidence itself is something inherently more solid than memory colored by emotions & collateral experiences & intervening unconscious, conscious and/or subconscious filtering.

                In contrast, the knife that The Trouple turned over as the murder weapon never alters in its size, blade shape, type of handle or serial number. How it came to have blood on it & where it came from are issues that surround that knife, but the questions don’t change the properties of the knife itself.

                People reading this blog seem too demanding to me at times, you are not running a free verbatim transcription service with promised hourly postings after all. That would cost a small fortune, take up page after page of reading with no oppotunity for anyone to post their observations based upon what you the Editors have been so generous in sharing: your perceptions of what happened to date along with the relevant legal documents, as well as your perceptions of what is unfolding now as it unfolds.

                It is important that The Editors present with a point of view. Good Journalism demands this, don’t you think? Otherwise this blog just becomes just a periodic summarized transcript with no insight.

                It is so much more than that. Thank you again for doing such a remarkable thing in generating a New Journalism approach to attract interest in a heartbreaking murder story that was overlooked by the Mainstream Media.

                Because of you, we come closer every day to Justice For The Family of Robert Wone.

                • Michael
                  06/22/2010 at 2:12 AM

                  FCSOP: “Now you have stated that she was NOT weeping. My point was the same as Econo-girl writes, “Today at the Robert Wone murder trial, little Econo-Girl sat in the middle of family members for people on trial for killing him.”

                  I am not certain where I now say that she was not weeping. To me, breaking down and being offered tissues is weeping as many express it.

                  That said, thank you for your support and appreciation of our efforts to maintain this open forum in the search for justice in the tragic case of Robert Wone.

                  • Vandy
                    06/22/2010 at 9:08 AM

                    Rats…I thought I knew the meaning of weeping…confused now…but here’s what I found on-line…
                    weep·ing (wpng)
                    1. Shedding tears; tearful.
                    2. Dropping rain: weeping clouds.
                    3. Having slender drooping branches.

                    So, was in addition to the knives, did Ms. Ward have “slender drooping branches”?

                    I wish this trial would end so very soon.

                    • bloggie
                      06/22/2010 at 11:36 AM

                      Note to self- when setting up a blog, don’t use WordPress. This constantly shrinking width in replies is ridiculous.

                    • Annoying
                      06/23/2010 at 3:33 AM


                • Doubtful
                  06/22/2010 at 10:50 AM

                  “It is important that The Editors present with a point of view. Good Journalism demands this, don’t you think? ”

                  No, actually that is bias and is antithetical to good journalism. Of course you, and the other regulars on this site, demand rigid adherence to one point of view so your confusion is understandable. It is not, however, good journalism, Olde or New.

                  • Carolina
                    06/22/2010 at 2:43 PM

                    News journalism is a totally different animal. But you knew that.

                    That said, watched Fox “News” lately? Frightening.

        • Carolina
          06/22/2010 at 8:16 AM

          I agree. If this is the best they could find, imagine who must have turned them down.

    • CDinDC (Boycott BP)
      06/22/2010 at 8:57 AM

      David, said it best – “I’m beginning to think that this forensic science is BS.”

      It’s sad to me that people like Lee tout themselves as experts (and they may well be), but disgrace the science for a $$.

      Forensic science is modern man’s version of the discovery of the wheel. It has incredible purpose in today’s society. Used properly, it can convict the guilty and exonerate the innocent.

      Dr. Lee makes a mockery of it.

  4. Carolina
    06/21/2010 at 9:46 PM

    Mrs. Ward seems sure of very little, save that the knife never went to Dylan.

    • chilaw79
      06/21/2010 at 11:38 PM

      If there is someone I can feel sorry for in this case (other than members of the Wone family), it would be the parents of the defendants. It must be incredibly difficult to testify in a criminal case or even sit in the courtroom when your child is a defendant.

      Even if the defendants are acquitted, I cannot feel that badly for them because they could have cooperated more fully with the police. I know every one has a right against self-incrimination, but I think you also have a duty to stand by your friends.

      Robert Wone stood by his college friend, Joe Price, keeping in touch with him, being involved in his causes, and even trying to help further his legal career by trying to send him some business. Somewhere, somehow, this all went terribly wrong. While it could be something as innocent as leaving the back door open or giving a key to the wrong guy, my opinion, based upon the evidence of which I am aware at this time, is that there are other facts at play here.

  5. tucsonwriter
    06/21/2010 at 9:48 PM

    This boggles this particular mind. I am feeling stunned by the expert testimony. In a bad way.

    I can see the mom…. I am a mom. I have two kids. But for these experts to….. It’s like you can’t believe a word they say. Thanks to the editors for fleshing it out. Lee’s wasn’t quite as bad as it sounded earlier. I am pretty shocked by DiMaio.

    All I can think is Dr. Ninja. Ooops! Probably shouldn’t have let that cat out of the bag.

    I found a posting of the 911 call on the Washington Post website. Not sure if it is up here. I’m am not sure if the WaPo call is in its entirety. It’s pretty weird to listen to.

    • Pshep
      06/21/2010 at 9:57 PM

      I would strongly suggest to anyone reading this blog that has not listened to the 911 call, to do so. While you are listening to the call, remember that Victor has, according to their story, 1-2 minutes before just discovered that their overnight guest has been the victim of a stabbing and he (Victor) has just rushed back upstairs a placed the call.

      • Vito
        06/21/2010 at 11:06 PM

        Pshep, I took your advice and went back and heard the call for the first time; it’s chilling, but also odd; especially the unsolicited comment about the knife….the freakish tears could be expected knowing that his life will never be the same again!

        Fox 5 just reported the the defense “blew a major hole in the prosecutions theory,” are they serious or does that interpretation make it more newsworthy?

        • Former Criminal Sex Offense Prosecutor
          06/22/2010 at 12:32 AM

          Judge for yourself,The Sand Box Defense, I give you Econo-girl’s take on the proceedings at

          She begins, “Today at the Robert Wone murder trial, little Econo-Girl sat in the middle of family members for people on trial for killing him. “This is a combination of sloppy police work and a cruel prosecutor,” opined one man. Just shows you that there really are two sides to every story.

          Read her post, now what do you think?

          • CDinDC (Boycott BP)
            06/22/2010 at 8:34 AM

            From Econogirls blog (whoever the hell that is): “And thus we have the SANDBOX DEFENSE: our guy didn’t do it, some guy who jumps on cheap, plastic sandbox covers to get over a fence did it. See? Smashed sandbox cover? That proves that someone broke it, Right?”

            No, it doesn’t Econogirl.

            Whether a trash can, shed, car or turtle sandbox was used as a launching pad, there is still no evidecne ON THE FENCE or any of those objects that a person went from one side to another. None.

            I love how people take one piece of information and base the totality of their opinion on that tiny fragment.

            does one piece of a puzzle make the whole picture? No.

            • Deb
              06/22/2010 at 9:02 AM

              I think econo-girl was using a bit of sarcasm. I think she actually believes the sandbox information is stupidly useless

            • Nora
              06/22/2010 at 9:11 AM

              Yes, Econogirl was being sarcastic. I actually thought her post was rather unpleasant reading, given the stakes in this case. While I admit I smelled a rat when reading these “experts'” testimonies, Econogirl’s sneering tone and simplification of what was said in court can do the cause of justice no favors. Talk like a lynch mob, walk like a lynch mob, and people will keep calling us a lynch mob. Cooler heads should prevail.

              • Kate
                06/22/2010 at 12:54 PM

                I’m with you on that , Nora.


            • can'tstopreading
              06/22/2010 at 9:13 AM

              I think she was being sarcastic.

              • CDinDC (Boycott BP)
                06/22/2010 at 12:15 PM

                thanks all….I went back and re-read the entry. (Obviously, I didn’t read it thoroughly. My bad.)

    • mia
      06/21/2010 at 10:18 PM

      Could you share the link of the post?

      • vamom
        06/21/2010 at 10:40 PM
        • commonsensewillprevailihope
          06/21/2010 at 11:04 PM

          Having just listened again to this 911 tape I have to say it sounds basically bogus, particularly the first couple minutes of the call, when, per the defendants they had just moments earlier found a stabbed friend AND when the perpetrator was just a minute or two earlier was IN THE HOUSE. It just sounds absurd to start off “evidently there was an intruder”. Also, again, there aint no doubt that V says very clearly “we heard the screams”…”we heard the chimes”. I think the defense has to bring the intruder into court tomorrow to help solidify their case.

