GUILTY OH Pike Co., 8 in Rhoden Family Murdered Over Custody Issue, 4 Members Wagner Family Arrested #60

[Cool Cats]

Thank you. MO
This is a standard tactic used by both sides.
Maybe it is a gamble for the prosecution to do what they are doing - if I understand correctly - they have not provided transcripts of the evidence they plan to use at trial.
Prosecution almost always holds back with whatever they can as long as they feel it can be justified.
Like I said, a gamble.
But prosecution will probably prevail easily on this one. Defense attorney can simply ask Geo.4 and Jake.

lol.. Geo4 and Jake should know what they said in the truck and on the phone. They know what they did.

Also, its not clear to me, but did Prosecution already provide all (the massive amount) evidence, recordings to Defense? If so, Defense has what it needs. Defense just is lazy, wants to be told what to prepare for.
That's not how it works. Defense has to prepare for anything and everything.
This request to "Tell us exactly what you will use at trial" is something that can be ignored, in MO, especially sine there are 3 other trials to consider. Prosecution never gives away evidence.
Since evidence in Geo.4 trial will have an impact upon Jake's trial, and the other 2 also, it is possible/justifiable Judge will allow this specific evidence to be held back until trial.
Prosecution will never show their hand with evidence that impacts, implicates or tips their hand to the other 3 defendants. It won't happen. Judge won't let it happen. These 4 intertwined trials are very complicated and rules may be bent. MO
Sorry to be so lengthy. Hope I have not misunderstood the Defense requests.

DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE (DISCOVERY VIOLATION)

Thanks for your take on this. I really wanted to hear an opinion on this.
I don't know what to think. I am hoping to see the prosecution's response to this.

You raise interesting points!
I didn't know the prosecution could hold back evidence until trial.

The defense wants the judge to throw out alot of evidence.

The delay and disregard of the court's order must result in some sanction and such sanction must include the exclusion of any evidence obtained from these secret recordings. Such eavesdropping is frowned upon in the law....

...Excluding discovery including summaries, recordings and transcripts that were due to be provided to the defense on or before December 31st, 2020.

 

[Ann99]

DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE (DISCOVERY VIOLATION


LOL. What nerve for Attorney to say this.
Isn't this (evesdropping) exactly what the Wagners did to the Rhoden's?

Such eavesdropping is frowned upon in the law....

 

[Cool Cats]

All theory and supposition. Wagner Money, acquisition of 260 Peterson Rd. Need for more $$.

It's my theory that the Elder George Wagner (Frederica's husband) was a financial wiz. Unless it was Fredericka guiding him, or that ("doing the books/ taxes") person who was the companion of the fugitive guiding FW.

Could be that Elder Wagner purchased the 260 Peterson Rd property, eventually sold it to the boys GW/JW for 1$. Why? We don't know but probably as a "homestead" for the younger men/their families.

Apparently Angela lived there with JW for a period of time while Billy lived at FWF??? No explanation other than marital difficulties.
Seems maybe FW didn't want AW around, as they did not get along.

I can think of no logical explanation for the mechanics lien at the property other than JW /GW4 probably tried some well worn Wagner scheme on the guy and he recognized a scam and quit.
I found this info. may possibly explain a source (partial) of W $$.
Timing of Elder Wagner illness, subsequent death may explain the need for GW4 and JW to scramble for money.
Billy and FW too.
FARM SUBSIDIES

EWG's Farm Subsidy Database

USDA subsidy information for George Wagner Jr ( this must be the Elder George Wagner, FW husband) ?

George Wagner Jr received payments totaling $683,898 from 1995 through 2020

EWG's Farm Subsidy Database

USDA subsidy information for Fredericka Wagner

Fredericka Wagner received payments totaling $60,380 from 1995 through 2020'‡' received in 2018 and 2019

I can imagine all of this ( money was running out. FW may not have been as generous as Elder GW) as a motive for needing to get the children of GW4 and JW under legal control. Add AW scheme to move to Alaska.
If they had exhausted the $75k from a loan, they had no real source of huge chunks of cash.
Also another reason to think possibly $$ at CRSR was a motive for the murders.

