OH Pike County: 8 in Rhoden Family Murdered Over Custody Issue 4 Members Wagner Family Arrested#43

[Puzzles8]

Just a few questions for everyone. TIA 1) Did LE determine the physical location of the shatter operation and the people involved?

2) I am ignorant about shatter; what is it?

3) Lastly, concerning John Doe, I've read about cases where John Does have been endicted, but they were always living and to be named later. Does anyone remember a case in which an indicted John Doe was deceased at the time of indictment? TIA

2) Shatter appears to be a marijuana concentrated oil.
1) What shatter operation are you referring to?
MOO

 

[Cool Cats]

Just a few questions for everyone. TIA 1) Did LE determine the physical location of the shatter operation and the people involved?

2) I am ignorant about shatter; what is it?

3) Lastly, concerning John Doe, I've read about cases where John Does have been endicted, but they were always living and to be named later. Does anyone remember a case in which an indicted John Doe was deceased at the time of indictment? TIA

A John Doe indictment is basically indicting an unknown person's DNA sample so if you find the person (John Doe) later on, the statute of limitations won't have run out. It's about circumventing the statute of limitations.

But of course through the years some John D's would have passed away. Have any of these dead John D's been linked to their old DNA samples? Anything's possible.

 

[FrescaandSouthernComfort]

Very intriguing question. This case (below) seems to show that for a co-defendant to testify favorably for another co-defendant, they have to be severed from the case and have a separate trial.

Issue 1: Whether the trial court erred in denying Mr. Rollerson’s motion to sever his trial from Ms. Burns’s trial in order to be able to call her as a witness to testify he was not involved in the Elvans Road Incident?

Holding: Yes. While a trial court has discretion whether to grant a motion to sever, a court must grant such a motion if a defendant can show there will be “manifest prejudice” from being tried jointly. Under Jackson v. United States, 329 A.2d 782 (D.C. 1974), when a defendant wants to sever a trial from a co-defendant in order to have that person testify in his defense, the court should grant the motion if it has been established that the co-defendant is 1) likely to testify and 2) the testimony will be “substantially exculpatory.”
A Court Should Grant A Motion To Sever If A Co-Defendant Would Provide “Officially Exculpatory” Testimony
Exculpatory evidence
Exculpatory evidence is evidence favorable to the defendant in a criminal trial that exonerates or tends to exonerate the defendant of guilt. It is the opposite of inculpatory evidence, which tends to prove guilt.

WAGNER TRIALS
The Wagner's are not co-defendants ( I think but can't know for sure) because they are all having separate trials.
It's my understanding that any one of them could testify for the other. But we should get a Websleuth Attorney on here to see what they think about the Wags testifying FAVORABLY for each other at each other's trials.
......I'm not an attorney and am only giving my impressions and opinions.....

The problem of a witness giving the co defendant or anyone connected with the crime
is not the actual testimony, but the cross examination that the opposing attorney will
have with the witness.

 

[Cool Cats]

The problem of a witness giving the co defendant or anyone connected with the crime
is not the actual testimony, but the cross examination that the opposing attorney will
have with the witness.

Yes I was reading about that too. Say Angela testified in Jake's trial but didn't have her trial yet, the Prosecution Attorney could rip her to shreds and hurt her own case. I think this is what you mean.

 

[GoBuckeyes]

A John Doe indictment is basically indicting an unknown person's DNA sample so if you find the person (John Doe) later on, the statute of limitations won't have run out. It's about circumventing the statute of limitations.

But of course through the years some John D's would have passed away. Have any of these dead John D's been linked to their old DNA samples? Anything's possible.

If I'm following, it's not likely then that GII is the one the indictments refer to as "John Doe". Do you think it's a fifth person involved in the murders? Do you think they've already flipped them or that they have not yet been found? TIA

 

[IType]

Somewhere in the last thread there were a couple questions about the autopsy on CRsr, possibly about "mesh" and if he had recently had surgery. I'm not a doctor or nurse, but I do have 25+ years' experience as a medical transcriptionist.