          • mia
            06/21/2010 at 11:20 PM

            And he said he heard the chime after the scream, which well indicated that the intruder had left the house. But he still claimed the intruder might still in the house, which doesn’t make much sense.

            • dcce
              06/22/2010 at 7:58 AM

              I once came face-to-face with an intruder in my apartment. He ran, and I heard the door slam, but I froze because I wasn’t certain if he was gone or if he was ensuring the door was shut and would return. Don’t get me wrong, I think the 911 call is a load, but … oh, and the crime scene investigator, detective, and uniformed DCPD who came failed to notice the lock cylinder the would-be burglar had tossed about two feet from my apartment door on his way to the fire escape because it was under a dirty towel–with nothing else in the hall. I had to call and have them return to pick it up.

        • mia
          06/21/2010 at 11:11 PM

          One thing I dont understand is, at one point during the 911 call, Victor told the operator that he was so scared to go downstairs to open the door for the medical team because he thought the intruder would be still at their home. Why wouldn’t ask Dylan going with him?

          • ladyg
            06/22/2010 at 3:37 PM

            good point.

  6. Bill
    06/21/2010 at 10:09 PM

    I am not surprised at the depth and breath of Dr. Lee’s testimony. It’s to be expected — the best defense that money can buy. And if I was a defendant, I’d want the best experts testifying for me as well.

    • Bill Orange
      06/21/2010 at 10:13 PM

      “the best defense that money can buy”

      If this is the best, I’d really hate to see what the B team looks like.

      • tucsonwriter
        06/21/2010 at 10:21 PM

        I still say what happened to all the blood?

        I looked at the autopsy report and combined blood in various areas is 950ml.

        A male of 152 pounds could reasonably expected to have 5.2 liters of blood in his body.

        There were 100 cc = which is the equivalent of a ml = on the sheets. ( I wonder if Lee used cc purposely to confuse people.)

        10cc /ml on towel. So basically 110ml at the crime scene.

        5200ml – 110ml- 950 ml = 4,140 ml of blood unaccounted for. Why doesn’t the prosecution go after this more pointedly? I would be hammering on this. (Not that I am a lawyer – it just seems so unlikely – blood doesn’t vanish.)

        • Ann
          06/21/2010 at 11:54 PM


          I wish what you were saying were true, but 1cc=1ml. With that said 100cc would be around 1/3 of a cup. That is not a lot in my book.

          • tucsonwriter
            06/22/2010 at 12:10 AM

            Ooops _ I meant 1 cc + 1 ml. Its a one to one. And that is exactly the point.

            The 911 operator, when taking the call, told Victor to go get a towel and compress the wound. If that towel got saturated, to not remove the towel, but put another one over it.

            Instead when the EMT shows up Joe Price isn’t even touching Robert Wone and there are 100 cc or 100 ml of blood on the bed and 10cc on the towel. That is according to the testimony of Dr. Henry Lee.

        • DCULater
          06/22/2010 at 12:07 AM

          Agree 100%. Where is the blood?

          The vanishing blood seems to be a powerful point for the prosecution.

          The tidy intruder who cleaned up everything. Then left without a trace.

          • tucsonwriter
            06/22/2010 at 12:47 AM

            It seems like the police majorly messed up by using Ashley’s Reagent instead of Luminol. (Not that I really know what that means – its just what I have gathered from reading.)

            I did look at some forensic sites on line and its not a random science. Its only random when there is no real evidence or the evidence has been tampered with.

            Forensic experts use computer modeling to figure out splatter patterns, etc. They know a lot. The scene was compromised – twice as far as I can tell.

            Now its looking to me like the “burglary” was set up. There are so many complicating factors here.

        • KKinCA
          06/22/2010 at 12:49 AM

          I also am puzzled about the lack of blood and odd stain patterns. I believe that one or more of the defense experts attributed the large amount of blood on the back of Robert’s tee-shirt as the result of efforts of the EMTs to save Robert’s life. Can anyone explain the basis of this opinion, and how physically this could be true?

      • Bill
        06/21/2010 at 10:59 PM

        No, I believe that Dr. Lee did what he needed to do for the defendants — he created reasonable doubt.

        • Daphne
          06/21/2010 at 11:27 PM

          I’m not sure about that. I think it’s hard to evaluate by just reading snippets of his testimony. You have to be there to evaluate demeanor, etc.

          • Angry Parakeet
            06/22/2010 at 8:47 AM

            When Dr. Lee pointedly clarified that $10-$20K in fees were paid not to him but to his INSTITUTE, he should have said it was paid to his TAX DODGE.

          • Carolina
            06/22/2010 at 10:26 AM

            If he had been playing to a jury, maybe he would have gotten reasonable doubt just on confusion. I doubt this judge is confused about much.

        • Carolina
          06/22/2010 at 7:49 PM

          I believe Dr. Lee created reasonable doubt that he was worth $20,000.

  7. Cat
    06/21/2010 at 10:32 PM

    Blog Newbie here. Kudos to the Editors and the rest. I’m feeling all alone in Ohio with my fascination with this case.
    Two issues: Any explanation for sending Mr. Wone’s blackberry to the Secret Service for analysis rather than the FBI. I understand the Secret Service does more sophisticated data mining, but certainly the FBI can analyze a blackberry, and they have jurisdiction, no? As I’m typing this, I am, of course, contemplating the Super Ninja Assassin that jumped off the turtle pool. . .
    Second, they want us to believe the intruder entering the home to commit a murder grabbed a paring knife? Not a butcher knife, or a carving knife. . . What kind of inept intruder grabs a paring knife?
    OK, that’s my $0.02. . . I feel better now that I contributed. . . Sure hope the judge doesn’t confuse reasonable doubt with anything’s possible.

    • vmm
      06/22/2010 at 12:22 PM

      many from ohio are following this case, thanks to this website.

      • Ohio
        06/22/2010 at 2:13 PM

        me too

    • vmm
      06/22/2010 at 1:12 PM

      i should add that i have two friends in columbus named cat! i’ll be asking them if they are following this case.

      • Cat in Cleveland
        06/22/2010 at 4:01 PM

        I’m Cat in Cleveland. Although I note that another “Cat” also posts to this site.

  8. Ex Swann
    06/21/2010 at 10:38 PM

    The ME testified that she couldn’t exclude the knife beside the bed as being the murder weapon. Much earlier in the investigation she wrote that she believed the weapon was somewhat shorter than the one found.

    I actually believe that Robert was incapacitated with drugs and possibly restraints. I believe that on one or more occasions, while being sexually assaulted, Robert began to regain consciousness. I think Joe panicked, grabbed the knife from the kitchen and stabbed Robert in order to save his career and his lifestyle.

    I believe Joe removed the knife from Robert’s chest in order to explain why his (Joe’s) DNA was on the murder weapon.

    • Bill
      06/21/2010 at 10:58 PM

      Well is that this your theory of Joe’s motivation and actions, he did a terrible job now, didn’t he?

      • Ex Swann
        06/21/2010 at 11:18 PM

        I suppose that remains to be seen …

    • DonnaH
      06/21/2010 at 11:26 PM

      I’ve been looking at Dr. Lee’s website; indeed a strange and vulgar (per AnnaZed) place. It’s like he’s the celebrity hero in his forensic crime drama, with the intro’s staccato typing of his name in overlarge typeface, followed by what sounds like a third-rate electronic sound track to a TV crime program complete with gunshots and a woman screaming laid over a bass track of a pounding heart. You can click on “recent sightings of Dr. Lee,” view his epigrammatic philosophy about “The Winner’s Attitude,” click on “famous cases” where you’ll only find teaser descriptions leading to invitations to “Purchase Dr. Lee’s book to learn more,” and see pictures of him at work–is that really a dead woman laying on the grass, or is that a model?

      Everything there seems done solely for effect. Makes him the perfect witness for Joe and the team.

      • DonnaH
        06/21/2010 at 11:28 PM

        I meant this as a standalone post, not a followup to Ex Swann’s.

      • Jo
        06/22/2010 at 4:45 AM

        That’s what he does for a living, being the star witness for the defense of deep-pocketed clients.

    • Jo
      06/22/2010 at 4:52 AM

      Very plausible scenario. I believe Joe also put a towel over Robert’s chest to SHOW that he tried to save his friend’s life by following the 911 operator’s instructions. I could see him doing so with two fingers since he would freak out if he got any blood on his clean (or maybe cleansed) hands. Obviously he cared more about not getting blood on himself than about saving his dying friend.