Take the money and the children and run...
All My theory and opinion.

Still going back reading. The podcast cousin said it was definitely money as the reason they came back from AK. So desperate for money they stopped in Missouri on the way back to fill out fraudulent mortgage loans from 2 companies.

Angela went to stay in the free house she inherited from her dad in S Webster, this is next door to Rita's mom's house where Rita did her house arrest.

Yes Bob passing away could have had financial repercussions.

Note that it was Angie living at and selling the Peterson Rd. property not Billy.
Bob probably helped the "boys" obtain the property and thus the dollar purchase, so I wonder if Fred was upset that Angie cashed in the house? Note Billy lived with her not Angie. Billy worked for her not Angie.

Get a free house then get a loan for a barn against it, then sell the property and pocket all the equity, maybe or maybe not pay back your creditors for the lumber.

How could they take you to court, right? Your in AK....!

Just Saying

 

[Puzzles8]

I'm just trying to get an idea of the new pole barn's cost. Land prep, cost of lumber/materials and labor cost to construct. Can anyone try to give me a ball-park $ number as well as the division of cost between labor and materials?

IMO, it was odd to start to invest in constructing a costly structure and then just stop...on a dime, in December 2015. Was the barn completed when the property was sold in 2017?

 

[Tiff23fr]

I'm just trying to get an idea of the new pole barn's cost. Land prep, cost of lumber/materials and labor cost to construct. Can anyone try to give me a ball-park $ number as well as the division of cost between labor and materials?

IMO, it was odd to start to invest in constructing a costly structure and then just stop...on a dime, in December 2015. Was the barn completed when the property was sold in 2017?

A quick search on the average is: “A traditionally constructed, wooden, barn will typically cost approx. $45 per square foot to construct.”

45 x 1,925 sqft= apx $86k (I am guessing it is 1925 sq ft based on the property card)

They could have done it for much less per square foot, but that is the average I could find. It was finished and it has multiple stalls which increases the price (added wood).
Attached is the listing showing the finished barn.
But what happened 12/15/15.. so odd that same day a conversation occured that would become part of discovery.
260 Peterson Rd, Oliver Twp, OH 45660 - 4 beds/1 bath

edit to add: I couldn't give you the breakdown between labor and materials. Someone else might know apx percentages.

 

[Cool Cats]

I'm just trying to get an idea of the new pole barn's cost. Land prep, cost of lumber/materials and labor cost to construct. Can anyone try to give me a ball-park $ number as well as the division of cost between labor and materials?

IMO, it was odd to start to invest in constructing a costly structure and then just stop...on a dime, in December 2015. Was the barn completed when the property was sold in 2017?

It was June 3rd, 2016 when Angela said the new barn was almost done and her photos show they were still working on it at that time.

By the following month she was selling out.

According to Tiff's above post the barn was completed, see finished barn stalls here:

https://ssl.cdn-redfin.com/photo/158/mbphoto/340/genMid.1512340_12_1.jpg

 

[Tiff23fr]

It was June 3rd, 2016 when Angela said the new barn was almost done and her photos show they were still working on it at that time.

By the following month she was selling out.

According to Tiff's above post the barn was completed.

https://ssl.cdn-redfin.com/photo/158/mbphoto/340/genMid.1512340_12_1.jpg

Self Deleted

 

[NotHammerToed]

Attached is the listing showing the finished barn.
But what happened 12/15/15.. so odd that same day a conversation occured that would become part of discovery.
260 Peterson Rd, Oliver Twp, OH 45660 - 4 beds/1 bath

edit to add: I couldn't give you the breakdown between labor and materials. Someone else might know apx percentages.

Theory - someone witnessed JW getting physical with HR? Which subsequently halts all operations between the W’s and R’s.

