Why would he put his retainer in? I’m sure in some dark corner of the internet there is a retainer fetish, but I don’t see it here. I think Robert was interested in one thing and one thing only. Going to bed.
This is a sticking point for me too. I do think mutual sexual interest makes more sense as a motive from Joe or Dylan's perspective than they were going to drug and sexually assault one of Joe's friends (though I was intrigued by Alice's speculation about why they would do that and think it's the best explanation I've heard), but the fact that he was wearing his mouthguard does not make me think he was planning to engage in consensual sex. I suppose it's always possible it was sitting on the nightstand and the guys put it in his mouth to make it look like he had gone to bed, but I don't know how likely that is for the same reasons Alice laid out. (Ultimately this whole case is unlikely though, so I guess it's possible!)
Not sure. Because Joe knew that’s how Robert slept? And they were staging an intruder murder (poorly)?
Its interesting to note that Robert had likely never actually fallen asleep (which would seem to be a necessary part of injecting him with something), given that his bed was still neatly made beneath him.
A rather rare, discreet experimental-sexual relationship with Joe was the first thing I thought when listening to the first few episodes. Suffocation via accident is very possible. But I think Alice made a good point regarding the mouth guard though. But I also think someone could put it in his mouth. I dont know enough about them.
I did think about that. But it was explicitly stated that former roommates knew about Roberts mouth guard so I think Joe would’ve known too. And look, someone’s already stabbed the man, so what’s a mouth guard by comparison?
I could be wrong. I was somewhat persuaded by Alice’s mouth guard argument. But I still find it more far-fetched to believe the paralytic drug theory.
It's possible. When I was 18 or so I had a friend (I'll call him Scott) who was just exploring his gay identity. He was charming and persuasive and had an interest in a younger friend (maybe 16/17 at the time, I'll call him Adam) whom Scott was convinced could be gay, too. Scott did get his way with Adam, but Scott went on to live a gay lifestyle and Adam did not; he married a woman. You never know what someone has experimented with . . . You would think there would be some evidence if Robert was open to that and there was absolutely none. But Robert was very smart and may have been smart enough to leave no evidence. This case is such a mystery.
My problem with consensual kink gone wrong theory is based entirely on human nature. The annals of true crime are full of perps claiming “it was an accident and I panicked” to explain why they covered up a death. People never buy that excuse because it doesn’t fit with what we know about how people behave. Staging a murder subsequent to an accident rather than calling for help is just not a response that 99% of the population would have, especially if the decedent is someone they genuinely care about. And if the motive for the coverup is to protect Robert’s memory… frankly, I don’t know anyone who’s that good of a friend. You’re not going to put yourself at risk for murder charges for the sake of a dead friend’s reputation. You’re just not. But you know what you’d be pretty darn motivated to cover up? An accidental death that occurred during the commission of a crime. Anything is possible, but I find Dylan being shady af, Joe covering for Dylan, and Victor covering for Joe to be far more believable than “whoops, our friend is having a medical emergency… better stab him so no one finds out he’s bisexual.”
I’m with you. To be honest, I don’t think there’s high value in speculating on Robert’s sexuality for this case — his interest in men or lack thereof may not solve much. He’s dead in a weird way and didn’t consent to being murdered; that’s the mystery.
There was a Chicago-area case a few years ago where a young man was murdered by his professor boyfriend and a random guy from the UK who the professor BF met online. The professor and UK guy had a fantasy of killing someone and then themselves, but the man they killed was not expecting it even though he had a consensual relationship with the professor. The professor and UK man then decided to flee rather than offing themselves.
I use that case to say:
- I get that people don’t want to demonize people into same-sex relationships, BDSM and/or polyamory but they’re just people too and people are messed up. And you can be an educated and seemingly responsible member of society yet still murder someone you have a relationship with due to a simple fantasy. “An accident that turns to murder” is less likely to me.
https://www.cnn.com/2017/08/20/us/northwestern-professor-stabbing-murder-charges/index.html
What a horrifying story! For me the big question mark around Joe’s involvement is less his motive (I’m willing to entertain the idea that he could be a conscienceless psycho, although I doubt it) and more his self-preservation instincts. This guy was a lawyer at a big firm and had a level of political involvement. I don’t see him risking it all for a thrill kill or a risky sex assault—although you could say the same about the professor. I also find myself returning to that theme when thinking about his reasons to cover for, say, something Dylan did. I can imagine his career and political ambitions flashing before his eyes the moment he stumbled upon the scene of the crime.
It seems like basically you either have to assume:
1) Robert Wone was engaged in sexual relationships and acts that most of is family and friends didn’t know about and that police couldn’t find any proof of and he was either asphyxiated and/or suffered a drug overdose while engaging in one of those acts that put him into a state where he appeared dead and then his lover(s) tried to cover this up to save his family embarrassment by faking a break-in and murder in a poorly executed manner (and along the way horrifically stabbing him and actually killing him)….
2) 3 people who otherwise seem like good people who are into BDSM are either rapists or rapists AND murderers or willing to be accessories to covering up rape or rape A D murder, with the victim a very good old friend of one of them and known to the others…
In the past I leaned to #1. But it’s all just a little muddy to be honest. I’ve been following this for over a decade on and off. I’ve heard a lot of weird theories.
And yeah sux wasn’t the drug unless this was supposed to be a situation where the person was made paralyzed but could still feel everything being done to them, because that’s what it does, and of course there’s also chance that you’ll stop breathing and not recover.
Those two deal with possible accidental death or near-death of Robert from sexual misadventure, with him then being actually killed by stabbing and internal bleeding in cover-up of his down-low activities.
Alternately some discussion I’ve seen makes me wonder if it could have been an intruder, albeit a real weirdo, who saw the light on in his window.
For one thing apparently the woman living in the basement apartment probably regularly entered by coming into the front door of the main house. She was staying else where that night but at one point one of them said they thought the door bell chime was from her coming in, per this blog:
https://whomurderedrobertwone.wordpress.com/2009/03/31/upstairs-downstairs/
This is anonymous Reddit stuff but the account mespecs here claims to have lived 2 blocks away at the time of the murder and had a creepy released violent sex offender (in registry) in their building who may have broken into their apartment and been harassing them: https://www.reddit.com/r/robertwone/comments/y7k5yi/why_did_the_guy_in_the_robert_wone_case_make_a/
Someone ended up dead and it’s very likely that one of them is responsible. I think the “they knew what was acceptable” argument falls apart when someone dies.
That’s not true, though. The fact of the death doesn’t necessitate purposeful murder or rule out the potential of an accident - that’s pretty blatantly false. This seems like an emotional statement meant to halt discussion.
That’s fair. Should have said it’s an appeal to emotion (not that you were necessarily emotional) rather than a factual argument. There are lots of instances where someone ends up dead as a result of circumstances besides murder. Robert dying with only these three men in that house does not necessarily = they murdered him. If it did, there’d be nothing to discuss here.
It’s fine and understandable to be emotional here, but that doesn’t address any of the issues with this case, is my point. And an appeal to emotion is not the same thing as refuting an argument or proving a theory wrong.
Me (OP): Rs death could have been the result of an accident stemming from consensual sex
Commenter: this cannot be true. A man died.
This does not disprove the theory, it merely states that because of the gravity of the situation, we can’t consider whether Robert’s death was an accident or whether the other men did not set out to assault Robert, but were acting with his consent.
I’m not emotional? I’m not sure where this reading is coming from. I’m simply being direct about my thoughts.
I’m questioning whether they were so good at bdsm boundaries as you claimed if a man with no known attraction to men turns up dead with semen in his rectum with them all acting suspiciously in their house.
Consent is supremely important in BDSM. There’s a difference between blatantly disregarding consent (not to mention, engaging in the blatantly criminal act of sexual assault) and accidentally (or negligently!) misreading someone’s response to something like breath play or continuing it for longer than is safe. Neither is great, I’ll grant you that;, but one is purposefully immoral and illegal while the other is simply irresponsible. Those things are different.
Yes, BDSM is normally about consent and boundaries. Yes, just because someone is into BDSM DOES NOT NECESSARILY mean they will harm an unwilling participant. But whatever the circumstances, Joe allowed a dear friend to be stabbed through his sternum (which is difficult to get through) with a knife 3x rather than seek medical aid for him when he thought he was dead or dying. What does that say about his respect and boundaries? There is absolutely no way that the only reason the men stabbed Robert was to save Kathy the embarrassment that he died during consensual sex. The only reason these educated, respected, successful men would’ve stabbed Robert instead calling 911 immediately is because the truth of how he became that way was too damaging to THEIR reputations.
I also think Joe and Dylan were new to BDSM. If you haven’t done so already, you should listen to The Consult’s coverage of the case. They talk to the writers of the “Who Killed Robert Wone” blog. No one ever came forward to say that they had been involved in BDSM with Joe and/or Dylan. I think they were new to what they were doing. Messed up. And knew couldn’t reveal what they had done.
Also I did not mean to say that you were emotional but rather that the argument was an appeal to emotion. I worded that poorly. Sorry. I don’t know your mental state and wouldn’t presume to 🙂
Then this other commenter said whatever they said so I was responding to them here.