      • cinnamon
        06/22/2010 at 8:54 AM

        Yes, it does seem like there was concern about not getting any blood on themselves…once clean. Victor says on the 911 call “don’t touch that”. It’s as if they were being very careful not to get anything on themselves. This is not the kind of behavior you would expect from a friend trying to save another friend. You would think that a friend would do whatever was necessary to help regardless of getting blood on themselves. I think when Joe was being questioned by the police he mentions that he has one spot of blood on his finger. If you were trying to help save your friends life by applying pressure to 3 stab wounds, you would likely end up with more blood on your hands than one little spot on a finger.

        • Ex Swann
          06/22/2010 at 2:52 PM

          I think when Victor is saying “Don’t touch that” in the 911 call he is referring to the knife in Robert’s chest. He is telling Joe not to touch the knife, not knowing that Joe must in order to cover his DNA previously being on the knife.

          • CDinDC (Boycott BP)
            06/22/2010 at 3:39 PM

            I don’t think that knife was ever IN Robert’s chest. The knife at the scene was the substitute knife. The knife at the scene was too long and didn’t have t-shirt fibers on it.

      • ladyg
        06/22/2010 at 4:03 PM

        i remember, reading joe’s statement to the police, where he (joe p) have blood on his finger. crazy as it seem, he told one of the detectives that he washed his hands at the MPD!!!

  9. Themis
    06/21/2010 at 11:08 PM

    Nobody is commenting on the obvious implication of Dr. Najem being the only remaining defense witness, i.e., no defendant will testify.

    • chilaw79
      06/21/2010 at 11:19 PM

      I think that has been obvious from Day 1. A defendant who lawyers up the day after someone is murdered in their home is not going to start talking now (unless they really want to be cross examined and have their credibility assessed fully by the judge). If I were a defense attorney in my case, I would not want to expose my client to an intelligent judge who has been a prosecutor. This judge has shown an innate ability to get to the core of the matter with her questions. In addition, the prosecutors seem to be better at cross-examination than at eliciting direct testimony.

      Like prize fighters, those gut shots can be very telling in the late rounds.

      • Themis
        06/21/2010 at 11:30 PM

        Ah, but the wisdom of testifying has never been the issue. The only thing that has been in question is whether Joe’s ego, need for control, whatever you want to call it, would get the best of him. After all, he didn’t lawyer up until he had given a lengthy statement, on videono less. So now that question is solved. Of course, it’s irrelevant legally to his guilt in this proceeding if he testifies. Had any of them chosen to testify, his testimony could be used against him in a subsequent proceeding.

        • chilaw79
          06/21/2010 at 11:56 PM

          The plea bargain train also seems to be leaving the station.

          Do you have a prediction on the potential outcome of the trial at this point?

          I am thinking that the judge is going to apply a lot of common sense and inference in reaching an outcome. The testimony of the forensic pathologists seems to be relatively consistent and the testimony of the other experts turns a lot on the judge’s assessment of their credibility and of the science behind their testimony.

          Two facts that I want to see addressed are whether Mr. Wone was dead and/or had PEA by the time the EMTs arrived and the blood on the back of the t-shirt.

          Of course, there are a lot of exhibits that are available to the judge that the blog does not have access to and the judge has experience in assessing credibility, particularly in criminal cases.

          • tucsonwriter
            06/22/2010 at 12:18 AM

            The blood on the back of the shirt is odd, as is the blood underneath the body, since he was stabbed in the chest.

            As is the fact that the ME in the autopsy report said he hadn’t been lying on his back for very long (paraphrase) in terms of liviidty and rigor.

            I am wondering if somehow he was laid on his stomach after being stabbed (but prior to death) and that is where the apparent suffocation came into play. Like say after he was showered he was placed on the bed face down, bled on the bed, then was redressed and laid back on the blood.

            I don’t know how else to account for the blood underneath him when he was stabbed in the chest.

            • bigfatmike
              06/22/2010 at 1:18 AM

              I believe there have been some posts on this site that mentioned tests (done at home?) that support, roughly, this unusual pattern. I wouldn’t dare try to explain them and sorry I am not sure exactly where they are, except on this site in comments. Perhaps someone can help.

              But Please, a little help for an old man. I just cannot bring together the saturated back of the shirt and the relatively small, roughly circular stains on the sheet.

              How do you get bleeding that saturates the back of the shirt, the body on it’s back, presumably, pressing the back of the shirt against the sheet, and the sheet has, I think I recall, two smallish, roughly circular stains.

              The shirt back has been described as saturated – that does not seem to be controversial. Yet the transfer of blood from the shirt to the sheet is to two discrete small areas.

              I think I recall that someone suggested the shirt was absorbant. If so, this must be pretty amazing material. Even though it is saturated, it did not yield, any blood to the sheet, except in two locations, despite having the weight of a body pressing the shirt to the sheet.

              I don’t know that this has any relevance to explain the crime. But is is puzzling to me – did I say nagging, frustrating.

              Thanks to anyone who can suggest a reasonable explanation for this, and my apologies if it has already been discussed earlier.

              • KKinCA
                06/22/2010 at 2:15 AM

                Hi Mike – I posted a comment somewhere in this thread that I recalled one or more of the defensive experts stated that the large amount of blood on the tee-shirt came from the efforts of the EMTs to revive Robert. But I don’t really understand why that would be. Perhaps someone out there can explain.

              • Leo
                06/22/2010 at 8:05 AM

                Hi Mike, as KK stated, testimony was that the back of the shirt became saturated when EMTs moved the body and began resuscitation efforts in the ambulance. Dr. Fowler believed that if pressure had been applied to the right side of Robert’s chest, where the wounds were and as Joe stated, blood would have been present on the right side of the sheet, not the center and left as is evident.

                • KKinCA
                  06/22/2010 at 11:40 AM

                  Thanks Leo. I still don’t understand how, during the resuscitation efforts, the blood from the knife wounds would have “saturated” the back of the shirt. Would Robert have bled from the resuscitation efforts and dripped down the side of his body? [I have zero medical knowledge] Where the heck did “Lawmed” go?? And what happened to his articles?

                  • Leo
                    06/22/2010 at 8:03 PM

                    I know, I’m afraid lawmed got hired by the defense as an expert in something!

                    • KKinCA
                      06/23/2010 at 12:40 AM

                      Hah! Good one! The silence is a bit deafening after all the hoopla about Lawmed’scoming post(s). Yet another mystery!

  10. tassojunior
    06/21/2010 at 11:11 PM

    No one’s saying someone climbed on the turtle to scale the fence. Someone or something landed on it to crush it the night of the murder according to the housekeeper and she reported it immediately.

    • tucsonwriter
      06/22/2010 at 12:49 AM

      That seems to work more for the prosecution than the defense.

      • tassojunior
        06/22/2010 at 1:48 AM

        Someone jumping over the fence from 1509 to 1511 and landing on the turtle works better for the prosecutor??

        • tucsonwriter
          06/22/2010 at 2:22 AM

          No- someone throwing a bag full of evidence. There is no reason for someone to jump from one locked from the inside yard into another. But if something were thrown over the fence to get it out of the house….

          I had a Mr. Turtle once for my kids.

          Who knows who or what could have landed on Mr. Turtle’s shell and caused an indentation.

          I am not a lawyer. It seems really silly to bring this up at all, especially with no supporting evidence or reason for this to matter. The prosecution basically shredded this.

          BUT it is objective evidence. I am all in the supposition mode that there was a bunch of stuff that needed to be vacated from the premises. Not having seen the premises…… don’t know what people do when they have a VERY short time to cover their tracks.

          I would say based on my extensive experience in this area ( have attended Dr. Henry Lee’s Institute for 03 seconds) that the weight to indent a Mr. Turtle shell is on the order of 5-10 pounds. Maybe more. Actually I think Mr. Turtle would indent at 2-3 pounds. Its pretty pliable.

          Wow. This stuff isn’t hard to check. We gave away our Mr Turtle a long time ago.

          • tucsonwriter
            06/22/2010 at 2:25 AM

            Oh not that clear. Clarification: I think “an intruder” landing on Mr Turtle’s shell would do more than indent.

            So what is the point of bringing this into the trial? HOw does Mr Turtle’s dented shell in any way work for the defense?

            • KKinCA
              06/22/2010 at 2:27 AM

              I think it’s just a red herring – a distraction. Shows the defense’s desperation.

        • Carolina
          06/22/2010 at 7:56 PM

          Two things here.

          First, if the intruder did jump the fence, he did so without any signs ON the fence. But let’s just say for sake of argument he pulled this off. Wouldn’t going into a side yard be more reasonable than running down the alley, where he might be spotted? You still have to get past the lack of scuffing on the fence, but after that it would seem a reasonable escape plan.

