OH Pike Co., 8 in Rhoden Family Murdered Over Custody Issue, 4 Members Wagner Family Arrested #54

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Merrygirl said:
‘I totally agree but I figure some law offices don’t contract with colleges and/or not the same colleges. Also some of these defense lawyers are from areas OTHER THAN Columbus. I know @ least one does services in Meigs/Gallia & Lawrence Counties. Don’t get me wrong, I still believe they should be responsible for doing their own organization. If the State could supply an individualized list of what was sent to the defense then each office needs to do their own organization & notify the State that they didn’t receive it. I understand the Defense has other cases but that is their problem, not the State’s imo. I worry that the Defense may use it as an ‘ineffective council” to appeal. That’s why I would think AC would also want her bases covered by keeping records of what was sent and to whom/when. IANAL/IMOO
Click to expand...
BBM

That is a good question. If the State won't hire the $80,000+ discovery evidence professional to streamline the discovery for a more manageable presentation at trial, will that be grounds for appeal?

They would not use "ineffective counsel" because that means the defense attorneys were incompetent but if there are legal errors for improperly admitted evidence, this can be used for an appeal.

Justia
Justia is an American website specializing in legal information retrieval.
Appealing a Criminal Conviction

Potential grounds for appeal in a criminal case include legal error, juror misconduct and ineffective assistance of counsel. Legal errors may result from improperly admitted evidence, incorrect jury instructions, or lack of sufficient evidence to support a guilty verdict. To grant the appeal, the appellate court must find that these errors affected the outcome of the case. If the errors would not have changed the verdict, they are considered harmless, and the conviction will stand.
 
Last edited:

Discrediting Evidence in a Criminal Trial.

Types of Evidence
In general, there are three types of evidence offered at trial and each type of evidence is subject to a credibility challenge.

Testimonial evidence from witnesses - physical evidence - demonstrative evidence (such as a chart showing steps in an embezzlement conspiracy).

Credibility of Evidence:
Some types of evidence are considered, on their face, to lack credibility. Hearsay is the most common example of evidence that on its face lacks credibility.

Witness Hearsay:

"So and so told me he saw Jake trying to kick in HR's door."

Not Witness Hearsay - the testimony is allowed and jury decides if witness is credible:

"I saw Jake trying to kick in HR's door."

Constitutional/procedural challenges :
A common constitutional challenge to the credibility of evidence is a Miranda challenge. Statements taken by police without advising a suspect of his Miranda rights.

Common procedural challenges include evidence tampering such as the defense violating a “chain of custody. " Example:

A bloody knife was found at the crime scene and was processed/ cataloged/sealed etc..It's in the documented chain of custody as it makes it's way to the BCI evidence room then later transported to the forensics lab. Blood samples have been taken from the knife and the defense has picked up some samples for their own testing.

Later the defense turns over it's discovery documents with the lab reports to the prosecution and there are some new results conflicting with the prosecution's results.
However, something is wrong with the chain of custody, there are conflicting reports concerning how the defense transported their blood samples. This can make their conflicting lab reports useless when the prosecution shows the jury how the samples could have been deliberately tampered with or accidentally contaminated.

Forensic challenges:
Often this evidence is presented through expert witnesses who will be challenged by the opposing party such as being asked how much they are being paid for their testimony. And, the opposing party will call their own expert to challenge the other side’s expert.
Then, the jurors will huddle and choose a winner in the “battle of the experts,” often by deciding which of the experts was most credible.
 
Discrediting Evidence in a Criminal Trial

Types of Evidence:

Testimonial evidence from witnesses - physical evidence - demonstrative evidence (such as a chart showing steps in an embezzlement conspiracy).

Credibility challenges:
Some types of evidence are considered, on their face, to lack credibility. Hearsay is the most common example of evidence that on its face lacks credibility.

Witness Hearsay:

"So and so told me he saw Jake trying to kick in HR's door."

Not Witness Hearsay - the testimony is allowed and jury decides if witness is credible:

"I saw Jake trying to kick in HR's door."

Constitutional challenges :
2 common constitutional challenges are a Miranda challenge -- statements taken by police without advising a suspect of his Miranda rights. Or a coerced confession -- the defense wants the confession tossed out so claims it was coerced.