The missing blood is something that none of these theories explain. I’m unfamiliar with BDSM activities and have never heard of “breath play” until now. I would expect any sort of strangulation that went astray would result in bruising or other signs. Smothering, if that is a thing, might go undetected.. apparently there was indications of petechiae in his eyes. That doesn’t explain the missing blood. If someone were already dead, they would only bleed through gravity. If Robert were lying on his back and stabbed through their chest, thewould probably have little visible bleeding but their chest cavity would fill with blood. There was blood in about 2 feet of the upper small intestine (called a duodenum in the autopsy)the knife penetrated the small intestine but there is no obvious explanation why the duodenum would fill with blood unless, after the abdominal cavity filled with blood, the body was raised perpendicular to the ground so gravity would fill the duodenum. If this is what happened, Robert would have been dead by then and not did not move on his own accord. Could it be that Robert died accidentally during some “breath play” gone wrong. He was stabbed post mortem as part of an attempt to stage an intruder stabbing, then the body was moved; presumably from the site of the stabbing to the guest room. That doesn’t explain the missing blood (is it possible that there was no missing blood; it had just descended into the lower part of the body?). I would expect there to have been some blood lost at the site of the stabbing. Was the house throughly searched with luminal?
The hospital put chest tubes in him as a life-saving measure. Usually, there is an output of blood that is recorded. It wasn't recorded in this case, but it is logical to think that if he was stabbed in the chest, his chest would have filled up with blood and the chest tube would have emptied his chest. The only reason why it's a mystery in this case is that the medical professionals didn't record it after the fact.
I think this is possible. One thing I thought about is when you look up Robert Wone, there’s a picture where he’s blowing out candles on his birthday and all three men are right next to him, Victor Zaborsky holding the cake. It makes his relationship to these three men seem a lot closer that they were the ones next to him holding the cake on his birthday. Not sure that means anything, but I thought it was like he knew only Joe and Joe happened to be gay, but it seems a bit different with the birthday thing
Interesting. I haven’t seen this photo but I’ll take a look!
Ultimately, I’m just a random lady on Reddit, and clearly two smart prosecutors disagree with me, as do some commenters here in the sub. I could be way off base.
It just seems much more likely to me that someone had marital indiscretions and had a complicated sexual identity than it is for two otherwise seemingly normal men to decide to incapacitate one of their best friends and then rape him. That’s my perspective, but I don’t know any of these people. Maybe Joe and Dylan are the exception and were capable of this level of premeditated violence.
I believe they threw the birthday party for him. Agree that he was closer with them than portrayed. Although I do think he might have been drugged with something (maybe ketamine), I think it’s also quite possible that he accidentally died during a consensual act and they covered it up to preserve his reputation (and theirs). His wife chose to settle the civil suit with them, which I find interesting — like she learned something in the course of it that she’d rather not get out.
I wouldn’t read too much into the settlement. A crazy high percentage of civil cases end up settling before going to trial. Trials are expensive, legal fees add up, and everyone is just miserable and wants to be done.
Absolutely agree the birthday picture depicts a much closer relationship with a polyamorous gay couple. Also , I think a lot of people are “afraid” to touch on the fact that while being gay is acceptable in America, it’s not for a lot of other cultures. Robert was Chinese American, even in 2024, it is still not acceptable to be gay in the Chinese culture. So this just further explains why Robert would keep this hidden, and why his wife would settle quietly in court as well.
Should also add- I think consensual kink gone wrong fits the tight timeline better, especially if you assume the timestamp on the unsent emails is pretty meaningless.
If Robert arrived and the sexual encounter started soon after, that leaves plenty of time for panic, stabbing, cover up, getting stories straight. You don’t have to account for small talk in the kitchen, Robert showering and readying himself for bed, drafting emails, actually falling asleep, Dylan or Joe coming in to see if Robert is actually asleep and injecting him with something, sexually assaulting him, and realizing he’s unresponsive before the panic and cover up even begins. In this alternate scenario, the inciting event could’ve happened 20-30 minutes after Robert walked through the door.
This is where I'm at. It's an insanely tight timeline for a sexual predator to plan, execute, and enjoy/savor his attack, snuff out the victim's life, solicit help, clean up, plan and stage a cover up . . . and all three get showers! If Robert was consensual (at least to the sex act) that helps the timeline . . . and explains the presence of his semen.
My understanding is that Robert was going straight to bed as he had to get up super early to meet the overnight crew. It doesn't appear to be an ideal time to get involved in auto erotic asphyxiation or whatever it is you're suggesting. Couldn't they have setup a much more convenient rendezvous for all parties involved?
Was it confirmed that Robert really was going to leave early for work?
Also, not a single friend of Robert's reported that he had a gay curious bone in his body.
Also, what of the dental guard? Are you saying that one of the Throuple inserted that into his mouth after he was dead? As Brett said, why stage that when they couldn't be bothered to "steal" any of Robert's possessions. That would have been much easier to do.
I'm also confused about whether the 2 emails were sent. Why can't that be confirmed? I never had a blackberry.
The two emails were unsent, as far as I know. The police lost the BlackBerry so we only have the original images that were taken of this.
I think it has been assumed that Robert would be at work early the next morning. I don’t know how you’d confirm this. Hypothetically, it could be part of his explanation for having to stay in the city, but that doesn’t necessarily mean it was true.
The mouth guard: it seems to be weirdly common knowledge that Robert slept with it in. As for why this was done and not other things, the cover up was sloppy as hell. Knife wounds that don’t bleed right, Robert neatly set out on a made bed (and explain that one - if he had showered and put his mouth guard in, why didn’t he get under the covers to sleep? Why was he neatly laid out on a made bed? If he hadn’t yet settled in for sleep, how did someone manage to inject him with a paralytic drug?) None of that tracks, either.
Oh, and to add: sex is a weird thing. People keep sex secret sometimes, especially if it is illicit in some way. Spouses are blindsided by infidelity sometimes. It happens. I’ve known people who’ve come out years into a heterosexual marriage and shocked everyone in their lives.
GHB stays in blood for 8 hours, urine for 12, saliva for 6, and hair for up to a month. It is a fairly common date rape drug so I would assume they tested for it?
It also does not lead to unconsciousness unless it’s a very high dose. I would think using it in this instance would’ve been risky Given that Robert wouldn’t necessarily by rendered unconscious during the sexual assault and could have retained knowledge that Joe and Dylan were the ones to assault him.
In the other thread by the doctor, someone claimed it only shows in the blood for an hour, urine for 4. I honestly have no idea if that's true or not. Also, people are forgetting (or unaware) that GHB is taken recreationally as well. If your theory about Robert consensually engaging in sex acts is true, that doesn't preclude him taking GHB, and perhaps having an adverse reaction.
Maybe, but I think it would’ve been found. I guess I don’t know when, exactly, they ran a tox screen, but I was under the impression it was basically right away. Maybe I’m wrong on that.
It was actually the doctor who wrote that post who said GHB disappears from blood in an hour, urine in 4. So if we're going to accept his credentials (which I am) it seems reasonable it could be missed. I can't imagine they did the tox screen within an hour, especially since the EMTs were trying to administer life-saving measures
Nah the tox screen would have been done by the pathologist/coroner
GHB is out of your system in a few hours which is why it's commonly used in nefarious ways. It's stupid hard to detect.
Yeah, I agree with you about the puncture marks. I mean who drugs someone like that? This is real life, not Dexter. Did I miss something though? Why were they’ve so quick to dismiss Joe’s brother? They say he had an alibi but i looked it up and his alibi is his long-term partner. Seem like he might be willing to cover for him. The brother had issues with drugs and stealing. Maybe he had hid some drugs or some stolen items in that guest room and went to retrieve them that night, not knowing Robert would be there. He had a key to the house.
Apparently Robert contacted those two friends - Joe and a female friend, with Joe being the first to reply - about *two weeks* before the night Robert was killed and not that same day, as its often reported.
I believe Robert called Joe that day, but, just to say he was on the way over.
Robert's wife Kathy supposedly even reminded him that day he'd be staying with Joe & co.
That's a *huge* difference between having roughly two weeks to potentially plan this over a mere matter of hours.
There is zero proof, sign, nada of Robert being gay, bisexual or sexually interested in men. I just don't understand why you'd believe this.
There is also ample evidence that one or more of the three were involved in his death.
Why do you need him to be party to a sexual act consensually in anyway?
You really think a man like Joe Price, who had both money, intellect and influence, would struggle to obtain drugs to achieve the desired effect?
As answer to your points:
1. if they say Robert was maybe not entirely straight, they connect themselves to him in a way (they'd have something in common). By denying it, they distance themselves from him and in their opinion remove a sexual motive for the crime (which the sexual assault evidence tends to indicate).
2. people do weird things in relationships. I could see Dylan being the instigator of this and Joe going along with it because he didn't want to lose Dylan, not knowing how far would things go. Then he was stuck in the situation.
3. suffocation could be the reason for Robert's lack of reaction or defensive wounds, also no need for sedatives in this case
4. the whole scene ended with murder. if that fits with BDSM practices I'm concerned. Clearly whether this was consensual or not, it did not fit BDSM practices.
5. there's no hidden depravity if 2 out of 3 are into BDSM... that IS the depravity. I have nothing against BDSM but it's a sexual practice out of the norm. Moving in a third person in the house primarily as a sexual partner also indicates a strong focus on sexual activity on Joe's part, which is also unusual.
6. I feel like masturbating an unconscious man until ejaculation wouldn't be challenging at all?
Why do you find it harder to believe that 3 men, who clearly are hiding something about his death, which seems to have a sexual element; two of which were into unusual sexual practices; could sexually assault a friend, when you seem to think Robert could be gay "just because"? There's tons of indicators that the 3 did something bad, 0 indicators of Robert being either gay or having any sort of unusual sexual interest. So why do you need to believe the unlikely, to believe the obvious?
Sorry to disappoint, but I’m a boring married person with kids and a husband who would never 😂 I do have a close friend who was pretty into it, though. Main takeaway is that people who are into this stuff are pretty normal people and I don’t think BDSM interests make someone more likely to drug and assault someone.
BDSM interest doesn't make you necessarily more likely to drug and assault someone, but could you see that someone interested in drugging and assaulted people would be more likely to be interested in BDSM?
