GUILTY OH - Pike Co - 8 in Rhoden Family Murdered - 4 Wagner Family Members Arrested #86

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.

WATCH: We'll be going on the record in a couple of minutes for a couple of small, minor things. OH v. #GeorgeWagnerIV

Jury wants a copy of the transcript of Jake Wagner's testimony. It's 764 pages.
@LawCrimeNetwork
OH v. #GeorgeWagnerIV

State objects to jurors being given transcripts. Defense wants jurors to get the transcripts. Rob Junk says they’re not printed yet. They can print in prosecutor’s office. Jury being brought in to caution them about transcripts.

Now the jury is no longer requesting the transcripts of Jake’s testimony.
 
Last edited:

PIKE COUNTY TRIAL: Attorneys will be going on the record in the courtroom in a couple minutes - standing by for what it is. FWIW - prosecutor ROob Junk mentioned on his way up it was some minor stuff.

PIKE COUNTY TRIAL: On the record in courtroom - jury is still in jury room. Judge Deering says jury wants a transcript of Jake Wagner's testimony - it is 764 pages. Special prosecutor Canepa says it is practice not to provide it. Defense atty Parker says it should.

PIKE COUNTY TRIAL: Judge Deering will provide the transcript of Jake Wagner's testimony - but is going to bring the jury in to give them a cautionary instruction about it. State is worried jurors can put too much emphasis on things in writing.

PIKE COUNTY TRIAL: Prosecutor Rob Junk says he thinks it will take 30 mins or so to print the 764 page transcript. But jury is headed into the courtroom right now to be given instruction on reading/interpreting the transcript.

PIKE COUNTY TRIAL: After Judge Deering explained the concern over the transcript, the jury foreperson told him they didn't need it. So, jury returns to the room to continue deliberations without transcript of Jake's testimony.


Edit to include additional tweets.
 
Last edited:
arielilane said:

PIKE COUNTY TRIAL: Attorneys will be going on the record in the courtroom in a couple minutes - standing by for what it is. FWIW - prosecutor ROob Junk mentioned on his way up it was some minor stuff.

PIKE COUNTY TRIAL: On the record in courtroom - jury is still in jury room. Judge Deering says jury wants a transcript of Jake Wagner's testimony - it is 764 pages. Special prosecutor Canepa says it is practice not to provide it. Defense atty Parker says it should.

PIKE COUNTY TRIAL: Judge Deering will provide the transcript of Jake Wagner's testimony - but is going to bring the jury in to give them a cautionary instruction about it. State is worried jurors can put too much emphasis on things in writing.
Click to expand...

This is good. The jury is not discounting Jake's testimony, they are taking his testimony very seriously. They have to decide how credible they think Jake is. It is possible all of them could believe Jake when he places George at the crime scenes. Or they could end up doubting Jake's testimony. Interesting.

I believe that if the jury believes George was at any of the crime scenes that night, then they will convict him of most of his charges.
 
Last edited:
Re jury request for JW transcript: Prosecution objected. Defense told judge it was up to his discretion. Judge told jury he would let them have transcript but suggested it would be unfair to their deliberations. He gave jury the choice to have it or not. Jury decided to withdraw the request for JW transcript. (per today live stream at approx 11:40 a.m.)
 
Cool Cats said:
This is good. The jury is not discounting Jake's testimony, they are taking his testimony very seriously. They have to decide how credible they think Jake is. It is possible all of them could believe Jake when he places George at the crime scenes. Or they could end up doubting Jake's testimony. Interesting.
Click to expand...
Yes, Jury will be relying on their respective notes and memory in absence of transcript.
 
https://twitter.com/jamespilcher

Good morning - waiting on the jury to reach a verdict in the Wagner murder trial in Pike County. I'll have a live update at noon on @local12 Jury arrived at 8:30 and has taken a break. Been at it for two hours plus so far. We'll also break in with live coverage when it hits.

Court going on record in a few minutes to go over a few minor details while jury deliberates.
 
Chelly said:
Re jury request for JW transcript: Prosecution objected. Defense told judge it was up to his discretion. Judge told jury he would let them have transcript but suggested it would be unfair to their deliberations. He gave jury the choice to have it or not. Jury decided to withdraw the request for JW transcript. (per today live stream at approx 11:40 a.m.)
Click to expand...
I don't understand why prosecution doesn't want them to have it. Because of discrepancies?
 
For those who couldn’t hear the exchange in real-time I’ve tried to transcribe it as best I could.
Attorneys brought back in for this jury request, Judge briefly explains the question, and then talks to both sides. AC specifically said - after asking their position on providing the transcript

Just in general, and I think it’s court practice to not provide transcripts uhmm because, it’s a slippery slope, you know, and as the Court knows there are some dangers of them putting more emphasis on one part of the trial versus others, but that would just be the State’s concern your honor….”

