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.
Does anyone have a link to the info/timeline with the murder truck? I swore yesterday I read that after it was purchased it was hidden behind the barn on the Wagner property until the murders but that GW4 didn’t know where it had been hidden. Now I can’t find where I read it! Has this case just infiltrated into my dreams to provide new evidence or is this real info that I just can’t find today?
 
arielilane said:

CLOSING ARGUMENTS: Parker is back to finish closings after short break. He says Angela testimony was that "Billy told her to buy two pairs of shoes - it was Billy and Jake that planned this.”

CLOSING ARGUMENTS: Parker tells the jury "there's a lot of insinuations in this case the state has made, look for the hard evidence.”

CLOSING ARGUMENTS: Parker tells the jury to consider defense witnesses - the pastor from AK who said Jake was a little slower than George. "That describes a person who could be pressured. George stood up to his mother and father.”

CLOSING ARGUMENTS: Parker says "there's been a lot of talk about guns." He says George is "a gun guy." He trades a lot - almost like currency.

CLOSING ARGUMENTS: Parker asks jury "you saw George’s demeanor, compare that to Jake’s and Angela’s. His mother wouldn’t even look at him ... And Jake was laughing and smiling and smirking while talking about murders. You’re going to trust those people?"

CLOSING ARGUMENTS: Parker - "I don’t know what you folks are going to believe ... but if you believe that George was up there, don’t forget that Jake said he had no intent to kill, he went along at the last second."
Click to expand...

CLOSING ARGUMENTS: Parker - "I don’t know what you folks are going to believe ... but if you believe that George was up there, don’t forget that Jake said he had no intent to kill, he went along at the last second."

Weird. Why would your defense attorney even mention you being at the crime scenes? He should be saying George wasn't there.

If the jury believes George was at the crime scenes then it doesn't make a pile of @#$% difference that
Jake said "he had no intent to kill, he went along at the last second."
I thought Jake was sopose to be a liar? The jury shouldn't believe him. So that means you can't believe Jake.

This also means that if the jury believes George was at the crime scenes it doesn't matter why he went or if he shot anyone or not. Doesn't matter if he didn't plan to directly kill.

JUST GEORGE GOING TO THE CRIME SCENES SHOWS HE IS GUILTY. PERIOD.
 
rescuemom said:
Parker is pathetic ..poor guy. Pointing out the unreasonable insanity of the case proves the point
Click to expand...
Everyone of us can agree we've seen/heard/been part of viscous custody battles in our lifetimes. And MOST people don't tralop down to the courthouse for assistance. Who has that kind of lawyer monies? We handle it amongst ourselves.
Wagner family took it beyond; as there are families who have committed heinous crimes against one another just over custody.
I think jury sees it this way as well.
 
I am glad Wilson is saying what MANY of us have said. Jake didn't want to testify. Jake wasn't trying to pin this on George, Jake was trying to lessen George's role. If it seems like his story doesn't make sense in some spots, it's because he's guessing at some things because he took the blame for the things George did. I'm glad he talked about that SKS and shooting Chris Sr. I hope he also speaks about Kenneth.
 
Cool Cats said:
CLOSING ARGUMENTS: Parker - "I don’t know what you folks are going to believe ... but if you believe that George was up there, don’t forget that Jake said he had no intent to kill, he went along at the last second."

Weird. Why would your defense attorney even mention you being at the crime scenes? He should be saying George wasn't there.

If the jury believes George was at the crime scenes then it doesn't make a pile of @#$% difference that
Jake said "he had no intent to kill, he went along at the last second."

I thought Jake was so pose to be a liar? So that means you can't believe Jake and it also means that if the jury believes George was at the crime scenes it doesn't matter why he went or if he shot anyone or not. Doesn't matter if he didn't plan to directly kill.

JUST GEORGE GOING TO THE SCENES SHOWS HE IS GUILTY. PERIOD
Click to expand...
Parker had to acknowledge GW might have been along that night in case the jury (given GW has no alibi) believes he was there. IMO Parker did a good job of poking holes in JW and AW testimony.

Superman's Walmart example, to me, is exactly how the Wag's shoe buying trip went down: GW may have been there, but had no idea what AW bought or planned to buy. It really exemplifies the prosecutions entire case. GW had no idea before, during or after the murders. His rebuttal can go either way, supports both the prosecution and defense case.

ETA: GW had to have had his head very deeply buried in the sand. If he suspected at any point, he didn't have to turn in his family members.
 
Do you believe this guy Parker?? "George sold his gun to Ben McCan, did you hear anything about that?" ....no that would be your job, Parker. It's like he is pleading GW's case in closing. Why didn't the defense offer a better defense for GW4??
 
Cool Cats said:
CLOSING ARGUMENTS: Parker - "I don’t know what you folks are going to believe ... but if you believe that George was up there, don’t forget that Jake said he had no intent to kill, he went along at the last second."

Weird. Why would your defense attorney even mention you being at the crime scenes? He should be saying George wasn't there.

If the jury believes George was at the crime scenes then it doesn't make a pile of @#$% difference that
Jake said "he had no intent to kill, he went along at the last second."
I thought Jake was sopose to be a liar? The jury shouldn't believe him. So that means you can't believe Jake.

This also means that if the jury believes George was at the crime scenes it doesn't matter why he went or if he shot anyone or not. Doesn't matter if he didn't plan to directly kill.

JUST GEORGE GOING TO THE CRIME SCENES SHOWS HE IS GUILTY. PERIOD.
Click to expand...
If I was on the jury and was lied to in opening by defense that George wasn't there and now he is saying he was?? I'd be pi$$ed.
 
silenced said:
Parker had to acknowledge GW might have been along that night in case the jury (given GW has no alibi) believes he was there. IMO Parker did a good job of poking holes in JW and AW testimony.

Superman's Walmart example, to me, is exactly how the Wag's shoe buying trip went down: GW may have been there, but had no idea what AW bought or planned to buy. It really exemplifies the prosecutions entire case. GW had no idea before, during or after the murders. His rebuttal can go either way, supports both the prosecution and defense case.

ETA: GW had to have had his head very deeply buried in the sand. If he suspected at any point, he didn't have to turn in his family members.
Click to expand...

You say this:

"GW had no idea before, during or after the murders." You actually believe this?

The prosecution proved beyond any reasonable doubt that George knew about the family's murder plans. He was running the family, you can hear it on the tapes of him.

It is way beyond a reasonable doubt, there is no doubt at all, that George knew about his mom and dad and brother planning murder.

It has no basis in fact that the murders were the one time George didn't vote with his family, wasn't told anything, did not overhear anything, did not notice anything.

George:

"I would take your daughter away from you and your wife."

"The family has spoken."

"I have to break the cold hard truth to my son, Angela is not his mother."

"If they have the gun they have the silencer."

"Don't come over here, we have company" meaning BCI was at Peterson Rd.

"Your always getting us into trouble over some woman."

"If we are arrested......."

For starters.......
 
Last edited:
Parker is saying: Even if you, the jury, believe that George was at the scene, because only the co-conspirators can confirm or dispute his alibi for that night, even if you believe George was there that night, there is no proof he knew his family planned to murder the Rs
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 102 more.
Total: 2,245 (members: 103, guests: 2,142)

Online statistics

Members online
103
Guests online
2,142
Total visitors
2,245
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
600,627
Messages
18,111,373
Members
230,992
Latest member
Clue Keeper
Back
Top