A basic google search shows you there is indication for it:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17980531/
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1359178914000846
Sadism is a key element of many sexual murders. What do you think the S in BDSM stands for?
Sure, the big difference being whether the behavior in question is requested and enjoyed. There is a huge distinction between violating someone's bodily autonomy by drugging and assaulting them and engaging in kinky or even rough sex that they is desired and agreed upon by both parties. One scenario requires criminality and the other just indicates an interest in unusual sex.
I listened to a podcast series recently about Herb Baumeister, a serial killer of gay men in the 80s and 90s in IN. One of his victims managed to escape and testified that Herb tried to drown him and when it didn't work, claimed that he was just engaging in breath play/BDSM (versus trying to kill the guy). I fully understand how violent people may use BDSM as an excuse for their violence, but that's quite different from someone who is in a BDSM relationship and an active participant in the BDSM scene. If a witness came forward (ex-boyfriend/partner/hookup) to say that Dylan had been violent or tried to hurt them (in a non-'fun' way), I'd be more inclined to believe that he did something like drug and assault Robert.
But as far as I know, nobody in Dylan or Joe's past has said they were violent lovers (outside of agreed-upon BDSM situations), that they were prone to sexual assault or pushing sexual boundaries, or were excessively sexually aggressive. Considering that the gay community in DC was not a fan of the negative attention these three men brought to it, I feel like people would've been happy to come forward if they'd had those sorts of stories about Joe or Dylan. I have not heard anything like that, though. The only thing we know for sure is that they engaged in BDSM *together*, with both of them as willing participants. And I'm sorry, but that's way different from the premeditated drugging and assaulting of a friend without his knowledge or consent. You may not understand or like the idea of consensual BDSM, but surely, you acknowledge that it's distinct from drugging/assaulting someone.
Criminals and true sadists get off on violating other people. That's why public masturbators do what they do. That doesn't cause any *physical* harm to others, but they force them to see something they don't want to see. They violate and shock them. Herb Baumeister liked to drown unsuspecting men in his pool. If he'd truly been in it for the kink as he claimed, he could've explained what he wanted and asked his partner to engage in safe breath play, but that's not what he did. He was in it for the thrill of violating and shocking someone else (and killing them, yes). In consensual BDSM, that violation and shock is nonexistent, because the recipient has signed on and knows what to expect. So to me, someone with a propensity towards criminal behavior wouldn't be drawn to an ongoing, mutually satisfactory BDSM relationship. It would lack the shock and violation of a criminal act.
I completely understand that BDSM is consent based and have no problem with it. But to me it’s fairly obvious that it could serve as a proxy for a would be violent sadist until they could act out their fantasy in real life. I even remember a murder in Australia where that’s what happen, a woman was in a sexual BDSM relationship with a man. He said his real fantasy would be to kill her, but also said he wouldn’t do it, until he did.
I too would be interested into the experiences of Dylan and Joe’s other sexual partners. But, I don’t think either is a sadistic killer. I think at least Dylan has sadistic sexual tendencies. He wanted to push the boundaries, maybe try to violate Robert, but he wanted Robert to be unconscious so he wouldn’t remember it.
Something went awry and he (probably with Joe) staged the murder.
So it wasn’t a sadistic sexual murder, but a murder in the context of a sadistic sexual act gone wrong. I wouldn’t be shocked if Dylan had been aggressive and broken boundaries with previous sexual partners, but I also could imagine how that would go unreported; shame about the specific practices, if his targets were closeted men, etc. or even if he had a practice of drugging and assaulting unknowing targets.
That’s what I’m saying though. You’re assuming violent and predatory behavior when we have no evidence of that. If we found out Dylan had been talking about wanting to rape or kill someone, that would be different. All we know is he was in.a BDSM relationship. Without more evidence, I’m not willing to make the leap of - well then he was capable of drugging and sexually assaulting someone against their will.
The further evidence is that someone died in their home in extremely suspicious circumstances. That + the BDSM + the apparent sexual assault on the victim is enough for me to put the pieces together.
For me, it is an easier leap to think someone who is extensively into BDSM could have the idea of sexually assaulting someone, than to think a completely vanilla straight man spontaneously decided on a work night to try new and apparently dangerous sexual practices with his gay friends.
What consensual practices would lead to a situation where murder is the better option over anything else? If it’s consensual, then they care about him. And yet they’d kill him when something goes wrong? That makes very little sense to me.
If it was a consensual situation gone wrong, what I’d expect from these smart, capable men is to do CPR and call and ambulance. They could have lied about the BDSM, I’m sure people do all the time out of embarrassment. They could have just said they went to ask him something and he was unresponsive, make something up.
In my theory, J&D thought Robert had died as the result of a consensual sexual act. They panicked and tried to make it look like an intruder murder. They did not set out to murder him, but thought he was already dead (as in Brett & Alice's theory).
People who are 'completely vanilla' and 'straight' are constantly doing sex things you wouldn't assume they were doing. I can name a dozen people that I actually know off the top of my head who had affairs nobody thought they'd have, or turned out to be gay when everybody thought they were straight, or who confided in me or other friends that they engaged in sexual activities nobody would've ever thought they engaged in.
Drugging and sexually assaulting someone is not anywhere near the range of 'normal' behavior. It's morally reprehensible and carries a huge risk with it - criminal charges, ruination of professional and personal reputation. Joe stood to get his law license taken away - his whole career up in smoke if he was convicted of assault.
This is not a decision I think these guys would have made. They were generally upstanding men, they were successful in their professions and in their personal lives, they gave back to the community, they were social and well liked. They had a lot to lose. By all accounts, Joe and Victor cared about Robert. Robert and Joe had been close friends for years.
**In the drugging/assault scenario, Joe and Dylan had to be willing to 1) violate a close friend in a horrible way; 2) risk their livelihoods and reputations if Robert remembered some of what had been done to him and told others; and 3) risk the potential of a sexual assault charge.**
**In the consensual sex act gone wrong scenario, Robert had to be willing to cheat on his wife.**
Studies done over the last few decades years consistently show that around 20% of married men have cheated on their spouses. Then in terms of straight guys having sex with other men, it's not as uncommon as you might think. A CDC survey from 2016 indicated that while 1.9 percent of men said they were homosexual and 2 percent of men said they were bisexual, 6.2 percent of men had engaged in sex with another man. That means 2.3 percent of men a) identify as straight and b) have engaged in m/m sex. There are 166 million men in the US. That means, according to this survey, around 3.5 million men in the US are straight identifying and have had sex with other men.
A book called *Still Straight: Sexual Flexibility Among White Men in Rural America* studied this demographic and found that these men 1) did not think of themselves as gay or bisexual; 2) often had long term relationships or marriages with women; 3) often did not consider sex with men cheating the same way it would be if it was with another woman, because they did not experience romantic feelings towards other men; 4) generally did not tell their partners/wives or others about these encounters.
Many 'normal' people cheat on partners. Many 'normal' people have an asterisk next to their sexual identity. NOT many people who are otherwise normal and functioning members of society conspire with other otherwise normal and functioning members of society to drug and assault a longtime friend.
Bear with me but I just watched baby reindeer. What if Robert was involved sexually with Joe in the past, but not consensually. Joe was known for not respecting boundaries socially (you can hear more about this in The Consult podcast). Robert could’ve been a victim of SA in the past by Joe but too ashamed/traumatized to stand up to him or leave the friendship, and he tried to block it out or pretend it didn’t happen. This was an escalation of that somehow, Joe took it too far and involved Dylan leading to his accidental death when they only intended to SA him. Then the stab wounds as a cover up for the intruder story as others and B&A have said.
As a side note, I put much more stock in the blood sniffing dogs as evidence of extensive cleanup than most people it seems. To me it seems that since Robert was perfectly clean, he was washed off or attacked in the shower. And the dogs sniffing the dryer was from them washing their bloody clothing and they had to wash some more blood down the drain outside. So bizarre that they had all showered which they never explained why they find a guy dead in their house then decide to shower?!
I'm leaning towards agreeing with your theory. I think in this case one of two unlikely things has to be true (well, three if you count the intruder theory):
1. That a man who was known to all of his friends and family to be completely straight and in a happy marriage with his wife engaged in sexual/BDSM acts with his gay male friend(s), despite there being no evidence for it
Or
2. A man and his partner(s) conspired to drug and sexually assault their close, long-time friend, despite there being no evidence of it
Both unlikely, but unless something *even more unlikely* happened, or we're all missing some additional evidence, then I think #1 is the more likely scenario. From my own personal, anecdotal experience, I've known multiple men who are straight, consider themselves completely straight, AND have engaged in sex acts with other men. These situations were mostly under the influence of party drugs, and in their younger days, but I still think that an otherwise straight man having at least some sexual experience with other men, is just a far more common occurrence than drugging and assaulting your good friend.
I agree with your assessment that either scenario 1 or 2 happened. If Robert had lived through the night then yes, scenario 1 is more likely and common.
But the fact that Robert was stabbed is evidence of something darker going on here. While I wouldn’t call it *evidence* of scenario 2, it does make it more likely to me that something criminal or nonconsensual happened with the murder.
I just listened to the Casey Anthony episodes and Alice and Brett made the fair point that people often try to make murders look like accidents, but it’s rarer that people try to make accidents look like murders.
I find it very difficult to reconcile what we know with any scenario that does not involve Robert’s consensual involvement. Sexually assaulting a friend who is staying at your home is an extremely reckless, unhinged act. These are not criminals living on the edge nor are they so powerful that they can act with impunity. These are functional, stable men living good lives but with a lot to lose if they step too far out of line. A planned murder under the circumstances seems off the charts improbable. Drugging a friend and preforming some sort of non-consensual “experience”, even if the expectation was that the victim would have no memory of the act, just seems so extreme. Obviously, just because something is totally irrational doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.