          EXCEPT that I, too, have Mr. Turtle experience, and I can tell you, a heavy rain will give him a bit of a dent. A can of Campbell’s Chicken Noodle would collapse his shell. A full grown Ninja, even jockey sized, would have completely crunched the poor dear. He would require human intervention to fix it.

          Now, as TW says, a bag of cameras and a knife, that might be about the right size for a good dent.

    • John
      06/22/2010 at 5:54 PM

      OK. I just got on my grandchildren’s Yellow Turtle. I weigh 205 lbs. I walked on to it and did not crack the shell. The shell caved in. I turned it over and popped it back into its original shape. Much more study has to go into this before speculating. Most important: what is the age of the platic turtle and where there any signs of cracking.

      • Carolina
        06/22/2010 at 7:57 PM

        And is it the Green Mr. Turtle or the Yellow?

  11. weaver
    06/21/2010 at 11:22 PM

    Did Lee comment on the injections marks? Did Lee comment on how Wone’s semen got *into* his rectum?

    As for the crime scene, did Lee comment on the lack of any evidence that an intruder was in the house/room?

    • Lee
      06/22/2010 at 8:25 AM

      Another question: Dud anyone ask Dr. Lee what kind of evidence might indicate a staged scene? Or, what sort of evidence indicates that the murder scene was not staged?

  12. susan
    06/21/2010 at 11:44 PM

    This is worth reading. Odd to note that the detectives said D. Ward was reading a New Yorker article on the eve in question, called “Late Works: Writers Confronting the End” about the deaths of great authors and that there was an illustration of Shakespeare lying in repose/deceased and that Mr. W was positioned similarly. I found the article online but not with accompanying illustrations. Coincidenced, detectives projecting? Who knows.

    • tucsonwriter
      06/22/2010 at 12:38 AM

      I checked this. It was written by John Updike with the byline Critic at Large and the date of August 7, 2006. That is August seventh. Five days after the murder.

      • AnnaZed
        06/22/2010 at 1:44 AM

        The New Yorker is published and sold with an advance date like like pretty much every magazine ever published all over the world (duh). A copy of the New Yorker with that date was found open to that page with that article and that illustration beside Dylan;s bed in his room by police, but thanks for playing!

        • Former Criminal Sex Offense Prosecutor
          06/22/2010 at 1:49 AM

          Thanks AnnaZed, that was next on my list. Well done.

          • tucsonwriter
            06/22/2010 at 2:35 AM

            Hmmm I am not sure I follow AZ and especially the reason for the (duh) comment.

            There were no explanatory remarks – other than “the New Yorker is published and sold with an advance date like pretty much every magazine ever published all over the world (duh).”

            I am not going to make the obvious snarky comment that…WTF?

            • tucsonwriter
              06/22/2010 at 2:37 AM

              OOps I did.

              • Doubtful
                06/22/2010 at 11:09 AM

                Thats good since the most snarky remark would have to be directed at the thickness of your skull. DUH! Indeed!

            • AnnaZed
              06/22/2010 at 2:37 AM

              Sorry, sometimes I’m just gratuitously rude for no reason. I apologize.

              • tucsonwriter
                06/22/2010 at 3:45 PM

                No problem. I just started up a digital subscription a few weeks ago and got one in my inbox Monday dated June 28. I hadn’t realized that they are backdated so to speak.

                I am so used to “real-time” with the internet, etc.

                The article BTW is pretty interesting but not that creepy. Its just about writers and what they chose to write when they are really feeling their mortality.

    • AnnaZed
      06/22/2010 at 1:40 AM
      • tucsonwriter
        06/22/2010 at 2:43 AM

        I don’t know how you got that….

        No resemblance to murder victim. RW would have been cluthing a blackberry not a quill pen….

        God I love Ralph Steadman. And Hunter S.

  13. susan
    06/21/2010 at 11:45 PM

    Coincidence, not coincidenced. Typos happen.

    • tucsonwriter
      06/22/2010 at 1:24 AM

      What I picked up from reading the warrant for obstruction of justice in 2008 (not the murder one that supposedly was nixed by the “burglary”)

      is the following “ALARMING LACK OF BLOOD” at the scene

      Victor went upstairs to phone 911. There was a phone in the guest room.

      Finally in testimony to the police Zaborsky and Price both say they heard the chime, then the grunts. In the 911 call Victor clearly says he heard the chime after the (can’t remember if it was scream or grunts)

  14. Timeline
    06/22/2010 at 12:11 AM

    Mrs. Ward’s testimony doesn’t really seem all that helpful for the defense. Even if she does have a 4066/12cm knife in her possession at her house, that proves nothing about whether Dylan’s set had that knife in it or not. It’s not a particularly distinctive knife: I have one that I received as a wedding gift nearly a decade ago, my mother has one that she’s had for probably 3 times as long or longer, and I hazard I could find one in probably 25-50% of my friends’ kitchens if I went to dig around. As Mrs. Ward said, she probably bought several of them as gifts when her husband was stationed there in the 70s. It’s an extremely common knife, one of the most basic Wustof utility knives. So she also has one in her knife block? Really means nothing as to the whereabouts of the one that was in Dylan’s set, as it’s very believable that she would have one herself anyway.

  15. S Danny
    06/22/2010 at 1:07 AM

    Yes, but the ambiguity casts enough of a shadow over the prosecution’s assertion that the “murder weapon” was replaced, perhaps to the degree that it will be ineffective in this or any other successive trials.

    • DonnaH
      06/22/2010 at 2:37 AM

      Okay, so it might not have been *that* paring knife. The prosecution might not henceforth make a large point about Dylan’s knife set, but it seems to me the prosecution’s argument that the knife was replaced is based more on evidence suggesting that the knife that was there was *not* the murder weapon–based on expert testimony that the blood on the knife was wiped on (Lee’s assertions to the contrary notwithstanding), the consistently shorter depth of the stab wounds compared with the knife, the bruising by the wound site (sites?) indicating the knife was inserted to the hilt, and so forth– even Victor’s 911 statements that the “intruder” took one of their knives.

  16. Bea
    06/22/2010 at 1:21 AM

    Any info about the prosecution’s rebuttal witnesses? Hoping Fowler, of course, and Deedrick, though I hope he prepares more than he seemed to the first time.

    And I’m guessing that the cardiac surgeon tomorrow for the defense will take us through tamponade, though it seems out of place a bit now – I suspect the defense wanted to end with Lee or DiMaio, but I may be wrong. And it looks like my theory that Joe might take stand was for naught – would still bet money that he argued to do so with Bernie.

    I do want the prosecution to address the PEA, the ketchup science of Lee, and the stabbing testimony of DiMaio which seems, in large part, contrary to common sense in addition to Fowler and Deedrick.

    • tucsonwriter
      06/22/2010 at 1:26 AM

      “Catch-up” science?

      • Former Criminal Sex Offense Prosecutor
        06/22/2010 at 1:47 AM

        That is funny, tucson. Bea, I am so with you on your theory that Joe still wanted/wants to take the stand against attorney’s advice, even thogh he lost that fight.

        The descriptions of his physical reactions to the testimony, his leg bobbing so hard his body was moving, the mouthing of words, it must be true torture for him to sit there day after day & never get a chance to just get up there & explain it all away to these unbelievers.

        • DonnaH
          06/22/2010 at 6:25 AM

          Re your great description of Joe’s agony: nothing like being bound and gagged.

    • Bob
      06/22/2010 at 7:25 AM

      Will the prosecution call an expert witness on ninjas to rebut Dr. Lee’s martial artist theory?

  17. tucsonwriter
    06/22/2010 at 2:09 AM

    I don’t know how many readers of this site have been involved in a true emergency and have had to make a 911 call.

    My daughter had a friend visiting from out of town that had a grand mal seizure. We were all racing for the nearest phone. The EMT’s were awesome. They responded in probably less than 3-4 minutes. I felt like they were at our door just minutes after I hung up the phone.

    The above (my) EMT’s were extra-ordinary. They totally assessed the situation, asked the right questions, etc. That is the thing about all of this. These people have a certain skill set and lots of experience. They are trained to assess situations and respond rapidly to the information they are getting on all levels. The health care provider had a super bad reaction to the situation. Hair on the neck rising is pretty indicative of his rational and intuitive systems talking to each other.