Procedural challenges :
Common procedural challenges include evidence tampering such as the defense or prosecution or LE violating a “chain of custody. " Example:

A bloody knife was found at the crime scene and was processed/ cataloged/sealed etc..It's in the documented chain of custody as it makes it's way to the BCI evidence room then later transported to the forensics lab. Blood samples have been taken from the knife and the defense has picked up some samples for their own testing.

Later the defense turns over it's discovery documents with the lab reports and there are some new results conflicting with the prosecution's results.
However, something is wrong with the chain of custody, there are conflicting reports concerning how the defense transported and stored their blood samples, or the seals on the evidence bags looked broken and resealed when they arrived at the lab.

This can make their lab reports useless when the prosecution shows the jury how the samples could have been deliberately tampered with or accidentally contaminated.

Forensic challenges:
Often this evidence is presented through expert witnesses who will be challenged by the opposing party such as being asked how much they are being paid for their testimony. And, the opposing party will call their own expert to challenge the other side’s expert.
Then, the jurors will huddle and choose a winner in the “battle of the experts,” often by deciding which of the experts was most credible.
 
Last edited:
Sorry above post posted twice. I went back to edit it -- the 2nd one is the edited version -- but for some reason it glitched and reposted the first one again. :oops:o_O
2nd one is better, more clear with the information I wanted to share plus has link.
 
Last edited:
Cool Cats said:
BBM

That is a good question. If the State won't hire the $80,000+ discovery evidence professional to streamline the discovery for a more manageable presentation at trial, will that be grounds for appeal?

They would not use "ineffective counsel" because that means the defense attorneys were incompetent but if there are legal errors for improperly admitted evidence, this can be used for an appeal.

Justia
Justia is an American website specializing in legal information retrieval.
Appealing a Criminal Conviction

Potential grounds for appeal in a criminal case include legal error, juror misconduct and ineffective assistance of counsel. Legal errors may result from improperly admitted evidence, incorrect jury instructions, or lack of sufficient evidence to support a guilty verdict. To grant the appeal, the appellate court must find that these errors affected the outcome of the case. If the errors would not have changed the verdict, they are considered harmless, and the conviction will stand.
Click to expand...

Good Question regarding Grounds for Appeal.
CC, your last several posts are really informative and have me thinking....

Defendants Motion to hire an Evidence Coordinator for all the defendants.
Deerings initial response to the request for a COORDINATING DISCOVERY/EVIDENCE ATTORNEY.

My opinion, this Evidence Coordinator is a necessity.
I believe all 4 Defense Attorneys are out of their league on this issue.

Here are two sources (very long, if you're interested, just scan them for the highlights) that discuss either:
"coordinating discovery attorney"
or
"multiple defendant litigation discovery/evidence experts"
or
"ESI - Electronically Stored Information" .


https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5647&context=flr

The twenty-first century’s technological revolution has shifted the practice of law, including litigation, from being primarily paper-based to paperless.
To manage the increasingly complex organization and review of evidence in civil and criminal cases, attorneys outsource legal tasks, work on teams, and use discovery coordinators.
This examines the development of court-appointed coordinating discovery attorneys and their role in multi defendant federal criminal trials involving voluminous discovery...
Now, lawyers usually find the “smoking gun” in electronically stored information (ESI)— sometimes in the minutia of metadata.
Once an anomaly in discovery, ESI is the new norm.
With rapid technological changes, it is unrealistic to expect one lawyer to collect, organize, and review every piece of documentary evidence and discover the ones that matter...
#

https://www.fjc.gov/sites/default/files/2016/Criminal e-Discovery.pdf

Overview:
Litigation support specialists should have legal and IT experience and training to organize, analyze, and present case materials through technology equipment and computer programs.
They should have the ability to harvest and extract electronic data and metadata from ESI; assist in meet-and-confer sessions regarding the exchange of ESI; monitor and manage discovery productions ( both production and receipt); provide advice on how to search data; and manage the day-to-day operations of strategically collecting, processing, organizing, reviewing....analyzing, and presenting case data.
Just as judges should be mindful of attorney knowledge and experience in managing e-discovery, they should also be aware that even knowledgeable attorneys need skilled litigation support.
page 1
The rapid growth of digital technology and its spread into every facet of life are producing increasingly complex discovery issues in federal criminal cases.
There are several advantages to electronically stored information (ESI, or e-discovery), including speed, efficiency, and quality of information...
Judges can play a vital oversight role to ensure that e-discovery moves smoothly, trial deadlines are met, and the parties and courts are able to review and identify critical evidence.
page 5
Both prosecutors and defense attorneys struggle with the same e-discovery issues:
large volume; a variety of sources and formats;
hidden information (metadata and embedded data);
differing formats for production;
software and hardware limitations;
finding efficient, cost- effective ways to review ESI.