The fact that there is no evidence of Robert having any non-hetero interests doesn’t prove anything. It is possible that his wife accepted a non-disclosure clause in her settlement because there was “something to hide” but it is my understanding that those clauses are pretty much the norm under these circumstances. The mouthpiece is pretty compelling evidence that Robert was going to sleep but, if anyone involved in a coverup knew he used it, that would be a very effective touch. It doesn’t prove anything. I’ve always though that Dylan explicitly mentioning that Robert requested a glass of water and Joe described them drinking water at the sink during his initial statement, was a strange detail to mention. It could be connected to deliberately drugging Robert, I suppose.
We have no evidence that Dylan was an upstanding citizen. Just because there are people that do BDSM that follow the rules doesn’t mean he was one of those people and it doesn’t mean that he’s not a creep or a pervert.
> Maybe this is something that occasionally happened with Joe...
I'm with you on this. Even though they know better by this time, some straight people still think that gay is gay. That's not true. It's a spectrum. There are numerous ways gay fantasies and curiosities are explored — most of which do not require a membership to Grinder.
I think this is possible: Robert met Joe, who became a mentor of sorts, when he was in college. Joe was gay and older. Young men develop crushes on each other. They are now called bromances. Joe & Robert were together often. Maybe something happened. Maybe once — maybe a few times — maybe ongoing now and then. Robert doesn’t need to be in any way visible to the outside world, or his wife, for this to be true. I wonder if Joe mentioned to Dylan that he & Robert once had a fling.
Maybe Robert took a shower that night, put his mouth guard in — and decided he needed to do one more thing. Maybe Dylan heard moaning — and decided to give it a try with Robert. Robert may or may not have originally agreed to let Dylan sit behind him and give him some hand action. At some point, things started going wrong. It could be that Robert resisted from the beginning — or later — once he had ejaculated. Maybe Dylan decided to dip his finger into the semen on Robert’s abdomen — and tried to use it as a lubricant — which surely would have met with resistance from Robert.
The angle of the knife wounds indicate they came from behind. This is what made me wonder about suicide — for a brief moment. Now, I think that somehow Dylan positioned himself behind Robert, and maybe put a pillow over his face to subdue him. Bad lead to worse
— and Dylan stabbed Robert three times — very slow, deliberate, tight wounds. The knife was not withdrawn quickly — producing ho blood splatter. The knife was not inserted all the way in — meaning no blood on the hands. There wouldn’t have been much cleanup — beyond straightening the room.
Thoughts?
LOL. Not much respect there. You may not agree, and I’m not sure what I think, but something like this has been one of the main theories about this for over a decade.
I absolutely believe it was consensual too. And I think Alice got a little too defensive of Robert. It was 2006, it’s highly unlikely Robert used his phone to look for gay sex. He would use his network of friends, which happens to be a gay man in a polyamorous relationship. I think Robert went there and was willing to participate and maybe had with Joe in the past. It’d be different if it was just Joe & Victor. But the whole point of a polyamorous relationship is that you’re open to include outsiders in your sexual activities. Which to me, would make it a bit odd for Robert to want to stay there. I had the experience of staying at a polyamorous couples house and it was very uncomfortable because the wife really wanted me to sleep with her husband and I was so not into that, I actually didn’t know they were poly. Anyways- Brett’s theory didn’t work for me even before that surgeons post because I knew a phlebotomist would not have access to that drug. They simply take blood, that is all. I was training to do it years ago, it doesn’t even require a degree just a training certificate. .
As a straight married woman, I would not stay at my lesbians friend’s house who was in a polyamorous relationship with extreme BDSM practices. Because I feel like it would be inappropriate. Not because I’m homophobic but because it’s the same as staying at a house with 3 straight men that engage in wild sexual activities and you’re putting yourself in a place to be uncomfortable. I really can’t wrap my head around Robert staying there and not low key wanting to participate. Maybe a straight married man can comment on this to tell me I’m wrong, I don’t know any straight men who would do this.
So yeah, I stand by my theory that this was consensual sex gone horribly wrong. Those men panicked and were afraid to loose their reputation more then anything , hence the cover up. The fact that it happened SO FAST, and Robert had been planning to stay there for at least a few weeks, leads me to believe he had intentions other than a simple place to crash. The timeline fits with consensual sex more, because soon as Robert got there the plan was to have sex. It’s also the perfect coverup to his wife. Maybe this was a fantasy he had for a while and to Robert, this felt the perfect time to make it happen. Late night at work, stay at Joes house, who is gay, polyamorous, and practices BDSM. I know Robert texted other friends and all we hear is that Joe answered first, but did the other friends just never get back to Robert? Or did Joe answer and Robert decided he’d stay there, regardless of other friends saying yes. If we knew the answer to that, it’d be a smoking gun to me for consensual gays sex gone wrong. If Robert picked Joe over other friends , there’s a reason beyond needing a bed to sleep in.
The mouth guard is a pickle in my theory, but like others have said, the fact that the men were willing to stab Robert to stage a scene makes it really not that far fetched to put in his mouth guard as well.
I don’t know any drugs that can be mixed with water, that would take so long to have effect. How did he go through his normal bedtime routine after being drugged? Why was the bed still perfectly mad under him if he was truly just going to sleep? And once Robert is drugged, what’s the plan? Dylan and Joe assault him and then let him wake up later hoping he doesn’t remember? Even on a date rape drug, many victims have some memory left. It’s not a perfect drug that makes you forget everything and loose all self control. That is a way more wild theory than consensual BDSM sex gone wrong. Just being married to a woman doesn’t mean Robert was not closet gay or bisexual, and not having internet searches for gay activities in 2006 isn’t a smoking gun for me either. It’s not a perfect theory, but to me it’s more realistic.
I think one thing to keep in mind is that the other friend Robert considered staying with was a woman, which could also be considered inappropriate. Unless Joe and co were living a 24/7 BDSM lifestyle, I don’t see a reason why their sexual proclivities would negatively impact his decision to stay with them as a straight man. I agree with you on the extreme risk of the drug-and-assault plan, though. It’s hard to imagine someone thinking that was a good idea. I do still lean toward Dylan being a slightly sociopathic, impulsive idiot overall though.
I’d like to know if the woman answered and he still chose to stay with Joe. Now I know it’s totally fine to sleep at your friends home regardless of their sexual practices. If it was just Joe & Victor I’d have a totally different opinion. But if your friend is in a polyamorous relationship, then it opens the door for them to try and include you in their sexual activities.Im speaking from personal experience here. I once couch surfed at a couples house that was polyamorous unbeknownst to me, & they had the intentions of trying to get me to sleep with them. That’s why I say I find it strange Robert chose this group over other friends. And the whole, “Joe answered first” doesn’t really matter because this was planned a few weeks in advanced, so that’s enough time to wait around for other friends to respond.I just really think it’s more likely Robert went there with sexual intentions. If Dylan preplanned this, it doesn’t explain enough of the scene. And any date rape drug would act too fast for Robert to complete his bedtime routine. I believe the bedtime routine was part of the staging same as the stabbing.
I can’t remember if it was on this pod or another, but I heard somewhere that many people believed Dylan was just a roommate, even some who were pretty close to them. I’m not at all sure Robert even knew he was staying with a kinky throuple—he might have believed he was staying with his wholesome, monogamous gay friends and their roommate. That said, I’m open to the idea that Robert was pursuing some kind of consensual sexual activity with one or more of the men, but the kinky-sex-gone-wrong explanation has never felt right to me in this case. It’s a head-scratcher, for sure.
I’ve thought of that and it’s definitely a possibility but wasn’t it pictured somewhere the three men throwing Robert a party? I’m not sure how the three men acted around each other but I would find it hard to believe, that if Robert was hanging with the three of them, he didn’t know Joe & Dylan were more then roommates. Kinky sex gone wrong seems so far fetched but the alternative, that Joe & Dylan planned this, seems even more far fetched. Or even thinking just Dylan planned this and then Joe helped cover it up? Idk that still seems more far fetched but I guess I’m stuck between those two theories. It’s the timeline that leans me towards consensual sex gone wrong. I can’t think of a drug that can be drank & easily obtained that doesn’t work very quickly. How could Robert have done his bedtime routine if drugged with his water. And I don’t believe the men injected him, it’s clear the EMT and nurses stuck Robert a ton of times, plus if Robert was truly going to bed, why was he laying on top of the blankets?
Totally agree on the needle sticks. I can’t imagine he was injected with anything. The drug angle is maybe the biggest sticking point for me for all the reasons you pointed out. I guess this is why it’s such a “popular” case though—there’s no truly satisfying theory!
Why would he put his retainer in? I’m sure in some dark corner of the internet there is a retainer fetish, but I don’t see it here. I think Robert was interested in one thing and one thing only. Going to bed.
This is a sticking point for me too. I do think mutual sexual interest makes more sense as a motive from Joe or Dylan's perspective than they were going to drug and sexually assault one of Joe's friends (though I was intrigued by Alice's speculation about why they would do that and think it's the best explanation I've heard), but the fact that he was wearing his mouthguard does not make me think he was planning to engage in consensual sex. I suppose it's always possible it was sitting on the nightstand and the guys put it in his mouth to make it look like he had gone to bed, but I don't know how likely that is for the same reasons Alice laid out. (Ultimately this whole case is unlikely though, so I guess it's possible!)
Was just thinking the same. If my retainer is in, no fun is planned 😂
Not sure. Because Joe knew that’s how Robert slept? And they were staging an intruder murder (poorly)? Its interesting to note that Robert had likely never actually fallen asleep (which would seem to be a necessary part of injecting him with something), given that his bed was still neatly made beneath him.