    Listening to Victor’s 911 call I had a hard time believing that it was a full 5 minutes before the EMT’s arrived. I am sure that is the case but what was extraordinary to me was just how freaked out and non-commonsense-ish Victor was being. The 911 operator was trying to calm him down and get information out of him. He spouted (extra) information that simply wasn’t an answer to any of her questions. His level of hysteria was totally inconsistent with what should have been the objective reality of the situation. It was also obvious that he was distracted and talking to someone else during the call. Like a puppet. Taking orders or instructions, reading lines from a script.

    I actually think my young son( 9 years old at the time) was the one who dialed 911 and spoke to the operator. I was in another room and my husband was busy trying to catch the person before her head hit our tile floors. He was trying to figure out if he should do anything with regard to keeping her safe. My kids yelled to me and I was running from the bedroom. As I recall my son, who is quite mature, communicated effectively between the 911 operator and my husband. Usually in an emergency everyone converges on the victim. They don’t diverge. In this case, Victor went to the third floor to call 911 and Dylan was in his room reading???

    I can’t BUY this. Just like the EMT had the hairs up on his neck.

    My heart goes out to Katherine Wone. What her life must be like now compared to how it was before. She does not really even look like the same person from pictures. How could she be the same person after such a trauma?

    On the one hand I get really upset thinking of the hubris of the killers. There had to have been more than one. On the other hand I think of “Crime and Punishment.” Joe Price pretty much fits right into that scenario – he was too talky, etc. He revealed details – the thumb tucked in, etc that he really shouldn’t know. If Doestoyevsky is right (sp?) he wants to get caught and punished.

    • dsquared
      06/22/2010 at 7:06 AM

      Long time reader, first time poster. I worked in fire-EMS for 25 years and witnessed people’s reactions at emergency incidents first hand. From the very beginning, the EMT’s comment that “the hair stood up on his neck” struck a chord with me. To walk into a scene like that with three freshly showered housemates, a house guest with multiple stab wounds and a very clean scene would have freaked me out.

      I worked in the DC suburbs and I’ve been to scenes where the rich and powerful were involved. You see them without their celebrity cloaks, at their very worst, at a point where (for a very short time) ego is replaced by fear.

      I would have expected to see the trouple unshaven, tousle-haired, dressed in a mixture of what they took off before retiring or left slung over a chair, (pants or shorts,gym shorts or pajama bottoms), either barefoot or in worn, broken down house slippers or flip flops– in a condition none of us wants to be seen by strangers. Shower before the fire department arrives?? Ludicrous. I also would have kept my distance when speaking with them (morning mouth).

      I’ve been to murders and assaults. Witnesses are afraid for their lives. There is a lot more that disturbs me about the scene, but others here have done a better job than I could ever do.

      • Carolina
        06/22/2010 at 10:41 AM

        Thank you for your post. It’s good to hear from someone who has experienced similar situations and still feels things were off kilter.

    • cinnamon
      06/22/2010 at 9:15 AM

      “He spouted (extra) information that simply wasn’t an answer to any of her questions. His level of hysteria was totally inconsistent with what should have been the objective reality of the situation. It was also obvious that he was distracted and talking to someone else during the call. Like a puppet. Taking orders or instructions, reading lines from a script.”

      I have often wondered if the reason Victor went back up to the 3rd floor to make the call was so that Joe could listen in on the call from the phone in the second floor guestroom.

  18. Jo
    06/22/2010 at 2:37 AM

    Personally I have always wondered whether or not the knife was switched. To me it didn’t matter b/c all of the other evidence pointed to conspiracy even without the planted knife theory.

    Regarding the bloody towel – It might have very well been used by Joe to apply “pressure” over Robert’s wounds but just for show and not as a real attempt to save Robert’s life. Didn’t the 911 operator tell Victor that they should apply pressure over the wounds and don’t stop until the EMT arrived? Well, both Dylan and EMT said that they did not see Joe apply pressure. If fact he was not doing anything but sitting on the edge of the bed when EMT arrived. If he truly believed that his dear friend was just stabbed by an intruder but still alive (breathing and moaning), wouldn’t he be frantically trying to save his friend? Doing CPR, applying pressure, calling Dylan over to help, etc? None of that. Joe was sitting on the bed and Dylan was sitting on the couch when the EMT arrived! Their inaction speaks volume.

    Joe telling Tara how there’s a difference between tampering and wiping away blood b/c one is freaking out. Well did he tell police that he wiped away blood (and where he wiped) b/c he was freaking out? No. I am sure he at least washed blood off of his hands unless he wore gloves when he supposedly tried to stop the bleeding with a towel. It was clear that none of the defendants tried to save the life of their guest that night.

    Prosecution should focus on the timeline of the 911 call, the lack of movement during stabbing (voluntary or reflexive), the unexplained needle marks, inconsistencies of the crime scene with Robert’s habits (bed sheets, clothes), the demeanor of the defendants as seen by the first responders, the obvious holes of the intruder theory, etc. I think prosecution can still paint a clear picture that Robert was incapacitated before going to bed and then stabbed, not killed in his sleep as the defense argue.

    • Bea
      06/22/2010 at 2:57 AM

      Hi Jo,

      I agree. Fortunately we don’t have a jury – this is the kind of thing which screws up verdicts in my opinion. They’d get twisted on the notion of “well, there’s reasonable doubt about which knife it was, so we have to acquit.”

      If only J Price hadn’t made racist comments, the defense would be sitting in a lot better place right now (also just my opinion). I know many people believe they waived the jury out of fear that jurors would be biased against the gay trouple relationship (even with the BDSM stuff excised). While I agree it could have been a problem (even a straight Joe with a wife and live-in mistress would have raised eyebrows), but even jurors willing to be open-minded would have balked when they realized Price talked a good talk but couldn’t help himself to point a finger at ‘the black guy’ for no reason whatsoever.

      • WhatACase
        06/22/2010 at 4:17 AM

        Agree that bench trial will remove risk of defense telling jury: “if the turtle sandbox lid is dented a bit, you must acquit”!

        • Jo
          06/22/2010 at 4:59 AM


    • DonnaH
      06/22/2010 at 4:49 AM

      If I recall, he said he had Robert’s blood on “one” of his fingers.

      Kind of like “token” blood, to me.

      • Jo
        06/22/2010 at 5:16 AM

        I don’t recall reading about any blood on anyone of the defendants. I think what you are referring to was the ME’s testimony that there was slight blood on one of Robert’s finger. My guess was that it was probably transferred there when they removed Robert’s body from the bed. The little bit of blood on one finger was definitely not consistent with movements such as fighting back or clutching of the wounds.

        • DonnaH
          06/22/2010 at 6:40 AM

          What a switch–thanks for catching that, Jo!

        • galoon
          06/22/2010 at 7:08 AM

          Jo- In Joe’s interview with police he stated that he had a bit of blood on his finger. I think he said that he noticed it while on the way to the police station but washed it off during one of his bathroom trips at the station.

        • ladyg
          06/22/2010 at 7:31 PM

          yes, when you read joe price’s statement (i forget what pg# & line#) i think he said something about going to the bathroom i wonder if the prosecutor pick that up). it’s there, honest. i wouldn’t make that up.

          • DonnaH
            06/23/2010 at 4:12 AM

            Thanks, galoon and ladyg, for confirming that my memory’s still working, more or less.

            • ladyg
              06/23/2010 at 2:47 PM

              you’re welcome. read it twice to make sure…it was as if joe was saying “you dummies i just washed my hands right in front of you.” (sorta)

  19. Jo
    06/22/2010 at 2:53 AM

    I have one of those plastic turtle sandbox at home. Knowing how easily the lid caves in, my first reaction upon reading the babysitter’s testimony was so what? How did she know she was the last one to touch the sandbox if she left at 2pm the day before? When did she see the crushed lid the next day? My kids crushed the lid all the time.

    • DonnaH
      06/22/2010 at 4:31 AM

      Your kids may have a future in forensic science. Their experimental work is more convincing than much that’s gone so far.

      • Jo
        06/22/2010 at 4:57 AM

        I hope that the judge has kids and owns a turtle sandbox to realize how pointless that piece of testimony was.

        • tucsonwriter
          06/22/2010 at 3:51 PM

          A cat could dent it. Neighbors must have cats that they let out at night. Cats can jump walls. Desperate times call for desperate measures.

    • ccf
      06/22/2010 at 10:33 AM

      I got the impression that the housekeeper was the only person at the house, perhaps the family was on vacation. On August 2 she left early in the afternoon; the next day, she returned to the house to check on it after she learned about the murder.