Some challenges are unique to criminal practice, such as incarcerated defendants’ access to e-discovery...


page 7
In multi defendant cases, the court may be able to minimize costs by calling for cooperative sharing among defendants.
This has been done for years whenever there is voluminous paper discovery, and many of those principles can apply to electronic discovery.

page 10
Unfortunately, many criminal practitioners still do not have an adequate understanding of e-discovery issues and litigation technology.
However, attorney competency ethics standards are evolving to require an adequate understanding of e-discovery and the technology needed to review it

page11
Because discoverable information is increasingly found and produced electronically, lawyers who are e-discovery illiterate may delay trial preparation.
Technological “dinosaurs” may also miss potentially beneficial evidence...



Everything in these two articles does not directly apply, but you get the idea.

Even the eventual necessity of the 4 Defendants (while incarcerated) having access to the evidence in their case is a factor, a consideration.

The expense of such a coordinator is small compared to the
coordinators multiple contributions to a successful outcome.
 
Cool Cats said:
Discrediting Evidence in a Criminal Trial.

Types of Evidence
In general, there are three types of evidence offered at trial and each type of evidence is subject to a credibility challenge.

Testimonial evidence from witnesses - physical evidence - demonstrative evidence (such as a chart showing steps in an embezzlement conspiracy).

Credibility of Evidence:
Some types of evidence are considered, on their face, to lack credibility. Hearsay is the most common example of evidence that on its face lacks credibility.

Witness Hearsay:

"So and so told me he saw Jake trying to kick in HR's door."

Not Witness Hearsay - the testimony is allowed and jury decides if witness is credible:

"I saw Jake trying to kick in HR's door."

Constitutional/procedural challenges :
A common constitutional challenge to the credibility of evidence is a Miranda challenge. Statements taken by police without advising a suspect of his Miranda rights.

Common procedural challenges include evidence tampering such as the defense violating a “chain of custody. " Example:

A bloody knife was found at the crime scene and was processed/ cataloged/sealed etc..It's in the documented chain of custody as it makes it's way to the BCI evidence room then later transported to the forensics lab. Blood samples have been taken from the knife and the defense has picked up some samples for their own testing.

Later the defense turns over it's discovery documents with the lab reports to the prosecution and there are some new results conflicting with the prosecution's results.
However, something is wrong with the chain of custody, there are conflicting reports concerning how the defense transported their blood samples. This can make their conflicting lab reports useless when the prosecution shows the jury how the samples could have been deliberately tampered with or accidentally contaminated.

Forensic challenges:
Often this evidence is presented through expert witnesses who will be challenged by the opposing party such as being asked how much they are being paid for their testimony. And, the opposing party will call their own expert to challenge the other side’s expert.
Then, the jurors will huddle and choose a winner in the “battle of the experts,” often by deciding which of the experts was most credible.
Click to expand...

D
 
Cool Cats said:
Discrediting Evidence in a Criminal Trial.

Types of Evidence
In general, there are three types of evidence offered at trial and each type of evidence is subject to a credibility challenge.

Testimonial evidence from witnesses - physical evidence - demonstrative evidence (such as a chart showing steps in an embezzlement conspiracy).

Credibility of Evidence:
Some types of evidence are considered, on their face, to lack credibility. Hearsay is the most common example of evidence that on its face lacks credibility.

Witness Hearsay:

"So and so told me he saw Jake trying to kick in HR's door."

Not Witness Hearsay - the testimony is allowed and jury decides if witness is credible:

"I saw Jake trying to kick in HR's door."