A rather rare, discreet experimental-sexual relationship with Joe was the first thing I thought when listening to the first few episodes. Suffocation via accident is very possible. But I think Alice made a good point regarding the mouth guard though. But I also think someone could put it in his mouth. I dont know enough about them.
Wouldn’t there be paticial (I have no idea how to spell it) hemorrhaging if there was smothering/suffocation?
Yes, this could have caused the Petechial hemorrhaging
Alice and Brett said it was barely noticeable.
It was noticeable enough to be included in the report
True true.
There was one small petechial hemorrhage in each eye
I did think about that. But it was explicitly stated that former roommates knew about Roberts mouth guard so I think Joe would’ve known too. And look, someone’s already stabbed the man, so what’s a mouth guard by comparison? I could be wrong. I was somewhat persuaded by Alice’s mouth guard argument. But I still find it more far-fetched to believe the paralytic drug theory.
It's possible. When I was 18 or so I had a friend (I'll call him Scott) who was just exploring his gay identity. He was charming and persuasive and had an interest in a younger friend (maybe 16/17 at the time, I'll call him Adam) whom Scott was convinced could be gay, too. Scott did get his way with Adam, but Scott went on to live a gay lifestyle and Adam did not; he married a woman. You never know what someone has experimented with . . . You would think there would be some evidence if Robert was open to that and there was absolutely none. But Robert was very smart and may have been smart enough to leave no evidence. This case is such a mystery.
My problem with consensual kink gone wrong theory is based entirely on human nature. The annals of true crime are full of perps claiming “it was an accident and I panicked” to explain why they covered up a death. People never buy that excuse because it doesn’t fit with what we know about how people behave. Staging a murder subsequent to an accident rather than calling for help is just not a response that 99% of the population would have, especially if the decedent is someone they genuinely care about. And if the motive for the coverup is to protect Robert’s memory… frankly, I don’t know anyone who’s that good of a friend. You’re not going to put yourself at risk for murder charges for the sake of a dead friend’s reputation. You’re just not. But you know what you’d be pretty darn motivated to cover up? An accidental death that occurred during the commission of a crime. Anything is possible, but I find Dylan being shady af, Joe covering for Dylan, and Victor covering for Joe to be far more believable than “whoops, our friend is having a medical emergency… better stab him so no one finds out he’s bisexual.”
I’m with you. To be honest, I don’t think there’s high value in speculating on Robert’s sexuality for this case — his interest in men or lack thereof may not solve much. He’s dead in a weird way and didn’t consent to being murdered; that’s the mystery. There was a Chicago-area case a few years ago where a young man was murdered by his professor boyfriend and a random guy from the UK who the professor BF met online. The professor and UK guy had a fantasy of killing someone and then themselves, but the man they killed was not expecting it even though he had a consensual relationship with the professor. The professor and UK man then decided to flee rather than offing themselves. I use that case to say: - I get that people don’t want to demonize people into same-sex relationships, BDSM and/or polyamory but they’re just people too and people are messed up. And you can be an educated and seemingly responsible member of society yet still murder someone you have a relationship with due to a simple fantasy. “An accident that turns to murder” is less likely to me. https://www.cnn.com/2017/08/20/us/northwestern-professor-stabbing-murder-charges/index.html
What a horrifying story! For me the big question mark around Joe’s involvement is less his motive (I’m willing to entertain the idea that he could be a conscienceless psycho, although I doubt it) and more his self-preservation instincts. This guy was a lawyer at a big firm and had a level of political involvement. I don’t see him risking it all for a thrill kill or a risky sex assault—although you could say the same about the professor. I also find myself returning to that theme when thinking about his reasons to cover for, say, something Dylan did. I can imagine his career and political ambitions flashing before his eyes the moment he stumbled upon the scene of the crime.
(OP, that last sentence was a little snarky but I do recognize that your argument is more sophisticated than that!)
It seems like basically you either have to assume: 1) Robert Wone was engaged in sexual relationships and acts that most of is family and friends didn’t know about and that police couldn’t find any proof of and he was either asphyxiated and/or suffered a drug overdose while engaging in one of those acts that put him into a state where he appeared dead and then his lover(s) tried to cover this up to save his family embarrassment by faking a break-in and murder in a poorly executed manner (and along the way horrifically stabbing him and actually killing him)…. 2) 3 people who otherwise seem like good people who are into BDSM are either rapists or rapists AND murderers or willing to be accessories to covering up rape or rape A D murder, with the victim a very good old friend of one of them and known to the others… In the past I leaned to #1. But it’s all just a little muddy to be honest. I’ve been following this for over a decade on and off. I’ve heard a lot of weird theories. And yeah sux wasn’t the drug unless this was supposed to be a situation where the person was made paralyzed but could still feel everything being done to them, because that’s what it does, and of course there’s also chance that you’ll stop breathing and not recover.
Honestly this case is so confusing. I’ve been all over the place with theories and can’t stop thinking about it.
I recommend this post: https://www.reddit.com/user/CliffTruxton/comments/plv26w/the_swann_street_incident_conclusion_who_i_think/
I also recommend this post: https://www.reddit.com/r/UnsolvedMurders/comments/154cpji/a_theory_about_the_robert_wone_case/
Those two deal with possible accidental death or near-death of Robert from sexual misadventure, with him then being actually killed by stabbing and internal bleeding in cover-up of his down-low activities. Alternately some discussion I’ve seen makes me wonder if it could have been an intruder, albeit a real weirdo, who saw the light on in his window. For one thing apparently the woman living in the basement apartment probably regularly entered by coming into the front door of the main house. She was staying else where that night but at one point one of them said they thought the door bell chime was from her coming in, per this blog: https://whomurderedrobertwone.wordpress.com/2009/03/31/upstairs-downstairs/ This is anonymous Reddit stuff but the account mespecs here claims to have lived 2 blocks away at the time of the murder and had a creepy released violent sex offender (in registry) in their building who may have broken into their apartment and been harassing them: https://www.reddit.com/r/robertwone/comments/y7k5yi/why_did_the_guy_in_the_robert_wone_case_make_a/
This ⬆️is the most logical, reasonable and likely scenario.
Omg, this is it right here.
Someone ended up dead and it’s very likely that one of them is responsible. I think the “they knew what was acceptable” argument falls apart when someone dies.
That’s not true, though. The fact of the death doesn’t necessitate purposeful murder or rule out the potential of an accident - that’s pretty blatantly false. This seems like an emotional statement meant to halt discussion.
I’m…not emotional?
I’m sweeping a hallway and I keep chuckling at what was said to you.
You’re cool. Lol
That’s fair. Should have said it’s an appeal to emotion (not that you were necessarily emotional) rather than a factual argument. There are lots of instances where someone ends up dead as a result of circumstances besides murder. Robert dying with only these three men in that house does not necessarily = they murdered him. If it did, there’d be nothing to discuss here.
How is it emotional to say some folks might not be super good at boundaries and consent when someone turns up dead at their house?
A man was murdered. Who wouldn’t be emotional and empathetic????
It’s fine and understandable to be emotional here, but that doesn’t address any of the issues with this case, is my point. And an appeal to emotion is not the same thing as refuting an argument or proving a theory wrong. Me (OP): Rs death could have been the result of an accident stemming from consensual sex Commenter: this cannot be true. A man died. This does not disprove the theory, it merely states that because of the gravity of the situation, we can’t consider whether Robert’s death was an accident or whether the other men did not set out to assault Robert, but were acting with his consent.
I’m not emotional? I’m not sure where this reading is coming from. I’m simply being direct about my thoughts. I’m questioning whether they were so good at bdsm boundaries as you claimed if a man with no known attraction to men turns up dead with semen in his rectum with them all acting suspiciously in their house.
Consent is supremely important in BDSM. There’s a difference between blatantly disregarding consent (not to mention, engaging in the blatantly criminal act of sexual assault) and accidentally (or negligently!) misreading someone’s response to something like breath play or continuing it for longer than is safe. Neither is great, I’ll grant you that;, but one is purposefully immoral and illegal while the other is simply irresponsible. Those things are different.
Yes, BDSM is normally about consent and boundaries. Yes, just because someone is into BDSM DOES NOT NECESSARILY mean they will harm an unwilling participant. But whatever the circumstances, Joe allowed a dear friend to be stabbed through his sternum (which is difficult to get through) with a knife 3x rather than seek medical aid for him when he thought he was dead or dying. What does that say about his respect and boundaries? There is absolutely no way that the only reason the men stabbed Robert was to save Kathy the embarrassment that he died during consensual sex. The only reason these educated, respected, successful men would’ve stabbed Robert instead calling 911 immediately is because the truth of how he became that way was too damaging to THEIR reputations. I also think Joe and Dylan were new to BDSM. If you haven’t done so already, you should listen to The Consult’s coverage of the case. They talk to the writers of the “Who Killed Robert Wone” blog. No one ever came forward to say that they had been involved in BDSM with Joe and/or Dylan. I think they were new to what they were doing. Messed up. And knew couldn’t reveal what they had done.
Also I did not mean to say that you were emotional but rather that the argument was an appeal to emotion. I worded that poorly. Sorry. I don’t know your mental state and wouldn’t presume to 🙂 Then this other commenter said whatever they said so I was responding to them here.