Then the Judge, after Defense said they had “no objections” on Judge giving cautionary instructions to the jury about using solely one transcript for their deliberations. Judge said he heard “caution” from the State but not an actual “objection”, he thought.

Then AC followed up to clarify “yeah your Honor, in general we object of giving transcripts to any witness, again because, like you’re saying, 764 pages you know, I might ask the question and he answers one way, then he asks a question & he (referring to Jake) answers this way, and then on re-direct I….you know, so I mean, I think the danger is they zero in on a paragraph or two or three somewhere within that 764 pages, that’s all”

Defense then said “Judge, obviously our position is that they should have accurate information no matter what they’re deciding; they should have accurate information and this is available for them to make an accurate determination”

IMHOO AC and State really didn’t want them to have this transcript. I’m not sure if I think this means they are doubting some of what State alleged that Jake said or did, but I am pretty sure that they are taking their role carefully and seriously just based on having to have asked for something so voluminous.
 
We
MTW2011 said:
For those who couldn’t hear the exchange in real-time I’ve tried to transcribe it as best I could.
Attorneys brought back in for this jury request, Judge briefly explains the question, and then talks to both sides. AC specifically said - after asking their position on providing the transcript

Just in general, and I think it’s court practice to not provide transcripts uhmm because, it’s a slippery slope, you know, and as the Court knows there are some dangers of them putting more emphasis on one part of the trial versus others, but that would just be the State’s concern your honor….”

Then the Judge, after Defense said they had “no objections” on Judge giving cautionary instructions to the jury about using solely one transcript for their deliberations. Judge said he heard “caution” from the State but not an actual “objection”, he thought.

Then AC followed up to clarify “yeah your Honor, in general we object of giving transcripts to any witness, again because, like you’re saying, 764 pages you know, I might ask the question and he answers one way, then he asks a question & he (referring to Jake) answers this way, and then on re-direct I….you know, so I mean, I think the danger is they zero in on a paragraph or two or three somewhere within that 764 pages, that’s all”

Defense then said “Judge, obviously our position is that they should have accurate information no matter what they’re deciding; they should have accurate information and this is available for them to make an accurate determination”

IMHOO AC and State really didn’t want them to have this transcript. I’m not sure if I think this means they are doubting some of what State alleged that Jake said or did, but I am pretty sure that they are taking their role carefully and seriously just based on having to have asked for something so voluminous.
Click to expand...
Well if it had been videoed, they could rewatch. I think it's totally unfair to ask the jury to rely on memory. It's also unfair to the accused. This is my opinion.
 
https://twitter.com/pattinewberry


Deliberations about to begin in #PikeCountyMassacre trial of #georgewagneriv. Waiting and watching for
@enquirer
and other Gannett outlets.

.#PikeCountyMassacre jury -- which began deliberating in the #GeorgeWagnerIV case at 8:30 a.m. today -- was just called into the courtroom for its request for a trial transcript. Jurors had sent word to the judge that they wanted to see the testimony of Edward "Jake" Wagner. 1/6

The prosecution objected to the request. Special Prosecutor Angela Canepa said she objects to providing transcripts, in general. "The danger is (jurors) zero in on a paragraph or two." 2/6

Wagner IV's lead defense attorney supported the request. "They should have accurate information to make a determination," said John P. Parker. 3/6

Judge Randy Deering sided with the defense, intending to instruct the jury not to give "over emphasis" to one witness over others by virtue of having a transcript. 4/6

Once assembled and instructed -- and informed the transcript of Jake Wagner's four days on the stand ran "hundreds of pages" -- the jury changed its mind and returned to the jury room empty-handed. 5/6

Before the jury assembled, Deering's court reporter said the transcript ran 764 pages. Pike County Prosecutor Rob Junk told the judge a copy could be ready in about a half hour. Jake Wagner is the defendant's brother, who admitted killing five of the eight victims in 2016. 6/6
 
Cool Cats said:
Thanks, I will add this to my post, I still have time to edit.
Click to expand...
One really needs to have lived a life Tab led. Her upbringing, undereducated, no family support, crimes against her/sisters, poor, the list goes on and on and...
Not just walk a mile in their shoes, but to actually live that life style. It's a sad existence, because you only just exist, your in fight/flight every minute of your day. Many live with that fight/flight into adulthood/entire life style moving forward.
 
Skully67 said:
We

Well if it had been videoed, they could rewatch. I think it's totally unfair to ask the jury to rely on memory. It's also unfair to the accused. This is my opinion.
Click to expand...
They were also allowed to take notes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 184 more.
Total: 415 (members: 185, guests: 230)

Online statistics

Members online
185
Guests online
230
Total visitors
415
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
608,733
Messages
18,244,765
Members
234,436
Latest member
Justicesss
Back
Top