Could Wint, acting alone, have killed three adults and one child? Had prosecutors proved Wint’s motive was robbery, revenge or something else?

AD

Then, after two days examining each of 20 charges against Wint, the 12 jurors took their first — and only — vote. They had reached consensus on all of the charges: Wint was guilty of kidnapping, burglary and murder counts in one of the most horrific cases to grip the nation’s capital. After the jurors delivered their verdict, they quietly returned to the jury room. Some broke down in tears and comforted each other.

AD

“I was taken by surprise by the emotional impact that this had on us as jurors. It has cost me to do this civic duty. It was a brutalizing experience,” said juror Stacy Pervall.

“There was a time when we had to mourn for the victims. We didn’t know them. But we did get to know them. We could describe their house. We lived with them for two months. We mourned for them. They had greatly impacted our lives,” said Pervall, 50, a government contractor.

AD

Now, two months after the jury rendered its verdict, Pervall, another juror and an alternate juror who was dismissed before deliberations began agreed to share their thoughts about a case that they all said affected them emotionally, probably for the rest of their lives.

Wint, 37, is scheduled to be sentenced Feb. 1. Prosecutors have said they plan to ask D.C. Superior Court Judge Juliet J. McKenna to impose a punishment of life in prison.

It was a diverse jury made up of six men and six women; six whites and six blacks.

AD

Pervall had previously served on a jury in an attempted-murder case involving a shooting. But she was not prepared for the gruesome photographs of the victims. “Quite honestly, no one wanted to be there. The day we were selected we were like, shoot, we should have taken a grand jury assignment instead,” Pervall said with a slight laugh.

AD

“But once we got in there, we were all very serious about being good jurors and listening,” she said. “And personally, for me, I felt part of our job was to bear witness to what had happened. And we had to pay attention to every piece of evidence.”

Juror Jeremy Holden said he struggled with “sitting in judgment” of a person who was charged with committing four murders, including the killing of a child.

“The images we looked at, of humans, that were so emotionally charged. Such devastating pictures. A horrific tragedy that impacted human beings,” said Holden, a 42-year-old communications manager for a nonprofit organization. “And the person we were sitting in judgment of was a human being, a human that did something monstrous.”

AD

AD

During the trial, prosecutors portrayed Wint, a former employee at a Savopoulos family business, as a man driven by greed and vengeance. Wint had once worked for Savopoulos’s company, American Iron Works, in Maryland but was fired in 2005 after two years.

Prosecutors said Wint entered the Savopoulos home on the morning of May 13, 2015, and was able to restrain Figueroa and Philip, who was home sick from school. Amy Savopoulos, who had gone to get coffee, returned home and also was subdued, prosecutors said. By late afternoon, Wint had forced Amy Savopoulos to telephone her husband and summon him home from work, without alerting him to the danger.

All four victims were held hostage overnight, prosecutors said.

AD

The next morning, Wint forced Savvas Savopoulos to have $40,000 in cash withdrawn from his company’s bank and have it delivered to the house. They said Savopoulos complied in the hope that Wint would release him, his family and housekeeper.

AD

Hours later, a fire at the house drew rescuers, who found the bodies inside.

While police initially suspected there were multiple assailants, Wint was the only one charged. Prosecutors said his DNA was found on a discarded slice of Domino’s pizza that had been delivered to the house. They said Wint’s DNA also was on a knife in the basement, and a hair matching Wint’s was found in one of the bedrooms.

Wint’s public defenders said Wint was innocent, arguing that his brother and half brother were the killers and that Wint had been set up to take the blame.

AD

In a surprise move, Wint took the witness stand. He calmly and repeatedly denied any involvement in the killings and told the jury his brother lured him to the house under a false pretense of doing drywall and painting work. Wint said that when he arrived, he was told the real plan was to burglarize the house, and that he left. He said that he never knew there were victims being held in the upstairs bedrooms.

AD

One woman who was dismissed as an alternate juror before deliberations said Wint’s account was not believable. “I thought his whole story had so much inconsistency to it,” said the 47-year-old, who asked that her name not be published. “But he had to take a shot. But there was too much evidence to contradict him; the phone records and the DNA all pointed to him when he tried to explain them away.”

Two pieces of evidence, the jurors agreed, solidified their opinions of Wint’s guilt. The DNA evidence and the fact that when Wint was arrested days after the killings, he had thousands of dollars in cash and money orders.

AD

For the jurors, the biggest unanswered question is whether Wint carried out the crimes alone. Pervall thinks he did, that he used Philip as leverage to get the adults to comply with his demands. Other jurors weren’t sure. But they also agreed it did not matter.

AD

“If we had to decide if Wint did it by himself, then yes, there would have been a doubt,” the alternate juror said.

Holden said it helped that the judge instructed the panel that it did not have to determine whether Wint acted alone.

“I don’t know if Wint did this alone,” he continued. “I’m not willing to speculate. I am perfectly comfortable with the idea that the ultimate verdict that we reached can be justified based on the evidence, regardless if he acted alone or in concert with one or multiple accomplices.”

Jennifer Jenkins and Magda Jean-Louis contributed to this report.