  20. Rich
    06/22/2010 at 3:58 AM

    Easy question for youse Legal Wonks or Courtroom Watchers:

    Try Again Since There Were Server Problems. Bea, Kiki and sopmeone else helped a bit:

    If JUDGE LEIBOWITZ RULES THIS WEEK WITH GUILTY VERDICTS RESULTING IN JAIL TIME, WILL THE DEFENDANTS be immediately taken into custody or do they have until sentancing?

    3 months? More or less

    Or, worse, even more time to organize a jail visit after the sentancing?

    If after sentancing, how long do we have before they have to surrender?

    It will be a very bad time for all. The defendants, families, readers, posters and more.Maybe even the wones as there will ne chance to get the Civil Suit paid down.

    Not that they shouldn’t serve time, but, we all so invested.

    Mu hunch is that they will appeal and thery remain free for two more years. 🙁

  21. Gloria
    06/22/2010 at 5:41 AM

    My last day at the trial, but I’ll send some random observations, especially prompted by blog questions, to “feed the beast” until the first postings, from day 20.

    Mrs. Ward NOT “weeping”: As someone who weeps at your average TV commercial, I can say with certainty that Mrs. Ward was NOT “weeping.” However, what she did was more affecting to the audience, attorneys and the judge. She was choked up, shaking, etc., desperately trying to compose herself. At that point, ALMOST the whole courtroom was squirming, feeling the pain of the four parents in attendance (Zaborskys and Wards). Dr. Needham Ward, especially. Why do I even mention this? Because Dylan’s flat affect did not change a bit. Victor was noticeably empathetic for Mrs. Ward, but nary a Dylan muscle moved. Agree with a courtroom observer/poster here that she took seriously the admonition about telling the truth and you could see she struggled mightily to be “fair and honest,” even though her son’s life was in the balance.

    Dr. Lee: My bad for speculating on Friday that Dr. Lee was the witness held up in Mongolia. I discounted any grandstanding (I’m used to massive ego’s) and initially was charmed by his patter and was swept up in his technical explanations especially as to hairs and tissue being found on the knife. (I now doubt knives were switched.) And he scored with me re wiping blood from towel onto the knife (pattern on knife is back and forth rather than unidirectional). He did not come across as buffoonish as some have characterized him, no showmanship at this trial. But where he lost me was in not conceding an INCH to the prosecution (he said he currently, since “my third retirement,” testifies 70% for the prosecution). His continued obduracy elicited groans in the audience. BTW, the judge asked if the apparent lack of blood on the knife blade is an OPTICAL illusion (add word “optical” to “illusion”). I did not hear snarkiness in her comment; just a search for a correct term to use. “Artifact of light reflection” is probably closer. (The actual photo belied that theory I think.) The pattern of blood on the saturated t shirt back matches stains on the bed in a few areas. Re our questions about seemingly inadequate quantity of blood at scene, most blood goes into the body cavity, he said. Felt towel shows evidence of heel of hand (vs. four fingers) applying pressure to wound. Implied criticism of evidence procedures on scene, like need a photo of the (crumpled) towel stretched out (with paper on the floor to catch debris that falls off). Although he mentioned restraint of victim as a possible reason for no defensive wounds, he (and Dr. DiMaio afterwards) continually referred to “the victim” as being stabbed while sleeping. Also, if the victim had been standing when stabbed, one would have expected more blood, from dripping, onto the shorts. He saw no evidence that the scene had been cleaned/”staged”. BTW, Dr. Lee used to teach martial arts!

    Dr. DiMaio also did not concede much to the prosecution but was rather laconic. No matter what (no fishtailing, precise alignment of stab wounds), it was “unremarkable,” “individual differences,” etc. Most fatal stab wounds are 4” +/-1”, but the knife’s width is more important than its length. Saw discoloration rather than bruising on one wound; probably not the result of hilt of knife which he says is very rare (maybe sees one case every 5 years). 750 ml of blood can be expelled from the body in a minute. The 3 stab wounds could have been inflicted within less than one second. Blood will first enter the chest cavity, upon stabbing. He emphasized length of time for pain receptors to kick in and then only in the skin (not internal organs). He echoed Dr. Lee’s assumption that Robert was sleeping so posited that stabbings were quick, Robert not aware, no defensive or reflexive movements; and no pain felt. No questions raised about how long it takes for a person to enter such a deep sleep cycle. Hmmmm?

    BTW, I met a courtroom observer who had the same questions and came to the same conclusions as most readers, from listening to days of testimony, but had never heard of this blog!!

    Michael: Masterful coverage of complex material on Day 10.

    • 06/22/2010 at 5:48 AM

      Ooops. I meant “material on day 19.”

    • BadShoes
      06/22/2010 at 10:19 AM

      According to Gloria’s account, Dr. DiMaio testified:

      “The 3 stab wounds could have been inflicted within less than one second.”

      This observation, if true, may be inconsistent with the account of multiple scream/grunts/moans given by the defendants to police.

      The reason why the wounds being inflicted quickly matters (I presume) is that it accounts for the symmetry of the wounds and that it doesn’t give Mr. Wone time to react and receive defensive wounds, nor to affect the shape of his wounds.

      OTOH, the defendents described several screams/grunts/moans as taking place over a (short) period of time. In order to reconcile the defendants’ account with Dr. DiMaio’s hypothesis, Mr. Wone must have been stabbed first, then recovered consciouness(?) sufficiently to make a signficant amount of noise for a period of time.

      • Carolina
        06/22/2010 at 10:51 AM

        I’d like to cross Dr. DiMaio. Let’s go back to the pork loin, because like it or not, it does give an idea of the density of human flesh. Try to stab it three times in one second and have one of these go through something like the sternum, then get back to us, doc.

      • Ohio
        06/22/2010 at 3:20 PM

        It also doesn’t corroborate Joe Price’s depiction of the stabbing to the widow.

    • KiKi
      06/22/2010 at 10:43 AM

      This is really interesting. Thank you Gloria. Based on these observations it seems the defense is starting to make headway. I think it is important to remember that while we all talk about reasonable doubt and whether the defense has created any doubt that is really the wrong question. The question is did the prosecutor prove the case (beyond a reasonable doubt)? – In full disclosure I am a criminal defense attorney and as biased as anyone can get.

      But I have always considered the information about the fense and the intruder/ninja/alien to be a red herring. All that really matters is what happened in the aftermath. And what struck me (as it did Gloria)is: “And he scored with me re wiping blood from towel onto the knife (pattern on knife is back and forth rather than unidirectional).”

      If the knife is the murder weapon, and the knife is still at the scene I do not think the prosecutors meet their burden. And what the Lee/DiMaio team told us is that this knife could be the murder weapon. I think the knife is the key. And the question is has the prosecution proven that this knife was not the murder weapon?

      • leo
        06/22/2010 at 10:50 AM

        Like Hoya Loya, I don’t believe the prosecution has proved that the knife on the nightstand was not the murder weapon; their own witnesses, including the very impressive Dr. Fowler, could not rule it out. But unlike you, Kiki, I think the prosecution has additional evidence of tampering/obstruction/conspiracy, aside from the knife, that will sustain its burden of proof. The lack of blood on and in Robert and on the scene, the lack of defensive wounds, the precision and uniformity of the wounds, the premortem needle marks on his ankle, the defendants’ statements to police about what they heard and when, Joe’s incriminating statements to Hixson and Ragone, the absence of any evidence or even a plausible theory as to an intruder–all of this evidence still remains.

        • KiKi
          06/22/2010 at 10:55 AM

          I hear all that leo – and just saw Hoya’s post but my problem is that if the prosecution cannot prove the knife is a plant how can they prove that the scene was tampered. – The defendant cleaned all the blood, got rid of the evidence and staged the scene but just left the murder weapon on the night stand? I can’t past that. I think they need to prove BARD the knife was a plant.

          • leo
            06/22/2010 at 11:37 AM

            Well, like you, I don’t think prosecution has proved that BARD.

          • Bill Orange
            06/22/2010 at 11:45 AM

            The only one still being charged with tampering is Joe Price, so this really isn’t a big part of the prosecution’s case.

            • KiKi
              06/22/2010 at 12:07 PM

              My thought is that it is all linked. Yes JP is the only one still charged with Tampering. But for the prosecutions theory to make sense there had to be a cover-up right? i.e. the obstruction and conspiracy stem from the cover up. If there is no cover-up the prosecution case falls through. So tampering aside, if you are going to accept the prosecutions theory of the case, you have to accept that there was a conspiracy to cover up the murder and to obstruct the investigation.

              I can’t get to a theory in my head where the defendants conspire to cover up a murder and obstruct the investigation while leaving the murder weapon on the table.

