OH - Pike Co - 8 in Rhoden Family Murdered Over Custody Issue - 4 Members Wagner Family Arrested #76

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
SuziQ said:
Every trial I have watched where the investigators were not detailed and meticulous, the defense jumped right on that making them look lazy and inept.. If the investigators were not detailed and meticulous, the jury would think they were lazy and inept. Imo.
Click to expand...
I guess what I'm feeling is probaly due to the conspiracy, how it's being presented...or not. Knowing that your star witness us going to say his brother didn't kill anyone...BUT his conspiracy did. And don't get me wrong, I do believe that he's guilty of planning and execution of those plans. I'm still wondering if it wasn't GWIV that killed KR.
 
justtrish said:
The defense can cross examine him when he's on the stand and ask him if he lied in his interview at the border, if he lied all along, I mean we know he lied because he pled not guilty before pleading guilty. The jury will be very clear on how Jake lied and the defense will throw everything at him no doubt about it, but they can't present evidence to discredit a witness before they even take the stand. The prosecution is laying out the case of how they investigated these crimes. Angela lying about buying the shoes and throwing them away was a big piece of this. George lied in his interview as well. They didn't play that either. This recording was not played simply to show they lied, it was played to show why/how BCI investigated things and by Angela lying about the shoes it was another good piece that let them know they were on the right track. It wasn't showed to put blame directly on George or to make Angela look good. She will take the stand as well after having lied and this interview wasn't hidden, it was played.
Click to expand...
we do not know what is in JW interview and neither do the jury to decide if it has any bearing on how they - the jury the ultimate triers of fact will decide what weight they give to JW testimony, the defense can use his words against him but that is very very different from hearing him speak

the damage to AW credibility after listening to her interview will have on the jury would be very different if they had not heard her just learned what words she said, the most damaging part of AW interview was her stunned silence when confronted with the shoes, her dissembling at whether she bought the shoes but couldn't remember, her absolute shock at the casing evidence, spoken words, intonation, emotion are all expressed by speech you cannot read emotion into words on a page, we would not have known how she spoke her denials, it is so important to hear not just read

but I understand why the state will not want to allow the jury to hear JW, both AW and BW royally f@@cked themselves over when interviewed, and I imagine JW fared no better, but if the jury were to hear him and how his voice changed, how he reacted when confronted with the evidence then the jury's ability to have any faith in what he says on the stand would be filtered t5hrough the prism of this interview, as AW will
 
Angela's interview continued...


James Pilcher
@jamespilcher
Now on to what she buys for her sons and grandkids. She says everything - going to ask about the shoes at Walmart.

She buys 90 percent of her stuff at Walmart. But I don't go anywhere by myself. Goes usually with George and Jake. Prosecutors stop for a 15 minute break. We're about halfway through.

Starting new thread for Part II of Angela Wagner interview in Pike Co. murder trial of her son George Wagner. Coming back in a few after morning break.

Agent Comisford asks why does Angela think they stopped her and interviewed her?

Says George's ex-wife may have bad things to say about the family. Says Tabitha was bipolar and not on medication as she should. Agents asked why people would say Wagners would be involved?

Angela: "I don't know. As far as altercations, I didn't have any" except for Tabitha.

Says Jake and Hanna had written up a custody agreement. Was under negotiation between lawyers. Hanna never finalized it with her lawyers.

Angela never was a custody battle. Agents ask about living will? Says she doesn't have one. Agents now introduce her to the forged documents they found in search

Remember these documents had a date of Dec. 24 2014 and were notarized by Rita Newcomb, Angela's mother. But the URL and printout date were three weeks before the murders in 2016. Angela keeps saying she doesn't know when printed out

Angela says Jake and Hanna were going to take them to the lawyers. But says she doesn't know or remember if she printed it off.

Asking if Jake would have done anything because of breakup? Says other things he wants to show her. Something gone on totally awry that she didn't know of. Angela: No Jake - not to the point of murder. Nothing against Chris, Dana little Chris

Agents: Rhodens into all kinds of *advertiser censored*. Selling pot, cocaine, Hanna is promiscuous. Lots of stuff going on - also sexual abuse history in the family

Asking you - did your son do it anybody in family. Angela: no my son wouldn't do that. Even thought he and hanna broke up, it wasn't enough for that. And as far as my husband goes, he couldn't say a bad word about Chris (Sr).

Now going on to what shoes and clothes she would buy for her sons. She says she never buys shoes. Not buy shoes for them things fit differently.

Agent Ward: Another issue we have - these right here crime scene. Showing foot impressions in blood. Now presenting her receipt and pictures from Walmart. Angela - I did buy those.