 

[Betty P]

Thank you. MO
This is a standard tactic used by both sides.
Maybe it is a gamble for the prosecution to do what they are doing - if I understand correctly - they have not provided transcripts of the evidence they plan to use at trial.
Prosecution almost always holds back with whatever they can as long as they feel it can be justified.
Like I said, a gamble.
But prosecution will probably prevail easily on this one. Defense attorney can simply ask Geo.4 and Jake.

lol.. Geo4 and Jake should know what they said in the truck and on the phone. They know what they did.

Also, its not clear to me, but did Prosecution already provide all (the massive amount) evidence, recordings to Defense? If so, Defense has what it needs. Defense just is lazy, wants to be told what to prepare for.
That's not how it works. Defense has to prepare for anything and everything.
This request to "Tell us exactly what you will use at trial" is something that can be ignored, in MO, especially sine there are 3 other trials to consider. Prosecution never gives away evidence.
Since evidence in Geo.4 trial will have an impact upon Jake's trial, and the other 2 also, it is possible/justifiable Judge will allow this specific evidence to be held back until trial.
Prosecution will never show their hand with evidence that impacts, implicates or tips their hand to the other 3 defendants. It won't happen. Judge won't let it happen. These 4 intertwined trials are very complicated and rules may be bent. MO
Sorry to be so lengthy. Hope I have not misunderstood the Defense requests.

Yes, the prosecution has already provided the defendants with copies of all the recordings made of Wags conversations on phones, in their work truck, etc. Defendants have had those recordings for over a year now, so the attorneys have had plenty of time to listen to it and make note of what they think are the most incriminating conversations.

 

[Covert Operative]

Thank you. MO
This is a standard tactic used by both sides.
Maybe it is a gamble for the prosecution to do what they are doing - if I understand correctly - they have not provided transcripts of the evidence they plan to use at trial.
Prosecution almost always holds back with whatever they can as long as they feel it can be justified.
Like I said, a gamble.
But prosecution will probably prevail easily on this one. Defense attorney can simply ask Geo.4 and Jake.

lol.. Geo4 and Jake should know what they said in the truck and on the phone. They know what they did.

Also, its not clear to me, but did Prosecution already provide all (the massive amount) evidence, recordings to Defense? If so, Defense has what it needs. Defense just is lazy, wants to be told what to prepare for.
That's not how it works. Defense has to prepare for anything and everything.
This request to "Tell us exactly what you will use at trial" is something that can be ignored, in MO, especially sine there are 3 other trials to consider. Prosecution never gives away evidence.
Since evidence in Geo.4 trial will have an impact upon Jake's trial, and the other 2 also, it is possible/justifiable Judge will allow this specific evidence to be held back until trial.
Prosecution will never show their hand with evidence that impacts, implicates or tips their hand to the other 3 defendants. It won't happen. Judge won't let it happen. These 4 intertwined trials are very complicated and rules may be bent. MO
Sorry to be so lengthy. Hope I have not misunderstood the Defense requests.

Thank you. MO
This is a standard tactic used by both sides.
Maybe it is a gamble for the prosecution to do what they are doing - if I understand correctly - they have not provided transcripts of the evidence they plan to use at trial.
Prosecution almost always holds back with whatever they can as long as they feel it can be justified.
Like I said, a gamble.
But prosecution will probably prevail easily on this one. Defense attorney can simply ask Geo.4 and Jake.

lol.. Geo4 and Jake should know what they said in the truck and on the phone. They know what they did.

Also, its not clear to me, but did Prosecution already provide all (the massive amount) evidence, recordings to Defense? If so, Defense has what it needs. Defense just is lazy, wants to be told what to prepare for.
That's not how it works. Defense has to prepare for anything and everything.
This request to "Tell us exactly what you will use at trial" is something that can be ignored, in MO, especially sine there are 3 other trials to consider. Prosecution never gives away evidence.
Since evidence in Geo.4 trial will have an impact upon Jake's trial, and the other 2 also, it is possible/justifiable Judge will allow this specific evidence to be held back until trial.
Prosecution will never show their hand with evidence that impacts, implicates or tips their hand to the other 3 defendants. It won't happen. Judge won't let it happen. These 4 intertwined trials are very complicated and rules may be bent. MO
Sorry to be so lengthy. Hope I have not misunderstood the Defense requests.

