Typical.
Some sort of joke with his attorney.
From Billy's February 1st 2022, Hearing Video linked on page #42.
Billy laughing:
Think this could be the first smile I've seen on his ugly mug.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Typical.
Some sort of joke with his attorney.
From Billy's February 1st 2022, Hearing Video linked on page #42.
Billy laughing:
Think this could be the first smile I've seen on his ugly mug.
Think this could be the first smile I've seen on his ugly mug.
Now that ya mention it, yup.
He started smiling when the judge asked him if he had been seeing his attorneys enough. Right before Covid hit he complained he wasn't seeing his attorneys enough in person to be able to go over the evidence against him. Then Covid hit and he could only see his attorneys over video so he must have been pretty peeved.
After Billy laughed his attorney seemed to be joking with the judge that Billy was upset that he didn't get a Christmas visit with the attorneys. Some weird joke or else Billy really was upset about not seeing his attorneys around Christmas.
Never know with Billy, he has a reputation for complaining if he doesn't like how his attorneys are defending him as mentioned by his attorney in a Court Hearing and in MSM.
The Columbus Dispatch
PressReader.com - Digital Newspaper & Magazine Subscriptions
Five Years Later: The Rhoden Family Killings
Billy Wagner's attorneys told Pike County Common Pleas Judge Randy Deering earlier this month that their client disagrees with some of the defense strategies and is frustrated by how slow the case has progressed through the courts.
Guest defense attorney Terry Ausin (sp) said in regards to seating a jury in Pike County:
The odds are slim to none in my opinion. I think that they have to argue obviously that there's been excessive pretrial publicity and that the jury pool is biased and they need an impartial jury.
I just don't believe that they genuinely think this Case is going to trial between now and then, but I think this is more of a tactic to be able to figure out if there's a plea that makes sense.
Billy laughing:
Quote:Thanks for the summary. Facebook links don't work well here for some reason.
BBM
Ironic that it's George4's attorneys who've been responsible for all the pre-trial publicity. Just a coincidence. JMO
BBM
So, they don't think a plea deal of LWOP "makes sense"? Yes, the defense strategy has been painfully obvious - engage in all the BS and pre-trial publicity as possible in order to get a change of venue. Then get an acquittal and turn a murderer loose on an innocent public. JMO
At times I wonder if Billy expects "a plea on a plate" so to speak. You know, without any input from him. I can feel my hands flexing, I'd like to give that evil beast a slap right now.
All the wasted time, I blame his team for. Yes, they are good at their jobs from what I've heard but not in this case. Game playing.
What will be interesting to see is what comes out about Billy at George's trial. Note that Billy's defense is not saying that "Billy shot nobody."
If Jake testifies that Billy shot some of the victims how can Billy's attorneys get him acquitted of murder in his own trial? They can't. Billy could be arrogant enough to still want a trial but imagine that conversation...err... argument with his attorneys.
At times I wonder if Billy expects "a plea on a plate" so to speak. You know, without any input from him. I can feel my hands flexing, I'd like to give that evil beast a slap right now.
All the wasted time, I blame his team for. Yes, they are good at their jobs from what I've heard but not in this case. Game playing.
Do you remember any evidence that has been said in court or anywhere against BW yet? I keep trying to think of some. We have heard things about G4 and AW and JW. We heard the most about them in the bond hearing and in the statement of facts in court, during the pleas. They never mentioned BW in bond hearing.
The other acts stated BW threatened CRsr with a gun within a week before the before the murders. The guns spoken of in bond hearing were listed as JW's and G4's on the list and G4 bought the Glock. AW did say that the 3 left that night. I wish more had come out about him. Maybe when they start filing motions before trial it may.
There has been some more information that came out about what is claimed JW said about G4, and that night, other than G4 did not kill anyone. JW probably thinks in his mind it will help G4. I do not think JW did BW any favors in his proffer.
Yes, you are right, a lot of information is found out that is not mentioned in court or the media.No I've not heard much about Billy at all. As time moves on there'll be more Motions coming in prior to trial. Need to wait awhile.
<<<<This is Raize's husband. I want to make sure not to deceive anyone about who is posting.
Raize is recovering but still confined to bed as her legs and arms are very weak from no oxygen and being bedridden for almost 5 months now. She is in intensive physical therapy but as of yet not able to type on the computer. The surgery was a sucess as far as getting more oxygen to her extremities. There is still some work to go. As I am sure you all are aware Raize has quite the temper and when I had to confiscate (so to speak) her laptop to keep her from tiring herself out she has frequently made her displeasure known. I had to promise to read the posts to her. I never understood Raize's fascination with this forum but am beginning to understand: friends. One can never have too many friends.