Constitutional/procedural challenges :
A common constitutional challenge to the credibility of evidence is a Miranda challenge. Statements taken by police without advising a suspect of his Miranda rights.

Common procedural challenges include evidence tampering such as the defense violating a “chain of custody. " Example:

A bloody knife was found at the crime scene and was processed/ cataloged/sealed etc..It's in the documented chain of custody as it makes it's way to the BCI evidence room then later transported to the forensics lab. Blood samples have been taken from the knife and the defense has picked up some samples for their own testing.

Later the defense turns over it's discovery documents with the lab reports to the prosecution and there are some new results conflicting with the prosecution's results.
However, something is wrong with the chain of custody, there are conflicting reports concerning how the defense transported their blood samples. This can make their conflicting lab reports useless when the prosecution shows the jury how the samples could have been deliberately tampered with or accidentally contaminated.

Forensic challenges:
Often this evidence is presented through expert witnesses who will be challenged by the opposing party such as being asked how much they are being paid for their testimony. And, the opposing party will call their own expert to challenge the other side’s expert.
Then, the jurors will huddle and choose a winner in the “battle of the experts,” often by deciding which of the experts was most credible.
Click to expand...

Just my opinion, but I find this a negative post to the Prosecution, and thus to the victims, since the proof of evidence rests on the Prosecution. Just my opinion. I don't care to discuss further.
 
Ann99 said:
Good Question regarding Grounds for Appeal.
CC, your last several posts are really informative and have me thinking....

Defendants Motion to hire an Evidence Coordinator for all the defendants.
Deerings initial response to the request for a COORDINATING DISCOVERY/EVIDENCE ATTORNEY.

My opinion, this Evidence Coordinator is a necessity.
I believe all 4 Defense Attorneys are out of their league on this issue.

Here are two sources (very long, if you're interested, just scan them for the highlights) that discuss either:
"coordinating discovery attorney"
or
"multiple defendant litigation discovery/evidence experts"
or
"ESI - Electronically Stored Information" .


https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5647&context=flr

The twenty-first century’s technological revolution has shifted the practice of law, including litigation, from being primarily paper-based to paperless.
To manage the increasingly complex organization and review of evidence in civil and criminal cases, attorneys outsource legal tasks, work on teams, and use discovery coordinators.
This examines the development of court-appointed coordinating discovery attorneys and their role in multi defendant federal criminal trials involving voluminous discovery...
Now, lawyers usually find the “smoking gun” in electronically stored information (ESI)— sometimes in the minutia of metadata.
Once an anomaly in discovery, ESI is the new norm.
With rapid technological changes, it is unrealistic to expect one lawyer to collect, organize, and review every piece of documentary evidence and discover the ones that matter...
#

https://www.fjc.gov/sites/default/files/2016/Criminal e-Discovery.pdf

Overview:
Litigation support specialists should have legal and IT experience and training to organize, analyze, and present case materials through technology equipment and computer programs.
They should have the ability to harvest and extract electronic data and metadata from ESI; assist in meet-and-confer sessions regarding the exchange of ESI; monitor and manage discovery productions ( both production and receipt); provide advice on how to search data; and manage the day-to-day operations of strategically collecting, processing, organizing, reviewing....analyzing, and presenting case data.
Just as judges should be mindful of attorney knowledge and experience in managing e-discovery, they should also be aware that even knowledgeable attorneys need skilled litigation support.
page 1
The rapid growth of digital technology and its spread into every facet of life are producing increasingly complex discovery issues in federal criminal cases.
There are several advantages to electronically stored information (ESI, or e-discovery), including speed, efficiency, and quality of information...
Judges can play a vital oversight role to ensure that e-discovery moves smoothly, trial deadlines are met, and the parties and courts are able to review and identify critical evidence.
page 5
Both prosecutors and defense attorneys struggle with the same e-discovery issues:
large volume; a variety of sources and formats;
hidden information (metadata and embedded data);
differing formats for production;
software and hardware limitations;
finding efficient, cost- effective ways to review ESI.