I may misunderstand your post but the prosecution has to turn over all discovery to the defense. They also did agree they would provide which recordings they intended to use.----The Court finds that with respect to Defendant's Motion No. 59, the parties agreed that on or before December 31, 2020, the State of Ohio will provide the Defendant with summaries of all recorded telephone calls and other recorded conversations that the State of Ohio intends to use in the trial of this action, as well as transcripts of those positions of any recorded telephone calls and other recorded conversations that the State of Ohio intends to use at the trial of this action. ----I do believe the prosecution knows how far they can push and the recordings will not be excluded if they have not gotten the transcripts.

 

[Cool Cats]

I may misunderstand your post but the prosecution has to turn over all discovery to the defense. They also did agree they would provide which recordings they intended to use.----The Court finds that with respect to Defendant's Motion No. 59, the parties agreed that on or before December 31, 2020, the State of Ohio will provide the Defendant with summaries of all recorded telephone calls and other recorded conversations that the State of Ohio intends to use in the trial of this action, as well as transcripts of those positions of any recorded telephone calls and other recorded conversations that the State of Ohio intends to use at the trial of this action. ----I do believe the prosecution knows how far they can push and the recordings will not be excluded if they have not gotten the transcripts.

I don't think he will get convicted if the judge approves this motion.

 

[Ann99]

I may misunderstand your post but the prosecution has to turn over all discovery to the defense. They also did agree they would provide which recordings they intended to use.----The Court finds that with respect to Defendant's Motion No. 59, the parties agreed that on or before December 31, 2020, the State of Ohio will provide the Defendant with summaries of all recorded telephone calls and other recorded conversations that the State of Ohio intends to use in the trial of this action, as well as transcripts of those positions of any recorded telephone calls and other recorded conversations that the State of Ohio intends to use at the trial of this action.

I can agree prosecution has to turn over all discovery to defense. I may be wrong but I thought they did that already. My response was based upon that fact and the assumption that the Defense wants more. An exact list and transcripts.
My response was theory or a possibility as to Deering ruling on this motion. The prosecution, as of the date of the motion, had not turned over the exact list of discovery materials of exactly what they plan to use at trial.
I don't believe they have to do that. Defense has no basis for requesting that.
I have never heard of any prosecutor giving their exact trial plan to defense. Prosecution may be forced to turn over materials but at the very last minute.
Or, the judge who has wide latitude, may rule on this motion favorably for the prosecution. Because of the other upcoming trials and interconnected discovery.
Or Deering can rule for the Defense and reprimand the Prosecution. It remains to be seen. Honestly, it should be cut and dried but it is not in some cases. Prosecutors and Defense push things to the limit for their clients.
I agree with your basic statement Prosecution has to turn over all discovery to Defense.
My basic statement is Prosecution does not need to be specific as to what discovery they will use at trial.
It will be interesting.

 

[Betty P]

I may misunderstand your post but the prosecution has to turn over all discovery to the defense. They also did agree they would provide which recordings they intended to use.----The Court finds that with respect to Defendant's Motion No. 59, the parties agreed that on or before December 31, 2020, the State of Ohio will provide the Defendant with summaries of all recorded telephone calls and other recorded conversations that the State of Ohio intends to use in the trial of this action, as well as transcripts of those positions of any recorded telephone calls and other recorded conversations that the State of Ohio intends to use at the trial of this action. ----I do believe the prosecution knows how far they can push and the recordings will not be excluded if they have not gotten the transcripts.

As I mentioned before, the recordings have all been turned over. The last ones provided to defense were those recordings of AW talking to RN from jail, discussing the case and what RN should say.