She first says she doesn't know but then admits to buying them but says her sons called them old man shoes and that she threw them away.

Now going through the different things they have with the footprints and the documents. Moving on to shell casings found at the house.

Agent Ward: casings recovered at crime scene identically match ones in your driveway - fired same gun. Angela - there's no way. Comisford - identical match.

Angela says other people shot guns at her house.

Agent Ward: look into my eyes, you are far far from stupid. Not making this stuff up - identical matches to several casings found at your house.

Asks her point blank - did you know something happen either before or after? She says no. Did you later find out and ask what the f--? No. She asks if they have gun. I purchased them (the shoes), didn't like them.

Comisford - if you want any chance to talk about this and what happened it's now. Ward says he's worried about grandchildren and what will happen to them. Says he doesn't believe her.

Ward says he's on her side and needs to ask them. Angela says she wants to stop and get an attorney.

Comisford - don't want you to miss an opportunity to talk to us. And kids will go to foster care if we find it.

Ward leaves and they get her some water. But the recording is still going. Comisford tells her about the process and that she has to wait until the truck is processed.

Agents kept the recording going nearly 10 minutes even after leaving the room. You can hear the kids in the background. It was 2 hours, 4 minutes. George doesn't seem to have any reaction to any of this in the courtroom.

Now onto questioning - Comisford says there are things she will say during interviews she doesn't necessarily mean.

Comisford - there were concerns by the Wagners that the Rhodens would get custody of Sophia. Specifically Angela, Jake, George and Billy. She also knew about the previous dispute with George and Tabitha over son Bulvine

Comisford says agents were trying to build rapport with Angela by saying "we don't want Sophia to go back to the Rhodens" during the interview.

Now going through all the evidence they showed Angela during this interview

Done with direct. Waiting for cross examination. Breaking for lunch until 1:10 p.m


these next 3 tweets - I don't know "where"in the interview they go - a bit confusing...


Now showing her those documents - Angela says she might have done that. Says she didn't remember. If it was printed, would it have been you? Also doesn't remember her mother notarizing it?

Says Jake and Hanna had written up a custody agreement. Was under negotiation between lawyers. Hanna never finalized it with her lawyers.

Agent Ward: This is interesting to me we have this printed out less than three weeks before the murders. Says he needs to vet it. Angela: I don't know if printed them out or not remember.



link: https://twitter.com/jamespilcher



So they are a lunch.
 
Betty P said:
All in due time.

The defense is not allowed to dictate how the state prosecutes its case against George. Their constant interruptions and accusations are actually slowing down the state's presentation. If you follow trials, you understand this is how many defense teams often operate when they don't have much to work with.
Click to expand...
I see things differently, the defense has an ethical duty to represent their clients to the best of their ability, and their objections are to make a record of where they disagree with the state, nobody gets to dictate how either side presents its case but when one side is willing to allow two coconspirators interview to be played to the jury and not the other one then for me there is an issue with how they are protecting JW so that the jury does not get to hear him before the proffer,
 
arielilane said:
Today, I wanted to assist rock star Niner with some help.

Good morning from Day 22 of the Pike Co murder trial of George Wagner IV. First up - hearing on whether defense can introduce the 4-5 hour interview with Jake Wagner. If judge doesn't allow it, it will be BCI agent Jennifer Comisford, who interviewed Angela Wagner.
These happened on May 21, 2017. Now in the hearing.
Canepa says the interview with Jake had no impact on the investigation. They had already identified Wagners as suspects and put taps on their phones and in their SUV.
Also argues law precedent says only prosecution can introduce statements by defendants or co-defendants as part of the conspiracy rules
Canepa: Nothing that Jake Wagner said that day that led to any extra investigative steps.
And how to you sort through 5 and a half hours of interview to find out how it changed the investigation. Also Jake denies it and denies that family did it - calls it disingenuous approach to try to get something into evidence not allowed.
Judge asks why statement needs to be introduced. Not impeaching Scheiderer during cross-examination.

Parker for defense: this goes against the state's case, especially since Jake and Angela have pleaded guilty to conspiracy.
Also argues defense has a right to complete case and that jury needs to be able to determine reliability. And prosecution said previously defense could introduce it during their case.
Says state conceded it could be used, but that prosecutors were upset with the timing. Concedes Jake and Angela had conspiracy at Montana border. But not conceding George was part of it.
Judge denies request to play the recording. Says it could be impeachment later on but not now.
Nash now arguing they shouldn't be able to now play the entire interview of Angela Wagner. On it she agrees she bought the shoes "for her boys."
Wilson for prosecution argues prosecution should be able to introduce co-conspiracy statements - including Angela Wagner.

