OH - Pike Co - 8 in Rhoden Family Murdered Over Custody Issue - 4 Members Wagner Family Arrested #80

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Pru2U said:
I thought all 4 were charged with the exact same charges when they were arrested. At that time, they didn’t know who was present for the murders so they all got charged. MOO

The only one that should have changed would be AW’s AFTER her plea deal. I can’t remember how Jake’s changed with his plea. I know they dropped some things (but I think it had to do with restitution?)
Click to expand...

Jake pled guilty to all 23 Counts.
 
Since it has finally come out in this trial and is in Jake's proffer, and if true, anyone care to guess the reason why GW was protecting Jake from BW? What was going to happen to Jake?
 
joe jones said:
I understand the charges and the elements of all charges state has to prove, but the state has to prove that BW and GW went out that night and did visit the crime scenes and did either kill the victims or assist in killing the victims

one can remove oneself from a conspiracy by not going ahead with the planned events one conspired to do, so if BW or GW did conspire but backed out and only JW went on to commit the murders then in some instances defendants can be considered to have withdrawn from conspiracy, I think you have to do positive acts to have been considered to have withdrawn, not sure if the defense is going to argue this, they have only just started cross so they may continue with the GW wasn't there, or GW went to protect JW, or a myriad of other theories
Click to expand...
In one of the pre trial hearings they said that George had "No intent" of ever killing anyone.

JMO
 
justtrish said:
I was under the impression that they state could not play GW's because it would be as if they were forcing him to testify and he can choose not to take the stand. If they played his tape and he didn't take the stand, then he was not able to defend himself about what was on the tape. AW's interview was played because it showed she lied about the shoes and that furthered their investigation. The defense wanted to play JW's simply to discredit him before he took the stand and the argument then was the defense could cross examine JW when he was on the stand about lies he may have told.
Click to expand...
the state always wants to play the accused interview with LE, it shows the jury they have lied, GW has no say in what the state chooses to show the jury about him, defense attorneys are normally always arguing to keep interviews with LE from the jury,
 
RAISINISBACK said:
I am thinking more and more of what JW is selling stinks to high heaven

I am absolutely smelling what Jake is stepping in. 800 miles away.

if GW is not guilty then why would he even take a plea deal, it is only the word of JW that places GW and BW at any of the crime scenes,

There is no way I would plead guilty to something I did not do.

hung up on shoe print evidence no matter how expert the expert says he is, a half size difference in shoe size would not sway me into convicting GW if all the state has is shoe prints and JW

Doesn't anyone wonder why AC has showed that burned DVR numerous times when she stated in her opening that she knows it has nothing to do with the murders? Or why she trotted out hours of testimony about guns she knew were not the murder weapons? Or why the hours of testimony on casings she knew did not match the caliber guns used at the crime scenes.

That is the same thing with that shoe print. She keeps those shoes or shoe sitting in front of the witness stand. Why? Maybe because the expert in his report could not say what size the bloody print was?

Or could it be because as you said:

another thing of note according to JW it was raining and storming when he got to DR, but all 3 W went into DR home and nobody left any mud behind, but we have according to state a shoeprint in blood in the home, how did that blood stay on anybody's shoe, by the time they got to DR house they had walked back and forth to FR home, they had been in and out of vehicles, yet this one foot had blood on it still,

The only thing I have to say is I have seen NO evidence George was in on the planning, at the scenes, or covered up anything. And what about those damning statements from the semi that both Jake and Canepa admits George knew was being recorded? Did George admit he killed anyone on them? Because him getting angry about the pressure BCI was putting on him doesn't fly with me. Anyone would get angry if they were innocent and law enforcement kept following them around, going to their employer, bugging their vehicles and house. To me that is harassment. So yes I can understand why George blew up and vented his frustrations. I think those "damning statements" by George are going to fall as flat as those phone calls Canepa played in court when Parker said in front of the jury that George was upset because he was afraid the guy they sold the house to would sue him because BCI was tearing up everything.

Maybe Jake and Canepa needs to stay out of the cow pasture since what they are both stepping in stinks to high heaven.

Give me some solid evidence George even knew anything about what was going on or get this clown show over with. I hope the jury sees what AC is doing.

JMO
Click to expand...

No. George never admitted on the hidden BCI tapes that he participated in the murders according to Scheiderer at George's Bond Hearing. Canepa was very clear they did not catch George confessing on those secretly recorded BCI tapes.

But if there is this so called damning information from things George said in his bugged truck, I hope we can, the jury can, hear it.

Common practice is that recordings are played for the jury with transcripts to go along for the jury to read.
 
joe jones said:
the state always wants to play the accused interview with LE, it shows the jury they have lied, GW has no say in what the state chooses to show the jury about him, defense attorneys are normally always arguing to keep interviews with LE from the jury,
Click to expand...
I really might be mistaken, but I think this was different because it involves a conspiracy where multiple people will be tried for the same crimes as being why they couldn't play George's. I tried to follow the arguments for each when they had the hearing to talk about playing it or not playing it and this was my understanding, but again I could be wrong.
 
joe jones said:
JW confession should have matched the evidence from the crimes, the state should not tailor his confession to align with the evidence they collected, or how they found the victims,

In this trial I admit the state have gone so far out of their way to bolster the confession of JW it is damning IMO, they have protected him at every turn so the jury do not get to see the constant lies he told to LE, the jury have not been allowed to hear JW interview at the border, the state has not entered into evidence any of the times JW was interviewed lest the jury see what a cunning liar he is,

and then the man who admits to 5 murders 8 if you are GW defense team was allowed to tell the jury that God spoke to him and told him to confess, and he is so regretful and sorry for what he has done,

I think he is enjoying testifying, especially as he knows there will be no recording,
Click to expand...
was allowed to tell the jury that God spoke to him and told him to confess, and he is so regretful and sorry for what he has done,

While laughing and belching all the way.