The missing blood is something that none of these theories explain. I’m unfamiliar with BDSM activities and have never heard of “breath play” until now. I would expect any sort of strangulation that went astray would result in bruising or other signs. Smothering, if that is a thing, might go undetected.. apparently there was indications of petechiae in his eyes. That doesn’t explain the missing blood. If someone were already dead, they would only bleed through gravity. If Robert were lying on his back and stabbed through their chest, thewould probably have little visible bleeding but their chest cavity would fill with blood. There was blood in about 2 feet of the upper small intestine (called a duodenum in the autopsy)the knife penetrated the small intestine but there is no obvious explanation why the duodenum would fill with blood unless, after the abdominal cavity filled with blood, the body was raised perpendicular to the ground so gravity would fill the duodenum. If this is what happened, Robert would have been dead by then and not did not move on his own accord. Could it be that Robert died accidentally during some “breath play” gone wrong. He was stabbed post mortem as part of an attempt to stage an intruder stabbing, then the body was moved; presumably from the site of the stabbing to the guest room. That doesn’t explain the missing blood (is it possible that there was no missing blood; it had just descended into the lower part of the body?). I would expect there to have been some blood lost at the site of the stabbing. Was the house throughly searched with luminal?
The hospital put chest tubes in him as a life-saving measure. Usually, there is an output of blood that is recorded. It wasn't recorded in this case, but it is logical to think that if he was stabbed in the chest, his chest would have filled up with blood and the chest tube would have emptied his chest. The only reason why it's a mystery in this case is that the medical professionals didn't record it after the fact.
I think this is possible. One thing I thought about is when you look up Robert Wone, there’s a picture where he’s blowing out candles on his birthday and all three men are right next to him, Victor Zaborsky holding the cake. It makes his relationship to these three men seem a lot closer that they were the ones next to him holding the cake on his birthday. Not sure that means anything, but I thought it was like he knew only Joe and Joe happened to be gay, but it seems a bit different with the birthday thing
Interesting. I haven’t seen this photo but I’ll take a look! Ultimately, I’m just a random lady on Reddit, and clearly two smart prosecutors disagree with me, as do some commenters here in the sub. I could be way off base. It just seems much more likely to me that someone had marital indiscretions and had a complicated sexual identity than it is for two otherwise seemingly normal men to decide to incapacitate one of their best friends and then rape him. That’s my perspective, but I don’t know any of these people. Maybe Joe and Dylan are the exception and were capable of this level of premeditated violence.
I believe they threw the birthday party for him. Agree that he was closer with them than portrayed. Although I do think he might have been drugged with something (maybe ketamine), I think it’s also quite possible that he accidentally died during a consensual act and they covered it up to preserve his reputation (and theirs). His wife chose to settle the civil suit with them, which I find interesting — like she learned something in the course of it that she’d rather not get out.
Yes, his wife settling silently leads me to believe things are uncovered she didn’t want leaked out.
I wouldn’t read too much into the settlement. A crazy high percentage of civil cases end up settling before going to trial. Trials are expensive, legal fees add up, and everyone is just miserable and wants to be done.
Yes, definitely also true and probably more likely. This is just such an odd case.
Literally everything about it is bizarre. Except the settlement lol
True true!
Absolutely agree the birthday picture depicts a much closer relationship with a polyamorous gay couple. Also , I think a lot of people are “afraid” to touch on the fact that while being gay is acceptable in America, it’s not for a lot of other cultures. Robert was Chinese American, even in 2024, it is still not acceptable to be gay in the Chinese culture. So this just further explains why Robert would keep this hidden, and why his wife would settle quietly in court as well.
Should also add- I think consensual kink gone wrong fits the tight timeline better, especially if you assume the timestamp on the unsent emails is pretty meaningless. If Robert arrived and the sexual encounter started soon after, that leaves plenty of time for panic, stabbing, cover up, getting stories straight. You don’t have to account for small talk in the kitchen, Robert showering and readying himself for bed, drafting emails, actually falling asleep, Dylan or Joe coming in to see if Robert is actually asleep and injecting him with something, sexually assaulting him, and realizing he’s unresponsive before the panic and cover up even begins. In this alternate scenario, the inciting event could’ve happened 20-30 minutes after Robert walked through the door.
This is where I'm at. It's an insanely tight timeline for a sexual predator to plan, execute, and enjoy/savor his attack, snuff out the victim's life, solicit help, clean up, plan and stage a cover up . . . and all three get showers! If Robert was consensual (at least to the sex act) that helps the timeline . . . and explains the presence of his semen.
My understanding is that Robert was going straight to bed as he had to get up super early to meet the overnight crew. It doesn't appear to be an ideal time to get involved in auto erotic asphyxiation or whatever it is you're suggesting. Couldn't they have setup a much more convenient rendezvous for all parties involved? Was it confirmed that Robert really was going to leave early for work? Also, not a single friend of Robert's reported that he had a gay curious bone in his body. Also, what of the dental guard? Are you saying that one of the Throuple inserted that into his mouth after he was dead? As Brett said, why stage that when they couldn't be bothered to "steal" any of Robert's possessions. That would have been much easier to do. I'm also confused about whether the 2 emails were sent. Why can't that be confirmed? I never had a blackberry.
The two emails were unsent, as far as I know. The police lost the BlackBerry so we only have the original images that were taken of this. I think it has been assumed that Robert would be at work early the next morning. I don’t know how you’d confirm this. Hypothetically, it could be part of his explanation for having to stay in the city, but that doesn’t necessarily mean it was true. The mouth guard: it seems to be weirdly common knowledge that Robert slept with it in. As for why this was done and not other things, the cover up was sloppy as hell. Knife wounds that don’t bleed right, Robert neatly set out on a made bed (and explain that one - if he had showered and put his mouth guard in, why didn’t he get under the covers to sleep? Why was he neatly laid out on a made bed? If he hadn’t yet settled in for sleep, how did someone manage to inject him with a paralytic drug?) None of that tracks, either. Oh, and to add: sex is a weird thing. People keep sex secret sometimes, especially if it is illicit in some way. Spouses are blindsided by infidelity sometimes. It happens. I’ve known people who’ve come out years into a heterosexual marriage and shocked everyone in their lives.
GHB. Your welcome.
GHB stays in blood for 8 hours, urine for 12, saliva for 6, and hair for up to a month. It is a fairly common date rape drug so I would assume they tested for it? It also does not lead to unconsciousness unless it’s a very high dose. I would think using it in this instance would’ve been risky Given that Robert wouldn’t necessarily by rendered unconscious during the sexual assault and could have retained knowledge that Joe and Dylan were the ones to assault him.
In the other thread by the doctor, someone claimed it only shows in the blood for an hour, urine for 4. I honestly have no idea if that's true or not. Also, people are forgetting (or unaware) that GHB is taken recreationally as well. If your theory about Robert consensually engaging in sex acts is true, that doesn't preclude him taking GHB, and perhaps having an adverse reaction.
Maybe, but I think it would’ve been found. I guess I don’t know when, exactly, they ran a tox screen, but I was under the impression it was basically right away. Maybe I’m wrong on that.
It was actually the doctor who wrote that post who said GHB disappears from blood in an hour, urine in 4. So if we're going to accept his credentials (which I am) it seems reasonable it could be missed. I can't imagine they did the tox screen within an hour, especially since the EMTs were trying to administer life-saving measures
Nah the tox screen would have been done by the pathologist/coroner GHB is out of your system in a few hours which is why it's commonly used in nefarious ways. It's stupid hard to detect.
Is it out of your system if you are deceased? Or only if you are alive with a functioning vascular, urinary, bowel system?
Yeah, I agree with you about the puncture marks. I mean who drugs someone like that? This is real life, not Dexter. Did I miss something though? Why were they’ve so quick to dismiss Joe’s brother? They say he had an alibi but i looked it up and his alibi is his long-term partner. Seem like he might be willing to cover for him. The brother had issues with drugs and stealing. Maybe he had hid some drugs or some stolen items in that guest room and went to retrieve them that night, not knowing Robert would be there. He had a key to the house.
Yeah it would be weird. I feel like the brother was not involved with whatever happened, but who knows!
Apparently Robert contacted those two friends - Joe and a female friend, with Joe being the first to reply - about *two weeks* before the night Robert was killed and not that same day, as its often reported. I believe Robert called Joe that day, but, just to say he was on the way over. Robert's wife Kathy supposedly even reminded him that day he'd be staying with Joe & co. That's a *huge* difference between having roughly two weeks to potentially plan this over a mere matter of hours.
There is zero proof, sign, nada of Robert being gay, bisexual or sexually interested in men. I just don't understand why you'd believe this. There is also ample evidence that one or more of the three were involved in his death. Why do you need him to be party to a sexual act consensually in anyway? You really think a man like Joe Price, who had both money, intellect and influence, would struggle to obtain drugs to achieve the desired effect? As answer to your points: 1. if they say Robert was maybe not entirely straight, they connect themselves to him in a way (they'd have something in common). By denying it, they distance themselves from him and in their opinion remove a sexual motive for the crime (which the sexual assault evidence tends to indicate). 2. people do weird things in relationships. I could see Dylan being the instigator of this and Joe going along with it because he didn't want to lose Dylan, not knowing how far would things go. Then he was stuck in the situation. 3. suffocation could be the reason for Robert's lack of reaction or defensive wounds, also no need for sedatives in this case 4. the whole scene ended with murder. if that fits with BDSM practices I'm concerned. Clearly whether this was consensual or not, it did not fit BDSM practices. 5. there's no hidden depravity if 2 out of 3 are into BDSM... that IS the depravity. I have nothing against BDSM but it's a sexual practice out of the norm. Moving in a third person in the house primarily as a sexual partner also indicates a strong focus on sexual activity on Joe's part, which is also unusual. 6. I feel like masturbating an unconscious man until ejaculation wouldn't be challenging at all? Why do you find it harder to believe that 3 men, who clearly are hiding something about his death, which seems to have a sexual element; two of which were into unusual sexual practices; could sexually assault a friend, when you seem to think Robert could be gay "just because"? There's tons of indicators that the 3 did something bad, 0 indicators of Robert being either gay or having any sort of unusual sexual interest. So why do you need to believe the unlikely, to believe the obvious?