              • leo
                06/22/2010 at 12:44 PM

                The defendants’ statements to police and 911 alone contain ample evidence to support obstruction and conspiracy, IMO. You don’t need the tampering to succeed with the other two charges. Yes, the conspiracy charge is interlinked with the others, but the obstruction and tampering stand apart; thus Dylan and Victor still on trial despite tampering charges being dismissed.

  22. SueSue
    06/22/2010 at 7:56 AM

    My take on it is that this murder scene was the result of “sexual molestation gone wrong” (see Gina- Stringers 6/20/2010). Does anyone remember the Leopold and Loeb murder in the early 1920’s? I found some similarities in the L&L case – motive and attempted cover-up. You all may be interested in reading a fairly recent book, “For The Thrill Of It”, by Simon Baatz. I think someone or some persons at 1509 Swann were involved for the “thrill of it” !.

  23. Bill Orange
    06/22/2010 at 8:31 AM

    Question for the eds: Is Econo-Girl the “mysterious blond”?

    • Carolina
      06/22/2010 at 10:56 AM

      If she is tall, broad shouldered and (bottle) blond, I would suggest quietly calling the name “Yvonne” and see if she turns around. There is a domme in DC who spent her college years working at Econo-Lodge and went by, surprise, “Econo-Girl” at one time. Could be coincidence. Or not.

      • Kate
        06/22/2010 at 1:03 PM

        Carolina – if you click on her blog, she has a photo of herself on the right-hand side of the page.

        Do you think that’s the Yvonne you remember?

        • Carolina
          06/22/2010 at 8:00 PM

          Most assuredly not Yvonne.

          • Lee
            06/22/2010 at 8:24 PM

            I’ll tell you that was a disappointment to me. Having Yvonne the Econo-Girl Domme showing up at this trial was just way too perfect.

      • BadShoes
        06/22/2010 at 2:21 PM

        Econo-Girl’s profile says she is an “armchair economist.” In this diverse world, apparently there is more than one category of econo-girl.

  24. weaver
    06/22/2010 at 8:36 AM

    Couple questions please for anyone who can help me.

    Can somebody tell me why the defendants were freshly showered? This makes no sense to me. When did they shower?

    Also why wasn’t Dr. Lee asked about the needle marks *on the feet*??

    Lastly, let’s say the knife wasn’t switched, did the knife come from the defendant’s kitchen?

    Thanks in advance to anyone who can answer my questions.

    • BadShoes
      06/22/2010 at 9:42 AM

      In their affadavit supporting the indictment, the prosecution said that the first EMT on the scene, Mr. Baker, thought the defendants looked as if they were “freshly showered.” I do not know whether or not Mr. Baker made this point in his actual testimony, nor do I know what specific observations Mr. Baker might have made that led him to this conclusion.

      In their statements to the police, the three defendants said that they went to bed as usual, with no mention of any showering, and were awakened by screams/groans/moans. If the defendants statements are accurate, they only appeared to be freshly showered. If their statements are false, possibly they showered in an effort to remove blood or forensic evidence, and they would have had to do their showering shortly before the EMTs arrived.

      the knife discovered by Mr. Wone’s body is universally accepted as having come from the kitchen downstairs. If there is another, unknown knife, exactly where it might come from is a matter of speculation. The prosecution suggests, but hasn’t proved (IMHO), that the missing knife belonged to Mr. Ward.

      I don’t know why Dr. Lee wasn’t asked about needle marks. PRobably because he couldn’t reasonably be expected to know the answer.

      • weaver
        06/22/2010 at 11:02 AM

        Thanks Badshoes.

        So if the knife came from the defendants kitchen are we to believe that an intruder set on murdering someone– a sleeping guest… went to the townhouse without a weapon and had to rely on finding one in the kitchen??

        I think that notion is absurd.

        I also don’t understand why the sexual abuse of Robert is not being addressed by the defense…. surely the judge has not forgotten this very important point?

  25. Bill Orange
    06/22/2010 at 8:48 AM

    Okay, here’s my take after a night’s sleep. Yesterday was not a good day for the defense. Their first witness wants you to believe that you can’t trust the photographs. Their second witness wants you to believe that you can be stabbed three times in the torso and not wake up. Their third witness wants you to believe that one of the two knives that she dug up is actually the “missing” knife.

    On the other hand, yesterday was a HUGE victory for the kid next door, who now has a multi-million dollar legal team arguing that an “intruder” stomped on Mr. Turtle.

    Question for the lawyers: How much do judges tease each other after verdicts have been rendered? I would imagine that if she let’s these three walk based on the word of two defense witnesses from the OJ trial, he colleagues are going to be called her “Judge Ito” for the rest of her life.

    • weaver
      06/22/2010 at 11:07 AM

      Bill something else… Robert’s sheets were not turned down. His clothes were not folded. So are we to believe Robert laid down with his clothes thrown in a pile and he didn’t turn the sheets down and immediately feel into such a deep sleep that he didn’t hear/see the intruder come into his room and approach him on the bed thus he laid perfectly still to be stabbed??

      This whole thing is such a crock. I will be shocked if the judge doesn’t see that too.

    • Lynn
      06/22/2010 at 1:27 PM

      Bill-O: I don’t know about anyone else, but I loved your humorous comments! A little bit of levity never hurts.

      • KKinCA
        06/22/2010 at 1:37 PM

        Lynn – I agree! Bill O provides the perfect mix of an excellent memory of the facts, thoughtful analysis, and humor. I love reading his posts!

        • Kate
          06/22/2010 at 4:31 PM


          Love your posts, Bill O.

      • KKinCA
        06/23/2010 at 12:46 AM

        Three members of the Bill O fan club! Anyone else care to join? Bill O – when all is said and done with this sad story (hopefully with the 3 defendants in jail, the murderer(s) in prison, and Kathy Wone with a HUGE judgment against the trouple), you MUST start your own blog!!!

        • Former Criminal Sex Offense Prosecutor
          06/23/2010 at 1:14 AM

          I love Bill Orange, too, but I want the Editors of this blog to continue with their great work covering the civil trial as well. They are talented journalists. They have a lot of expertise that is so seamless it may be taken for granted at times.

          They are the ones who brought all of us together, including Bill O & Chilaw79 & AnnaZed & Bea, my favs 4 ever. None of this exists without them. Go back through the archives & admire all the hard work in putting this site together over the years when I just occasionally lurked.

          Also, I believe you go home with the one who brought you to the dance.

          • AnnaZed
            06/23/2010 at 1:17 AM

            In the South of my youth the expression was “you dance with the one who brung you,” but I like your update, ha!

          • KKinCA
            06/23/2010 at 3:50 AM

            Let me clarify – I am not at all suggesting that Bill O start a competing blog on this case, and I apologize for any misunderstanding in that regard. WMRW is the greatest and I am very very grateful to the Editors for the amazing work they are doing, and have done for so long. As I stated in my above post, ONCE everything in the case is resolved, criminal and civil, and there is no more to say (if such a time ever should come), at that time Bill O should start a blog about whatever he wants to. He just seems to have a knack for it. I could say the same about YOU, FCSOP, and all of those you listed above. I also love reading CDinDC’s posts. There are some amazing posters on this site. I was just adding onto a kudos post for Bill O, which I would do for any of the other amazing posters. I hope I have been more clear. Thanks.

  26. Rich
    06/22/2010 at 9:16 AM

    One More Quick Question:

    I’ve never read anything, I do not believe, about Joe’s parents.

    Are they around? Alive? On record as saying anything?

    And, are they going immedately into custody, if convicted.

    Some folks do not think so.

    • commonsensewillprevailihope
      06/22/2010 at 11:18 AM

      The parents will not be put in custody, only the defendants.

      • Bill 2
        06/22/2010 at 4:57 PM

        I’ve never read anything saying that any members of his family are at the trail. I read that his father was in the Navy, nothing about his mother. We’re well aware of his brother.

    • Carolina
      06/22/2010 at 8:02 PM

      Price’s father is alive. The parents are apparently divorced. No idea if his mother is alive.

  27. BadShoes
    06/22/2010 at 9:48 AM

    Dr. di Maio testified:

    His summary of the scenario was, “…victim asleep in bed and stabbed three times from above.”

    Except that it would be very difficult to stab Mr. Wone “from above” in the fold-out sofa…

  28. Rich
    06/22/2010 at 9:56 AM

    Server Down?

    A trick that has worked for me.

    Key, into the, “Eplorer Bar,” at the top of your puter and you will get in.

    It’s a browser?