In looking at the final autopsy redacted document, I don't see a reference to "mesh". On page 16 (which corresponds to page 5 of 8 of CRsr's individual autopsy), though, under the "serous cavities" heading it states, "Several blue surgical sutures are identified..." Surgical mesh and surgical sutures aren't the same thing, but the poster may not have known that. Mesh is used to reinforce tissue before the sutures are put in to close an opening—like in a hernia operation.

At the end of the same paragraph it also states, "The intestines...are not oriented normally." This was also questioned in the last thread. It is my opinion that the blue sutures and the intestines not oriented normally are explained by info on the following page (page 17). Under the gastrointestinal tract heading it states, "The appendix is not identified."

My opinion is that there is no mesh involved (possibly confused with the "blue sutures"??). I believe the intestines not being oriented properly are because they were moved out of the way in order to perform an appendectomy at some point. This might have been recent--but also could have been anytime in the past, even many years. My opinion is that the "blue suture material" was used to tie off the appendiceal stump when the appendix was removed. It is colored blue so that it is more easily visible in the abdominal cavity, because this type of suture is not "dissolvable" and is not removed at a later point like sutures in the skin commonly are—it is left in place permanently.

If you G***** the phrase "blue suture material", the first thing you'll see is info on a product called P*****e (not sure I can give the trade name here) that is commonly dyed blue and is used in abdominal surgeries.

Just my opinion, of course. Sorry this is so long. I also have an opinion about the question from the last thread about HMR's autopsy report but will post that another time since this is so long.

 

[Cool Cats]

If I'm following, it's not likely then that GII is the one the indictments refer to as "John Doe". Do you think it's a fifth person involved in the murders? Do you think they've already flipped them or that they have not yet been found? TIA

Good questions. One theory I have (only theories) is that there were a lot of people in and out of the Rhoden homes and thus, there was a lot of DNA extracted from the homes, even from Kenny's camper.

I have no doubt that they did everything they could to match the DNA to known visitors of the Rhodens. The mother of Frankie's son Brently said that she submitted a DNA sample and said it was routine in such cases.

Since they took DNA from her you can bet they took it from many other family members and maybe even friends, but family for sure.

My point is that I think they have DNA that they have not found a match for, and thus the DNA gets put on the indictment as a John Doe (they already know it's male DNA).

If someday they find a DNA match through their data base, they can investigate that person (John Doe). If they want to charge the John Doe they won't have the statute of limitations standing in the way because John Doe's DNA ...ie...John Doe, was already indicted.

 

[GoBuckeyes]

2) Shatter appears to be a marijuana concentrated oil.
1) What shatter operation are you referring to?
MOO

Oh, sorry, the shatter operation that is mentioned in news articles and interviews that occurred approximately 1 month, iirc, before the Rhoden murders. NOT implying that they are related in any way. I was just curious as to who was arrested.

 

[GoBuckeyes]

Good questions. One theory I have (only theories) is that there were a lot of people in and out of the Rhoden homes and thus, there was a lot of DNA extracted from the homes, even from Kenny's camper.

I have no doubt that they did everything they could to match the DNA to known visitors of the Rhodens. The mother of Frankie's son Brently said that she submitted a DNA sample and said it was routine in such cases.

Since they took DNA from her you can bet they took it from many other family members and maybe even friends, but family for sure.

My point is that I think they have DNA that they have not found a match for, and thus the DNA gets put on the indictment as a John Doe (they already know it's male DNA).

If someday they find a DNA match through their data base, they can investigate that person (John Doe). If they want to charge the John Doe they won't have the statute of limitations standing in the way because John Doe's DNA ...ie...John Doe, was already indicted.

I follow you 100% up until the statute of limitations. In Ohio, there is no statute of limitations on murder. But I can see where they could have found unknown DNA at the crime scenes.

 

[Loomis124]

Thankx. You just cleared something else up. GW4 didn't come back from Alaska because of custody, because he wasn't even served until he got back.

So twice you've done my research for me!...Lol....

Cool Cats, please refer to the court entries for dates. IDK if GW was in Alaska or not (after his family left). He very well could have been, and only came back after the notice of hearing went out on 10/5. He would have had to come by air to have arrived by the 7th. But yes, he could have come back for custody issues. TY hope this makes sense!