Over the years in my career I have investigated more than a few homicides on a federal level but have very little experience in the trial side other than being called to testify to evidence that was gathered in the course of the investigation and COC of said evidence. That being said, being retired now and virtually home bound by Raize's health and at loose ends, after reading recent posts to Raize I have become somewhat interested in this case myself. The irony of that should not be lost on anyone as over the years I have asked Raize's opinion on some unclassified information and gotten a very short answer of "not interested". Let me make it clear that being the good husband I am I gave very patient and detailed answers to any questions she asked about this case. (She might not agree with this.)
I would like to venture an opinion on the current subject of shoe print evidence.
I am not sure I am allowed to do this as Raize said I should ask a moderator if I can 1. post on her account and 2. if not, can a husband and wife have separate accounts under different screen names on here.
Sorry I messed up on the tab button.
I will venture the opinion on shoe print evidence as Raize tells me if it is not allowed the moderators will delete the post.
I believe the shoe print evidence will be admissible, but it will be an uphill battle for the prosecution and somewhat of a gift for the defense. The DNA evidence on both the inside and outside of the shoe will be admitted. While outside blood DNA will be irrefutable the inside DNA, I am assuming George Wagner IV's DNA from wearing the shoes, is another matter. To expound on that, his mother claims she bought the shoes for him, he denies he wore them as he did not like them. Inside DNA re: dead skin cells ect, could be argued by the defense to have gotten there by Mr. G Wagner IV having tried them on then discarding them as not to his liking. It could also answer to intent that has been a subject on here also. Given what I assume the relationship between the younger Mr. Wagner and his mother, his mother may have told young Mr. Wagner to take the shoes to make sure they were on the scene to coerce or blackmail the older brother in participating which would leave in doubt his intent to harm any of the victims.
Raize said to write jmo after my opinion so others know it is not fact but opinion.
I am going to begin at the start when the crime was committed in 2016 and try to read forward as I have time.
Thank you all for your time, Raize's husband.
Covert Operative I am not sure I have yet figured out the reply tab. Thank you for that piece of information as I had assumed the actual shoes were in evidence and the debate was on who was wearing them that night. As I said I do not have many facts on this case and have not read any actual reports from agencies involved. I will, in the future, try to ascertain facts before venturing an opinion. I intend to start from day one to read as much information and facts as time will allow. Is there a website where reporting agencies on state and local submitted any reports made by investigating officers? Being retired I have limited access to federal data at this time.
Thank you for taking the time to reply and pointing out the actual shoes have not yet been recovered.
<<<<This is Raize's husband. I want to make sure not to deceive anyone about who is posting.
Raize is recovering but still confined to bed as her legs and arms are very weak from no oxygen and being bedridden for almost 5 months now. She is in intensive physical therapy but as of yet not able to type on the computer. The surgery was a sucess as far as getting more oxygen to her extremities. There is still some work to go. As I am sure you all are aware Raize has quite the temper and when I had to confiscate (so to speak) her laptop to keep her from tiring herself out she has frequently made her displeasure known. I had to promise to read the posts to her. I never understood Raize's fascination with this forum but am beginning to understand: friends. One can never have too many friends.
Over the years in my career I have investigated more than a few homicides on a federal level but have very little experience in the trial side other than being called to testify to evidence that was gathered in the course of the investigation and COC of said evidence. That being said, being retired now and virtually home bound by Raize's health and at loose ends, after reading recent posts to Raize I have become somewhat interested in this case myself. The irony of that should not be lost on anyone as over the years I have asked Raize's opinion on some unclassified information and gotten a very short answer of "not interested". Let me make it clear that being the good husband I am I gave very patient and detailed answers to any questions she asked about this case. (She might not agree with this.)
I would like to venture an opinion on the current subject of shoe print evidence.
I am not sure I am allowed to do this as Raize said I should ask a moderator if I can 1. post on her account and 2. if not, can a husband and wife have separate accounts under different screen names on here.
Sorry I messed up on the tab button.
I will venture the opinion on shoe print evidence as Raize tells me if it is not allowed the moderators will delete the post.
I believe the shoe print evidence will be admissible, but it will be an uphill battle for the prosecution and somewhat of a gift for the defense. The DNA evidence on both the inside and outside of the shoe will be admitted. While outside blood DNA will be irrefutable the inside DNA, I am assuming George Wagner IV's DNA from wearing the shoes, is another matter. To expound on that, his mother claims she bought the shoes for him, he denies he wore them as he did not like them. Inside DNA re: dead skin cells ect, could be argued by the defense to have gotten there by Mr. G Wagner IV having tried them on then discarding them as not to his liking. It could also answer to intent that has been a subject on here also. Given what I assume the relationship between the younger Mr. Wagner and his mother, his mother may have told young Mr. Wagner to take the shoes to make sure they were on the scene to coerce or blackmail the older brother in participating which would leave in doubt his intent to harm any of the victims.
Raize said to write jmo after my opinion so others know it is not fact but opinion.
I am going to begin at the start when the crime was committed in 2016 and try to read forward as I have time.
Thank you all for your time, Raize's husband.