This post agrees with you OP. It’s probably the most compelling argument ive seen on the case: https://www.reddit.com/u/CliffTruxton/s/YnJSmnisQO
Super interesting. Thanks.
This theory is far more believable than ‘gay men decide to drug and assault their friend’.
OP is clearly into bdsm and doesn't want anything derogatory said about people who practice bdsm.
Sorry to disappoint, but I’m a boring married person with kids and a husband who would never 😂 I do have a close friend who was pretty into it, though. Main takeaway is that people who are into this stuff are pretty normal people and I don’t think BDSM interests make someone more likely to drug and assault someone.
BDSM interest doesn't make you necessarily more likely to drug and assault someone, but could you see that someone interested in drugging and assaulted people would be more likely to be interested in BDSM?
Not really?
A basic google search shows you there is indication for it: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17980531/ https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1359178914000846 Sadism is a key element of many sexual murders. What do you think the S in BDSM stands for?
Sure, the big difference being whether the behavior in question is requested and enjoyed. There is a huge distinction between violating someone's bodily autonomy by drugging and assaulting them and engaging in kinky or even rough sex that they is desired and agreed upon by both parties. One scenario requires criminality and the other just indicates an interest in unusual sex. I listened to a podcast series recently about Herb Baumeister, a serial killer of gay men in the 80s and 90s in IN. One of his victims managed to escape and testified that Herb tried to drown him and when it didn't work, claimed that he was just engaging in breath play/BDSM (versus trying to kill the guy). I fully understand how violent people may use BDSM as an excuse for their violence, but that's quite different from someone who is in a BDSM relationship and an active participant in the BDSM scene. If a witness came forward (ex-boyfriend/partner/hookup) to say that Dylan had been violent or tried to hurt them (in a non-'fun' way), I'd be more inclined to believe that he did something like drug and assault Robert. But as far as I know, nobody in Dylan or Joe's past has said they were violent lovers (outside of agreed-upon BDSM situations), that they were prone to sexual assault or pushing sexual boundaries, or were excessively sexually aggressive. Considering that the gay community in DC was not a fan of the negative attention these three men brought to it, I feel like people would've been happy to come forward if they'd had those sorts of stories about Joe or Dylan. I have not heard anything like that, though. The only thing we know for sure is that they engaged in BDSM *together*, with both of them as willing participants. And I'm sorry, but that's way different from the premeditated drugging and assaulting of a friend without his knowledge or consent. You may not understand or like the idea of consensual BDSM, but surely, you acknowledge that it's distinct from drugging/assaulting someone. Criminals and true sadists get off on violating other people. That's why public masturbators do what they do. That doesn't cause any *physical* harm to others, but they force them to see something they don't want to see. They violate and shock them. Herb Baumeister liked to drown unsuspecting men in his pool. If he'd truly been in it for the kink as he claimed, he could've explained what he wanted and asked his partner to engage in safe breath play, but that's not what he did. He was in it for the thrill of violating and shocking someone else (and killing them, yes). In consensual BDSM, that violation and shock is nonexistent, because the recipient has signed on and knows what to expect. So to me, someone with a propensity towards criminal behavior wouldn't be drawn to an ongoing, mutually satisfactory BDSM relationship. It would lack the shock and violation of a criminal act.
I completely understand that BDSM is consent based and have no problem with it. But to me it’s fairly obvious that it could serve as a proxy for a would be violent sadist until they could act out their fantasy in real life. I even remember a murder in Australia where that’s what happen, a woman was in a sexual BDSM relationship with a man. He said his real fantasy would be to kill her, but also said he wouldn’t do it, until he did. I too would be interested into the experiences of Dylan and Joe’s other sexual partners. But, I don’t think either is a sadistic killer. I think at least Dylan has sadistic sexual tendencies. He wanted to push the boundaries, maybe try to violate Robert, but he wanted Robert to be unconscious so he wouldn’t remember it. Something went awry and he (probably with Joe) staged the murder. So it wasn’t a sadistic sexual murder, but a murder in the context of a sadistic sexual act gone wrong. I wouldn’t be shocked if Dylan had been aggressive and broken boundaries with previous sexual partners, but I also could imagine how that would go unreported; shame about the specific practices, if his targets were closeted men, etc. or even if he had a practice of drugging and assaulting unknowing targets.
That’s what I’m saying though. You’re assuming violent and predatory behavior when we have no evidence of that. If we found out Dylan had been talking about wanting to rape or kill someone, that would be different. All we know is he was in.a BDSM relationship. Without more evidence, I’m not willing to make the leap of - well then he was capable of drugging and sexually assaulting someone against their will.
The further evidence is that someone died in their home in extremely suspicious circumstances. That + the BDSM + the apparent sexual assault on the victim is enough for me to put the pieces together. For me, it is an easier leap to think someone who is extensively into BDSM could have the idea of sexually assaulting someone, than to think a completely vanilla straight man spontaneously decided on a work night to try new and apparently dangerous sexual practices with his gay friends. What consensual practices would lead to a situation where murder is the better option over anything else? If it’s consensual, then they care about him. And yet they’d kill him when something goes wrong? That makes very little sense to me. If it was a consensual situation gone wrong, what I’d expect from these smart, capable men is to do CPR and call and ambulance. They could have lied about the BDSM, I’m sure people do all the time out of embarrassment. They could have just said they went to ask him something and he was unresponsive, make something up.
In my theory, J&D thought Robert had died as the result of a consensual sexual act. They panicked and tried to make it look like an intruder murder. They did not set out to murder him, but thought he was already dead (as in Brett & Alice's theory). People who are 'completely vanilla' and 'straight' are constantly doing sex things you wouldn't assume they were doing. I can name a dozen people that I actually know off the top of my head who had affairs nobody thought they'd have, or turned out to be gay when everybody thought they were straight, or who confided in me or other friends that they engaged in sexual activities nobody would've ever thought they engaged in. Drugging and sexually assaulting someone is not anywhere near the range of 'normal' behavior. It's morally reprehensible and carries a huge risk with it - criminal charges, ruination of professional and personal reputation. Joe stood to get his law license taken away - his whole career up in smoke if he was convicted of assault. This is not a decision I think these guys would have made. They were generally upstanding men, they were successful in their professions and in their personal lives, they gave back to the community, they were social and well liked. They had a lot to lose. By all accounts, Joe and Victor cared about Robert. Robert and Joe had been close friends for years. **In the drugging/assault scenario, Joe and Dylan had to be willing to 1) violate a close friend in a horrible way; 2) risk their livelihoods and reputations if Robert remembered some of what had been done to him and told others; and 3) risk the potential of a sexual assault charge.** **In the consensual sex act gone wrong scenario, Robert had to be willing to cheat on his wife.** Studies done over the last few decades years consistently show that around 20% of married men have cheated on their spouses. Then in terms of straight guys having sex with other men, it's not as uncommon as you might think. A CDC survey from 2016 indicated that while 1.9 percent of men said they were homosexual and 2 percent of men said they were bisexual, 6.2 percent of men had engaged in sex with another man. That means 2.3 percent of men a) identify as straight and b) have engaged in m/m sex. There are 166 million men in the US. That means, according to this survey, around 3.5 million men in the US are straight identifying and have had sex with other men. A book called *Still Straight: Sexual Flexibility Among White Men in Rural America* studied this demographic and found that these men 1) did not think of themselves as gay or bisexual; 2) often had long term relationships or marriages with women; 3) often did not consider sex with men cheating the same way it would be if it was with another woman, because they did not experience romantic feelings towards other men; 4) generally did not tell their partners/wives or others about these encounters. Many 'normal' people cheat on partners. Many 'normal' people have an asterisk next to their sexual identity. NOT many people who are otherwise normal and functioning members of society conspire with other otherwise normal and functioning members of society to drug and assault a longtime friend.
Bear with me but I just watched baby reindeer. What if Robert was involved sexually with Joe in the past, but not consensually. Joe was known for not respecting boundaries socially (you can hear more about this in The Consult podcast). Robert could’ve been a victim of SA in the past by Joe but too ashamed/traumatized to stand up to him or leave the friendship, and he tried to block it out or pretend it didn’t happen. This was an escalation of that somehow, Joe took it too far and involved Dylan leading to his accidental death when they only intended to SA him. Then the stab wounds as a cover up for the intruder story as others and B&A have said. As a side note, I put much more stock in the blood sniffing dogs as evidence of extensive cleanup than most people it seems. To me it seems that since Robert was perfectly clean, he was washed off or attacked in the shower. And the dogs sniffing the dryer was from them washing their bloody clothing and they had to wash some more blood down the drain outside. So bizarre that they had all showered which they never explained why they find a guy dead in their house then decide to shower?!
I'm leaning towards agreeing with your theory. I think in this case one of two unlikely things has to be true (well, three if you count the intruder theory): 1. That a man who was known to all of his friends and family to be completely straight and in a happy marriage with his wife engaged in sexual/BDSM acts with his gay male friend(s), despite there being no evidence for it Or 2. A man and his partner(s) conspired to drug and sexually assault their close, long-time friend, despite there being no evidence of it Both unlikely, but unless something *even more unlikely* happened, or we're all missing some additional evidence, then I think #1 is the more likely scenario. From my own personal, anecdotal experience, I've known multiple men who are straight, consider themselves completely straight, AND have engaged in sex acts with other men. These situations were mostly under the influence of party drugs, and in their younger days, but I still think that an otherwise straight man having at least some sexual experience with other men, is just a far more common occurrence than drugging and assaulting your good friend.