Judge says defense should bring it up with objections in front of jury.
Nash is trying to get the statement from Angela "I bought those (shoes) for my boys" excluded. Says it doesn't show furtherance of conspiracy.
Want to play all 2 hours of the Angela interview. Canepa says that initially Angela denies buying shoes, then she admits she bought them for her boys but threw them away. That entire statement shows cover up.
Now Canepa objecting to defense bringing up Jake's proffer/confession. Gets as testy as it has ever been during the trial. Nash also says the defense is not conceding there was a conspiracy.
Now Scheiderer on redirect. Says they wanted to get conversation inside the SUV with wiretaps after the interviews - but there wasn't any. Then road noise prohibited hearing anything inside the car.


Next witness is BCI special agent Jennifer Comisford, who interviewed Angela Wagner at the Montana border.
Been a BCI agent for 8 years, used to work special investigations and now in environmental enforcement. Also previously a Columbus officer.
Assigned to Rhoden murders from Day 1. Then worked and traveled to and from Pike County daily for several months.
Interviewed the Wagners in Montana but also went to Virginia for interviews. Also interviewed inmates during the investigation.
Treated the interview with Wagners at border as "custodial" meaning they were treated as if they were not free to leave and given Miranda rights. They were in custody and being interrogated.
Click to expand...

You are HIRED!! You can do the rest of the tweets for the afternoon - as it is getting on the late side here! :)
 
joe jones said:
we do not know what is in JW interview and neither do the jury to decide if it has any bearing on how they - the jury the ultimate triers of fact will decide what weight they give to JW testimony, the defense can use his words against him but that is very very different from hearing him speak

the damage to AW credibility after listening to her interview will have on the jury would be very different if they had not heard her just learned what words she said, the most damaging part of AW interview was her stunned silence when confronted with the shoes, her dissembling at whether she bought the shoes but couldn't remember, her absolute shock at the casing evidence, spoken words, intonation, emotion are all expressed by speech you cannot read emotion into words on a page, we would not have known how she spoke her denials, it is so important to hear not just read

but I understand why the state will not want to allow the jury to hear JW, both AW and BW royally f@@cked themselves over when interviewed, and I imagine JW fared no better, but if the jury were to hear him and how his voice changed, how he reacted when confronted with the evidence then the jury's ability to have any faith in what he says on the stand would be filtered t5hrough the prism of this interview, as AW will
Click to expand...
But the issue is at this point them wanting to play that video was to discredit him BEFORE he was on the stand to answer for his actions. They don't even know what he is going to testify to on the stand and how it could be different from what he might have said in that interview.

The prosecution's reason for playing Angela's interview was to show how/why they proceeded with investigating the Wagner's, not to show that George lied or Jake lied or is some saint and truthful.

When the defense gets it's chance to present things, they can show Jake's lying in many ways. I am sure they can even argue at that point they want to introduce that video.
 
sunshineray said:
I guess what I'm feeling is probaly due to the conspiracy, how it's being presented...or not. Knowing that your star witness us going to say his brother didn't kill anyone...BUT his conspiracy did. And don't get me wrong, I do believe that he's guilty of planning and execution of those plans. I'm still wondering if it wasn't GWIV that killed KR.
Click to expand...

Unless I missed something in Angela Canepa's opening statement, I don't think they've said Jake is going to say that. He may claim that GW4 didn't kill anyone, but the rest of the argument will be made by the prosecution, based on the evidence.

I know its easy to fall into the trap, but a lot of what's being said about Jake's likely testimony is opinion, not fact. JMO
People might feel less frustrated if they avoid assuming what Jake will say or not say, because there's very little information we do know about that.
 
Puzzles8 said:
Just makes you ask, where were their parents? What were they thinking, letting an 11 yo sleep with a 13 yo?

JMO
Click to expand...
I try very hard not to judge others on their parenting, I really do. Personally I have boys and girls, under NO circumstances while I am alive and in capacity of myself would my 11 y/o spend the night with a boy of any age. Not 13, and certainly not 15 nor would she at 13. At least not with my knowledge. I do believe Hannah did some running and partying after Jake, because SHE HAD NO CHILDHOOD!!! She went from kid to mom to wife or whatever, she got a breath of freedom and wanted to live as anyone would.
 
justtrish said:
But the issue is at this point them wanting to play that video was to discredit him BEFORE he was on the stand to answer for his actions. They don't even know what he is going to testify to on the stand and how it could be different from what he might have said in that interview.

The prosecution's reason for playing Angela's interview was to show how/why they proceeded with investigating the Wagner's, not to show that George lied or Jake lied or is some saint and truthful.