  29. commonsensewillprevailihope
    06/22/2010 at 10:59 AM

    How do things stand for the defense? My overall take is that this looks very likely to result in conviction.

    If this were just a case of HIGHLY SUSPICIOUS CIRCUMSTANCES — three men in a house, a dead body, and an intruder who left no trace and took nothing and acted super fast in a compressed time frame that couldn’t have been known in advance to the intruder, a randomly chosen victim, a victim killed so quickly and cleanly that there was no time for defense or clutching a wound — then there would still be a reasonable doubt because it just might be that the bizarre and lucky intruder did come by the house that night. But numerous peices of evidence remove the reasonable doubt (one could argue):

    – most fundamentally, the defendants argue that RW showered and went to sleep but that simply appears to be false given the crumpled clothes, the odd placement on top of the sheets, and the untouched towels.
    – the timeline established by the neighbor (and people’s TV habits are OFTEN very very regular, so the testimony was quite believable
    – numerous inconsistencies and/or odd statements by the defendants at the police headquarters or V on the 911 call [other posters have listed many of these]
    – the credible testimony about the unexplained needle marks
    – the bizarre behavior of the trio just minutes, literally, after an intruder was in their home and they found a mortally wounded friend

    I didn’t mention the quantity of blood evidence or the replaced knife because I think the case stands even if the judge discounts those prosecution points. However, more importantly, in my view, is the verbal statements about observed blood from V and another that do not accord with what was found.

    In other words, the circumstantial evidence is damning even if some of the forensic issues are conceded to the defense or considered not proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

    • weaver
      06/22/2010 at 11:08 AM

      I fully agree!!

    • mw
      06/22/2010 at 1:45 PM

      All of that is pretty convincing to me to except for:

      “- numerous inconsistencies and/or odd statements by the defendants at the police headquarters or V on the 911 call [other posters have listed many of these”

      …which I think is getting too much play here. Inconsistencies if anything, indicate the lack of a conspiracy, rather than provide evidence for it. If there’s a confusing set of circumstances is a tense situation, I’d expect everyone to have perceived things differently/had contrary memories.

      Maybe this would be different in a murder case – but I’m having a hard time understanding how throwaway defendant comments that don’t make sense up get us towards conviction.

      • KKinCA
        06/22/2010 at 1:52 PM

        mw – on the other hand, there was a certain consistency in some statements from all three defendants that are very suspect that could not have been independently known by all them absent some discussion among the three prior to the authorities arriving, and even prior to Victor’s 911 call. The use of the word “intruder”, the claim that the knife was taken by the intruder, the burned steaks, the back door was unlocked, etc.

      • leo
        06/22/2010 at 1:55 PM

        When the defendants all repeat an erroneous “fact,” e.g., that Victor called 911 at 11:43, that smacks of conspiracy to obstruct. The inconsistencies are not so much between and among the defendants’ statements, but between their surprisingly consistent (among themselves) statements and the other evidence, e.g., “we heard a scream” (or grunts) vs. killed while sleeping or instant death from knife wound to heart; “we heard a chime and I’m afraid to go downstairs” but it doesn’t occur to VZ to check on Dylan once he’s gone down there; “evidently there’s been an intruder” sounds coached; “he has one of our knives” when the murder weapon was on the body and then moved to the nightstand.

        • KKinCA
          06/22/2010 at 1:56 PM

          Leo – well said! We are on the same page.

          • tucsonwriter
            06/22/2010 at 4:04 PM

            Nice point – “he has one of our knives” but the knife is left behind.

            Also how is it possible to stab someone AND leave the knife either in the wound or on the chest? I guess I could see the final stab wound being a thrust with no pull back. But to leave the knife on the chest. I would imagine the theoretical intruder would throw it aside not gently place it on the chest. If the knife had been found on the ground that would make sense.

  30. Aquanetta
    06/22/2010 at 2:45 PM

    Confession time: The Experts

    It’s been awhile since I have posted, but I have definitely been following. And, I even made my way to the proceedings once. I love the editors postings and the great comments, insight, and the occasional witty banter.
    Notice that Ive been avoiding the confession part. Here it is…. There was a time in my career that I used to “sell” my services to defense attorneys. Though, certainly not as notable as these guys, I did my share of professing my opinion as gospel. I have moved on to more honorable uses of my talents. Money is Great, but integrity is better.

    My point: Im not saying that these guys are dishonest but a10-20K check certainly motivates you to tilt to one side of the fence b also, if you make the mistake of conceding too many points by the prosecution, those big checks will discontinue. For ME, it was a slippery professional slope.

    • Kate
      06/22/2010 at 4:26 PM

      Welcome back, Aquanetta!

      We’ve been wondering where you have been. I think that you and Gloria will get along famously – she is also a Mental Health Professional.

      Many thanks for your insights into expert testimony. I don’t believe that most of the folks here believe all experts are scoundrels, merely those who have made a long-standing livelihood from their “wares,” including extremely self-promoting web sites.

      As I am a Catholic, this is the part in the confession where I ask you to say three Hail Marys, perform a silent act of kindness and be joyful.


      • Aquanetta
        06/23/2010 at 8:30 PM

        Thanks Kate. Two hail mary’s down….one to go. I 100 percent agree with you regarding experts. Miss you guys.

  31. ladyg
    06/22/2010 at 4:10 PM

    if the question has been answered long, pls forgive me for asking again. will the defense team, put any of the defendants on the stand or will the prosecutors, call one or two them to the stand. i thought that if you are on trial, you have the right to defend yourself, especially if you have the answers to what was being told by other witnesses.

    • Bea
      06/22/2010 at 4:15 PM

      The prosecutors CAN’T call the defendants but the defense can put them on. That said, these three will not (apparently) be testifying. I think it’s fair to say that they could only damage their case by being inconsistent with prior statements and opening themselves up to some serious questioning. Much as we’d like to see them.

  32. ladyg
    06/22/2010 at 4:13 PM

    sorry, i was asking a question in there (silly me)

    • Former Criminal Sex Offense Prosecutor
      06/22/2010 at 6:49 PM

      Is this the answer you were looking for..I will try to be complete. Your Constitutional Rights include the Right To Remain Silent, commonly referred to as “The Fifth Amendment”, which is part of “The Bill of Rights”. That is included in the judicial case interpretation that you may have heard of as the “Miranda Warning” or your “Miranda Rights”.

      The pertinent text is as follows, “No person…shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself..” In this country, we have a system that is geared to protect these very important Constitional Guaranties to the extent that it does sometimes seem to serve to benefit criminals as opposed to victims.

      I was taught in law school that this philosophy was best expressed by the concept that you would rather see 100 guilty people go free to avoid the wrongful conviction of 1 innocent person. You may disagree with that idea, but that is how our system works & I don’t know of any better system. What we have in this country is less than perfect in so many ways, but it is better in my opinion than what you will find elsewhere.

      You are right in feeling that the Prosecution could put on much more evidence if it was lawful to force criminal defendants to the stand to answer questions, but it is not allowed. You not only have the right NOT to take the stand, your failure to do so in a criminal proceeding cannot be held as evidence against you. In a jury trial that is a very important instruction, no negative inference can be made from that execution of this Constitutional Right.

      You are also right in wondering don’t the defendants have a right to defend themselves in a Court of Law by testifying, if they choose, to answer any of the allegations raised by the Prosecution’s case, or any of the witnesses presented, the answer is they have that right. That is another important part of our system of law. No one is silenced. They have the right to be heard.

      In this particular proceeding, no one will know for certain until the defense rests, if the defendants will actually take the stand. Even then, any of them could still decide to testify in rebuttal. Posters on this site are throwing out ideas & theories, the idea that no one of the three defendants will testify is conjecture only. Based on very educated guesses & backed by sound reasoning, they could still be wrong.

      Bea gave you a short summary above explaining why taking the stand would be viewed as a difficult maneuver, it could easily serve to make matters worse for The Trouple. That being said, I do very much hope that Joe Price will decide to clear things up by exercising his right to be heard. He is a very talented litigator & I am sure he has some great answers to all the questions out there.

      • ladyg
        06/22/2010 at 7:43 PM

        THANKS, to both you FCSOP & BEA.

  33. AnnaZed
    01/10/2011 at 4:01 PM

    “Sandy Springs Garage Door” is an attack site spamming every single post on this bog (one after another), can they be blocked somehow please?

    • Craig
      01/10/2011 at 4:29 PM

      Done and done. That was some nasty blast. But they had such kind words to say about us: “Bloggers happen to be under appreciated, many thanks for bothering to post this.”

Comments are closed.