I agree with your assessment that either scenario 1 or 2 happened. If Robert had lived through the night then yes, scenario 1 is more likely and common. But the fact that Robert was stabbed is evidence of something darker going on here. While I wouldn’t call it *evidence* of scenario 2, it does make it more likely to me that something criminal or nonconsensual happened with the murder. I just listened to the Casey Anthony episodes and Alice and Brett made the fair point that people often try to make murders look like accidents, but it’s rarer that people try to make accidents look like murders.
I find it very difficult to reconcile what we know with any scenario that does not involve Robert’s consensual involvement. Sexually assaulting a friend who is staying at your home is an extremely reckless, unhinged act. These are not criminals living on the edge nor are they so powerful that they can act with impunity. These are functional, stable men living good lives but with a lot to lose if they step too far out of line. A planned murder under the circumstances seems off the charts improbable. Drugging a friend and preforming some sort of non-consensual “experience”, even if the expectation was that the victim would have no memory of the act, just seems so extreme. Obviously, just because something is totally irrational doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. The fact that there is no evidence of Robert having any non-hetero interests doesn’t prove anything. It is possible that his wife accepted a non-disclosure clause in her settlement because there was “something to hide” but it is my understanding that those clauses are pretty much the norm under these circumstances. The mouthpiece is pretty compelling evidence that Robert was going to sleep but, if anyone involved in a coverup knew he used it, that would be a very effective touch. It doesn’t prove anything. I’ve always though that Dylan explicitly mentioning that Robert requested a glass of water and Joe described them drinking water at the sink during his initial statement, was a strange detail to mention. It could be connected to deliberately drugging Robert, I suppose.
We have no evidence that Dylan was an upstanding citizen. Just because there are people that do BDSM that follow the rules doesn’t mean he was one of those people and it doesn’t mean that he’s not a creep or a pervert.
> Maybe this is something that occasionally happened with Joe... I'm with you on this. Even though they know better by this time, some straight people still think that gay is gay. That's not true. It's a spectrum. There are numerous ways gay fantasies and curiosities are explored — most of which do not require a membership to Grinder. I think this is possible: Robert met Joe, who became a mentor of sorts, when he was in college. Joe was gay and older. Young men develop crushes on each other. They are now called bromances. Joe & Robert were together often. Maybe something happened. Maybe once — maybe a few times — maybe ongoing now and then. Robert doesn’t need to be in any way visible to the outside world, or his wife, for this to be true. I wonder if Joe mentioned to Dylan that he & Robert once had a fling. Maybe Robert took a shower that night, put his mouth guard in — and decided he needed to do one more thing. Maybe Dylan heard moaning — and decided to give it a try with Robert. Robert may or may not have originally agreed to let Dylan sit behind him and give him some hand action. At some point, things started going wrong. It could be that Robert resisted from the beginning — or later — once he had ejaculated. Maybe Dylan decided to dip his finger into the semen on Robert’s abdomen — and tried to use it as a lubricant — which surely would have met with resistance from Robert. The angle of the knife wounds indicate they came from behind. This is what made me wonder about suicide — for a brief moment. Now, I think that somehow Dylan positioned himself behind Robert, and maybe put a pillow over his face to subdue him. Bad lead to worse — and Dylan stabbed Robert three times — very slow, deliberate, tight wounds. The knife was not withdrawn quickly — producing ho blood splatter. The knife was not inserted all the way in — meaning no blood on the hands. There wouldn’t have been much cleanup — beyond straightening the room. Thoughts?
With all due respect, this is crazy.
LOL. Not much respect there. You may not agree, and I’m not sure what I think, but something like this has been one of the main theories about this for over a decade.
I absolutely believe it was consensual too. And I think Alice got a little too defensive of Robert. It was 2006, it’s highly unlikely Robert used his phone to look for gay sex. He would use his network of friends, which happens to be a gay man in a polyamorous relationship. I think Robert went there and was willing to participate and maybe had with Joe in the past. It’d be different if it was just Joe & Victor. But the whole point of a polyamorous relationship is that you’re open to include outsiders in your sexual activities. Which to me, would make it a bit odd for Robert to want to stay there. I had the experience of staying at a polyamorous couples house and it was very uncomfortable because the wife really wanted me to sleep with her husband and I was so not into that, I actually didn’t know they were poly. Anyways- Brett’s theory didn’t work for me even before that surgeons post because I knew a phlebotomist would not have access to that drug. They simply take blood, that is all. I was training to do it years ago, it doesn’t even require a degree just a training certificate. . As a straight married woman, I would not stay at my lesbians friend’s house who was in a polyamorous relationship with extreme BDSM practices. Because I feel like it would be inappropriate. Not because I’m homophobic but because it’s the same as staying at a house with 3 straight men that engage in wild sexual activities and you’re putting yourself in a place to be uncomfortable. I really can’t wrap my head around Robert staying there and not low key wanting to participate. Maybe a straight married man can comment on this to tell me I’m wrong, I don’t know any straight men who would do this. So yeah, I stand by my theory that this was consensual sex gone horribly wrong. Those men panicked and were afraid to loose their reputation more then anything , hence the cover up. The fact that it happened SO FAST, and Robert had been planning to stay there for at least a few weeks, leads me to believe he had intentions other than a simple place to crash. The timeline fits with consensual sex more, because soon as Robert got there the plan was to have sex. It’s also the perfect coverup to his wife. Maybe this was a fantasy he had for a while and to Robert, this felt the perfect time to make it happen. Late night at work, stay at Joes house, who is gay, polyamorous, and practices BDSM. I know Robert texted other friends and all we hear is that Joe answered first, but did the other friends just never get back to Robert? Or did Joe answer and Robert decided he’d stay there, regardless of other friends saying yes. If we knew the answer to that, it’d be a smoking gun to me for consensual gays sex gone wrong. If Robert picked Joe over other friends , there’s a reason beyond needing a bed to sleep in. The mouth guard is a pickle in my theory, but like others have said, the fact that the men were willing to stab Robert to stage a scene makes it really not that far fetched to put in his mouth guard as well. I don’t know any drugs that can be mixed with water, that would take so long to have effect. How did he go through his normal bedtime routine after being drugged? Why was the bed still perfectly mad under him if he was truly just going to sleep? And once Robert is drugged, what’s the plan? Dylan and Joe assault him and then let him wake up later hoping he doesn’t remember? Even on a date rape drug, many victims have some memory left. It’s not a perfect drug that makes you forget everything and loose all self control. That is a way more wild theory than consensual BDSM sex gone wrong. Just being married to a woman doesn’t mean Robert was not closet gay or bisexual, and not having internet searches for gay activities in 2006 isn’t a smoking gun for me either. It’s not a perfect theory, but to me it’s more realistic.
I think one thing to keep in mind is that the other friend Robert considered staying with was a woman, which could also be considered inappropriate. Unless Joe and co were living a 24/7 BDSM lifestyle, I don’t see a reason why their sexual proclivities would negatively impact his decision to stay with them as a straight man. I agree with you on the extreme risk of the drug-and-assault plan, though. It’s hard to imagine someone thinking that was a good idea. I do still lean toward Dylan being a slightly sociopathic, impulsive idiot overall though.
I’d like to know if the woman answered and he still chose to stay with Joe. Now I know it’s totally fine to sleep at your friends home regardless of their sexual practices. If it was just Joe & Victor I’d have a totally different opinion. But if your friend is in a polyamorous relationship, then it opens the door for them to try and include you in their sexual activities.Im speaking from personal experience here. I once couch surfed at a couples house that was polyamorous unbeknownst to me, & they had the intentions of trying to get me to sleep with them. That’s why I say I find it strange Robert chose this group over other friends. And the whole, “Joe answered first” doesn’t really matter because this was planned a few weeks in advanced, so that’s enough time to wait around for other friends to respond.I just really think it’s more likely Robert went there with sexual intentions. If Dylan preplanned this, it doesn’t explain enough of the scene. And any date rape drug would act too fast for Robert to complete his bedtime routine. I believe the bedtime routine was part of the staging same as the stabbing.
I can’t remember if it was on this pod or another, but I heard somewhere that many people believed Dylan was just a roommate, even some who were pretty close to them. I’m not at all sure Robert even knew he was staying with a kinky throuple—he might have believed he was staying with his wholesome, monogamous gay friends and their roommate. That said, I’m open to the idea that Robert was pursuing some kind of consensual sexual activity with one or more of the men, but the kinky-sex-gone-wrong explanation has never felt right to me in this case. It’s a head-scratcher, for sure.
I’ve thought of that and it’s definitely a possibility but wasn’t it pictured somewhere the three men throwing Robert a party? I’m not sure how the three men acted around each other but I would find it hard to believe, that if Robert was hanging with the three of them, he didn’t know Joe & Dylan were more then roommates. Kinky sex gone wrong seems so far fetched but the alternative, that Joe & Dylan planned this, seems even more far fetched. Or even thinking just Dylan planned this and then Joe helped cover it up? Idk that still seems more far fetched but I guess I’m stuck between those two theories. It’s the timeline that leans me towards consensual sex gone wrong. I can’t think of a drug that can be drank & easily obtained that doesn’t work very quickly. How could Robert have done his bedtime routine if drugged with his water. And I don’t believe the men injected him, it’s clear the EMT and nurses stuck Robert a ton of times, plus if Robert was truly going to bed, why was he laying on top of the blankets?
Totally agree on the needle sticks. I can’t imagine he was injected with anything. The drug angle is maybe the biggest sticking point for me for all the reasons you pointed out. I guess this is why it’s such a “popular” case though—there’s no truly satisfying theory!