Keep your chin up @joe jones you can bet the jury saw that laughing and belching while he told how he killed his one true love while she was breastfeeding her 4 day old infant. It has been said that woman make up most of the jury. What do you think they thought about that? I know what I think about it.

there will be no recording,
There are 2 news cameras in that courtroom. With todays technology you can bet the farm one of them is recording both video and audio but not broadcasting out to the public. It is just a small matter of unplugging the wifi cable. Once this trial is over and out of Deerings courtroom there is nothing stopping the news stations from plastering it all over their channels and the internet. Deering has no power over what they do with film footage after the trial is over.

JMO
 
justtrish said:
I was under the impression that they state could not play GW's because it would be as if they were forcing him to testify and he can choose not to take the stand. If they played his tape and he didn't take the stand, then he was not able to defend himself about what was on the tape. AW's interview was played because it showed she lied about the shoes and that furthered their investigation. The defense wanted to play JW's simply to discredit him before he took the stand and the argument then was the defense could cross examine JW when he was on the stand about lies he may have told.
Click to expand...

Tapes are played all the time in court of a defendant saying incriminating things but the defendant doesn't have to take the stand to explain what he said.

John Gotti said things on hidden LE tapes that got him convicted, he never took the stand to explain it.
 
dgfred said:
Hmmm. Maybe saw the light from the phone from under the door? Do y'all think he didn't do or did do something else?

3 weapons used at CRs... maybe 3 people? Seems right.

After murders 2 boys maybe feeling bad/sad/guilty/etc about the murders and one Seal Team 7 team member not so much. Mom wishing she had not put that on the 'boy' with maybe her and hubby doing alone. Sounds like she didn't but would have been more than willing to. Probably didn't 'trust' the boys with the grandbabies anyway.
Click to expand...
Did you ever wonder why Jake said mom and dad asked him if he wanted to talk about what happened?

If George was at the scene why didn't mom and dad ask him if he wanted to talk about it?

Then dad asks Jake if he regrets what happened?

If George was at the scene why doesn't dad ask George if he regrets what happened?

Something to think about.

JMO
 
Pru2U said:
All interesting arguments.

Does George have an alibi for that night?
Click to expand...
GW does not have to prove or disprove anything, the onus is on the state to provide enough evidence to get to BARD so that a jury can convict him, if the state doesn't get to BARD then he is acquitted,

no defendant has to provide a defense, they do so because they are trying to show the state cannot prove its case,

but if GW and his attorneys sat at the table and never said a word the onus would still be on the state,
 
SuziQ said:
Since it has finally come out in this trial and is in Jake's proffer, and if true, anyone care to guess the reason why GW was protecting Jake from BW? What was going to happen to Jake?
Click to expand...
My opinion only...

I think BW is just plain crazy. Why would he kill his best friend, CRsr. Seems to me he would kill anyone, even his own son.

I listened to that audio investigators did with BW. In my opinion, he has no morals.

It will be interesting to see what AW has to say about the family dynamic.
 
pittsburghgirl said:
Another way of saying this is when you take a confession, you see if it fits the evidence--"make sure it fits the evidence"--before accepting the confession. That is, it would be stupid to put credence into a confession that made no sense.

The only thing I'm convinced of is if there are 3 guns, I'm thinking 3 shooters. And I can't see Jake doing a home invasion alone and killing 8 people. Billy and G4 were there and therefore guilty based on the charges.
Click to expand...
That is, it would be stupid to put credence into a confession that made no sense.
Then why is anyone putting credence into jakes confession that changes from minute to minute?

Billy and G4 were there
We do not know who was there, but we do know who was not there. Any of us.

JMO
 
RAISINISBACK said:
What about the two stories he told, one on direct and the other on cross while laughing and belching his way through it?

JMO
Click to expand...

It's the defense attorney's job to ruffle feathers. It would be very helpful to hear what is said and the questions that are asked, but we are left with what reporters tweet. I am not saying he didn't tell 2 different versions, but again defense is trying to trip him up. If he misspoke or if he just plain told 2 different versions, then on re direct she can attempt to clarify and clear it up.

If he lied then he has no deal. I don't know why he would sit in court and knowingly lie when his deal hinges on him testifying. If anything to me him lying is an attempt to get his brother off the hook totally. He certainly isn't trying to save himself by lying. He has also said he wished his brother could go home and his brother was against the plan. If he's playing a game it's not one that is pinning it on George so it isn't really making George look good if we can't believe anything Jake says. If anything it might make the jury think Jake is lying to protect George by minimizing his role.
 
LMDlong said:
I can see JW not wanting in published on the internet so that when SW is older she won’t be able to pull it up and see him say what he did to her family . IMO
Click to expand...
She'll still be able to pull up parts or all of it. Things like this don't stay under wraps. IMO I would hope that he'd be honest with her if she ever asks, or that he'd want her to know the truth. Reading the transcripts will be kinder to his memory than reading all of the speculation done on WS and other sites. However twisted JW may be, he states that concern for his daughter was his driving motivation. I think his words should be what she has to turn to if and when she looks for answers, not the opinions of strangers. AMOO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 142 more.
Total: 2,208 (members: 143, guests: 2,065)

Online statistics

Members online
143
Guests online
2,065
Total visitors
2,208
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
600,645
Messages
18,111,503
Members
230,992
Latest member
Clue Keeper
Back
Top