When the defense gets it's chance to present things, they can show Jake's lying in many ways. I am sure they can even argue at that point they want to introduce that video.
Click to expand...
it's only audio same as AW and BW interview, and of course the defense wants to discredit JW, they are saying JW killed all 8 so they are not going along with the he killed 5 part of the proffer, and the whole point of playing it is to show he lied as easily as BW and AW, except AW asked for an attorney once she realized how much evidence LE had amassed,

I just hope the jury is paying attention, and is wondering where this 4-5 hour interview of JW is, as yesterday they were told about all 4 Wagners interviews, AW was played today, they know BW kicked up a fuss and didn't cooperate, they didn't say much about GW interview, but I hope we get to hear that and they learned JW spoke to them for hours, if they are paying attention it may give them pause for thought
 
I don't see why the 'worry' over JW's interview being played now. I would hope the jury is patient and waiting for the prosecution to present it. Why would they need it now?

It will show/say the same things regardless of when the jury hears it. A mountain out of a molehill IMO.
 
dgfred said:
I don't see why the 'worry' over JW's interview being played now. I would hope the jury is patient and waiting for the prosecution to present it. Why would they need it now?

It will show/say the same things regardless of when the jury hears it. A mountain out of a molehill IMO.
Click to expand...
Because they have sat there for 5 weeks of their lives waiting...and waiting.
 
Betty P said:
Unless I missed something in Angela Canepa's opening statement, I don't think they've said Jake is going to say that. He may claim that GW4 didn't kill anyone, but the rest of the argument will be made by the prosecution, based on the evidence.

I know its easy to fall into the trap, but a lot of what's being said about Jake's likely testimony is opinion, not fact. JMO
People might feel less frustrated if they avoid assuming what Jake will say or not say, because there's very little information we do know about that.
Click to expand...
Assuming that Jake wants to live up to the plea agreement, the prosecution knows what he will say on direct examination. They know what his testimony will be about the conspiracy. Once the state establishes byeond that reasonable doubt there was a conspiracy to kill the Rhoden's and that George was present at the murder scenes, through Jake and Angela's testimony, the questions become not whether George shot anyone but what did he do to aid the conspiracy? What did he do to prepare--truck, suppressors, taking down cameras, carrying a weapon? What did he do outside those homes and inside? What did he do to aid the coverup?
 
joe jones said:
I see things differently, the defense has an ethical duty to represent their clients to the best of their ability, and their objections are to make a record of where they disagree with the state, nobody gets to dictate how either side presents its case but when one side is willing to allow two coconspirators interview to be played to the jury and not the other one then for me there is an issue with how they are protecting JW so that the jury does not get to hear him before the proffer,
Click to expand...

Has it been said in court by the judge that Jake's interview won't be shown at some point in time? I haven't heard that yet. There are rules that prevent someone from discrediting a witnesses statements before the jury has heard them. It's probably better to wait and see what happens before we criticize what may or may not happen.
 
Recidivist said:
Because they have sat there for 5 weeks of their lives waiting...and waiting.
Click to expand...

I recall reading the book about the Hillside Stranglers in LA back in the late 1970's. Ten women were murdered by two guys. They were both arrested in 1979. IIRC, each of their trials lasted nearly a year. I was amazed at how long the defense could make a trial drag on and felt sorry for those jurors. It's not unusual for a capital murder trial to continue for months.

ETA: Their trials took 2 years

www.upi.com

The Hillside Strangler case, the longest criminal trial in...

The Hillside Strangler case, the longest criminal trial in U.S. history, concluded with Angelo Buono Jr. sentenced to life in prison and his confessed...
www.upi.com www.upi.com

The Parkland High School murderer (who confessed last year to the murders) just today learned the jury recommendation for his sentence - life in prison. The jury has been hearing evidence all summer long to help determine his sentence.

A trial for a killer who helped murder 8 people at 4 different crime scenes with 3 other accomplices would normally take a few months. That's just how our justice system works, especially when the defendant is facing the death penalty. The court and attorneys are required to present very detailed cases.
 
dgfred said:
I hope they don't have a problem with time. From the beginning each trial will/would be long and complicated.
They are not waiting for one specific thing (JW audio) IMO. We may be... but not them IMO.
Click to expand...
For me, if I was a juror, I would have no problem giving my time. My problem would come from the feeling that my time was being wasted.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 127 more.
Total: 318 (members: 128, guests: 190)

Online statistics

Members online
128
Guests online
190
Total visitors
318
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
608,642
Messages
18,242,906
Members
234,402
Latest member
MandieMac
Back
Top