Some challenges are unique to criminal practice, such as incarcerated defendants’ access to e-discovery...


page 7
In multi defendant cases, the court may be able to minimize costs by calling for cooperative sharing among defendants.
This has been done for years whenever there is voluminous paper discovery, and many of those principles can apply to electronic discovery.

page 10
Unfortunately, many criminal practitioners still do not have an adequate understanding of e-discovery issues and litigation technology.
However, attorney competency ethics standards are evolving to require an adequate understanding of e-discovery and the technology needed to review it

page11
Because discoverable information is increasingly found and produced electronically, lawyers who are e-discovery illiterate may delay trial preparation.
Technological “dinosaurs” may also miss potentially beneficial evidence...



Everything in these two articles does not directly apply, but you get the idea.

Even the eventual necessity of the 4 Defendants (while incarcerated) having access to the evidence in their case is a factor, a consideration.

The expense of such a coordinator is small compared to the
coordinators multiple contributions to a successful outcome.
Click to expand...

Just my opinion...how far out is an appeal when we are still in the pre-trial stages? I won't allow my mind to be boggled with what-ifs way down the road. Especially negative thoughts, IMHO.
 
Loomis124 said:
Just my opinion...how far out is an appeal when we are still in the pre-trial stages? I won't allow my mind to be boggled with what-ifs way down the road. Especially negative thoughts, IMHO.
Click to expand...

Appeals are far far away right now.
Sure, we can't think way down the road. And we don't want to have negative thoughts.
But, thats how lawyers and Judges are trained to think. Especially the death penalty certified lawyer on each case. Appeals are just a certainty, a fact of any case that involves the death penalty. Prosecutors and Judges want to protect against giving the Defense any reason to have a successful appeal. Thats always in the back of their minds.
 
Ann99 said:
Appeals are far far away right now.
Sure, we can't think way down the road. And we don't want to have negative thoughts.
But, thats how lawyers and Judges are trained to think. Especially the death penalty certified lawyer on each case. Appeals are just a certainty, a fact of any case that involves the death penalty. Prosecutors and Judges want to protect against giving the Defense any reason to have a successful appeal. Thats always in the back of their minds.
Click to expand...

Also a good defense lawyer does start laying the ground work for appeals they know acquittals are not guaranteed and how the jury may vote. It is frustrating to us as by standers and the victims families, but we do want justice and the murderers to never b e released on a technicality. JMO
 
Cool Cats said:
Well said.
You say Billy doesn't say "your honor," I'll have to go back and listen to him in court.



The question is about the 2 Wagner children, their dads have not been convicted so I think they still have parental rights to communicate with them. I just want for them what the other kids have, stable forever homes and relationships with extended family.

We shouldn't talk about the kids, I am only saying what has been reported in MSM. Tony and B's mom and a few of the grandparents have talked to MSM about the kids.

Pike County: 'That's all we've got left. Just those kids.'
Click to expand...

I wonder if AW has got to speak with the Grand Kids?
 
I can respect the fact that for some posters it's too early to get into trial strategy and should wait until trials commence.

However, the defense right now is not sitting on their hands. They will try every legal avenue available to them to put reasonable doubt in the jury's minds. They only need one juror for a mis-trial.

But let me make this perfectly clear, I have a great deal of confidence that not only will Canepa be able to counter those (sure to come up) defense strategies, but also to anticipate what those strategies might be.

Why?
Do I say this just because I like and respect her? No, I'm looking at her track record, let's look at Angie's motions:

Angie has 50 Motions filed if you count this one:

RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR ORDER APPOINTING COORDINATING DISCOVERY ATTORNEY FILED

Out of those 50 Motions Canepa has responded to all 50 and opposes, at least in part,
43 Motions - wow. So Canepa is perfectly capable of standing up to the defense.

The Court finds that the State of Ohio has filed a response to each of the Defendant's motions. The Court finds the State of Ohio opposes, at least in part, Defendant's Motions:

No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, and 49.

Judge Deering ruled on Motions 1,2, 12, 14, 17, 18, 23, 48.
  • The Court therefore reserves ruling upon Defendant's Motions No. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 15, 16, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, and 49 until the "non-substantive" motions filed in all of the related actions have been orally argued and submitted to the Court for decision.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 117 more.
Total: 1,746 (members: 118, guests: 1,628)

Online statistics

Members online
118
Guests online
1,628
Total visitors
1,746
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
605,871
Messages
18,194,007
Members
233,618
Latest member
GFinder
Back
Top