The court also arranged to pay a consultant to help the defense organize and analyze all the evidence they've received from the state.

 

[Caylee Advocate]

Most peeps on here have probably seen a lot of these pics but having them all on one link is so helpful I wanted to share with you all.

George Wagner ordered not to contact fellow family members charged in Rhoden case

 

[Ann99]

I don't think he will get convicted if the judge approves this motion.

I agree. What I think about is how this could impact the other trials and Deering must think of that too. It is discovery that spans 4 trials or more. It is not limited to G.4

 

[Cool Cats]

I agree. What I think about is how this could impact the other trials and Deering must think of that too. It is discovery that spans 4 trials or more. It is not limited to G.4

Good point. And after reading your other post I have to rephrase. I especially like this:

"I have never heard of any prosecutor giving their exact trial plan to defense."

George would get off if the prosecution did not turn over all the transcripts but as far as I can tell they did. If the judge denies the motion I think George will still be convicted but it could raise grounds for appeals. That he didn't get a fair trial because certain conversations were not pointed out specifically to the defense.

Are Jake's attorneys wanting the same?

Apparently the defense (George) has everything they need but now they want the prosecution to point out which specific conversations of George's they plan to use.

Getting the recordings and transcripts is not enough for them they want to hold hands and be walked through, basically, the entire prosecution of George.

I would like to find out how Jake's attorneys are handling this considering his trial is in months not years anymore.

 

[Antimony]

How are taxes paid on bartered items?
Maybe the farm was traded for.
I wonder about the taxes tho.

 

[Covert Operative]

I can agree prosecution has to turn over all discovery to defense. I may be wrong but I thought they did that already. My response was based upon that fact and the assumption that the Defense wants more. An exact list and transcripts.
My response was theory or a possibility as to Deering ruling on this motion. The prosecution, as of the date of the motion, had not turned over the exact list of discovery materials of exactly what they plan to use at trial.
I don't believe they have to do that. Defense has no basis for requesting that.
I have never heard of any prosecutor giving their exact trial plan to defense. Prosecution may be forced to turn over materials but at the very last minute.
Or, the judge who has wide latitude, may rule on this motion favorably for the prosecution. Because of the other upcoming trials and interconnected discovery.
Or Deering can rule for the Defense and reprimand the Prosecution. It remains to be seen. Honestly, it should be cut and dried but it is not in some cases. Prosecutors and Defense push things to the limit for their clients.
I agree with your basic statement Prosecution has to turn over all discovery to Defense.
My basic statement is Prosecution does not need to be specific as to what discovery they will use at trial.
It will be interesting.

I do not believe they are asking them for specific/exact discovery they are going to use, they are asking them for specific recordings or portions they are going to use which they agreed to give. I would not think that any lawyer ever would ask the prosecution to tell them specifically how they are going to use the evidence they have. What is being talked about in the motion is the transcripts of the recordings. There are numerous reasons why a defense lawyer would want and need the transcripts of the recordings.

 

[Covert Operative]

As I mentioned before, the recordings have all been turned over. The last ones provided to defense were those recordings of AW talking to RN from jail, discussing the case and what RN should say.

The court also arranged to pay a consultant to help the defense organize and analyze all the evidence they've received from the state.

Yes, Turning over the recordings are not in question, unless there are a few stragglers. The transcripts of the recording or the portions of them that they are going to use are in question. The prosecution did agree to do this. There are many reasons that the defense would want and need the transcripts of those recordings.

 

[Covert Operative]

I don't think he will get convicted if the judge approves this motion.

I do not think the judge will approve for the recordings to be excluded if they do not have the transcripts yet. I think the prosecution knows what they can get away with and what they cannot, so I certainly hope and do not think they have messed up that bad. The recordings of G4 do seriously implicate him.
AW implicated them when she said she bought the shoes for them that were matched to the type found at crime scenes. She probably did not know at that time they had been matched.