10/11/2018

• CERTIFIED MAIL # 9414 8149 0234 3537 0039 41 SERVED TO
  WAGNER, GEORGE

• POSTAGE CHARGED

10/09/2018

• COPY OF MOTION FOR CHANGE OF VISITATION RIGHTS AND UCCJEA
  AFFIDAVIT MAILED TO GEORGE WAGNER, IV BY CERTIFIED MAIL.

• CERTIFIED MAIL ISSUED TO WAGNER, GEORGE
  CERTIFIED MAIL # 9414 8149 0234 3537 0039 41

10/05/2018

• HEARING: 10/29/2018 AT 11:00 AM - MOTION

• ASSIGNMENT NOTICE SENT
  S ANDREW STURGILL AND GEORGE WAGNER

09/28/2018

• DEPOSIT - RECEIPT NO. 2181758 IN THE AMOUNT OF $ 100.00

09/27/2018

• MOTION FOR CHANGE OF VISITATION RIGHTS, REQUEST FOR SERVICE
  FILED. (FILED BY S. ANDREW STURGILL, ATTY FOR DEFENDANT)

• PARENTING PROCEEDING AFFIDAVIT, REQUEST FOR SERVICE FILED.
  (FILED BY S. ANDREW STURGILL, ATTY FOR DEFENDANT)

 

[Cool Cats]

I follow you 100% up until the statute of limitations. In Ohio, there is no statute of limitations on murder. But I can see where they could have found unknown DNA at the crime scenes.

Right but the statute of limitations applies to other crimes. What if John Doe was charged with evidence tampering or robbery or obstruction etc...with or without murder charges? The John Doe indictment can then cover crimes that DO have a statute of limitations.

The Wag 4 and even the grandma's are charged with other crimes besides murder.

 

[IQuestion]

Somewhere in the last thread there were a couple questions about the autopsy on CRsr, possibly about "mesh" and if he had recently had surgery. I'm not a doctor or nurse, but I do have 25+ years' experience as a medical transcriptionist.

In looking at the final autopsy redacted document, I don't see a reference to "mesh". On page 16 (which corresponds to page 5 of 8 of CRsr's individual autopsy), though, under the "serous cavities" heading it states, "Several blue surgical sutures are identified..." Surgical mesh and surgical sutures aren't the same thing, but the poster may not have known that. Mesh is used to reinforce tissue before the sutures are put in to close an opening—like in a hernia operation.

At the end of the same paragraph it also states, "The intestines...are not oriented normally." This was also questioned in the last thread. It is my opinion that the blue sutures and the intestines not oriented normally are explained by info on the following page (page 17). Under the gastrointestinal tract heading it states, "The appendix is not identified."

My opinion is that there is no mesh involved (possibly confused with the "blue sutures"??). I believe the intestines not being oriented properly are because they were moved out of the way in order to perform an appendectomy at some point. This might have been recent--but also could have been anytime in the past, even many years. My opinion is that the "blue suture material" was used to tie off the appendiceal stump when the appendix was removed. It is colored blue so that it is more easilyof visible in the abdominal cavity, because this type of suture is not "dissolvable" and is not removed at a later point like sutures in the skin commonly are—it is left in place permanently.

If you G***** the phrase "blue suture material", the first thing you'll see is info on a product called P*****e (not sure I can give the trade name here) that is commonly dyed blue and is used in abdominal surgeries.

Just my opinion, of course. Sorry this is so long. I also have an opinion about the question from the last thread about HMR's autopsy report but will post that another time since this is so long.

HEY ITYPE....If you have done medical transcription....you are a better source than me!! You are correct, it says "blue suture material" not "blue material." "Material" not fabric or mesh. And "suture" like thread..... Coach, I think I get it now!
You have brought up a really good point about transcription....is it word for word? Isn't there an "audio and video" to go along with each autopsy of an untimely death? Are you allowed to view the autopsy video...and what do you do if you can not/did not hear the word or note the coroner made a mistake in their description? For instance, lateral vs medial or distal vs proximal. Does anything else stand out in the autopsy, to you? Thank you in advance. IQ

 

[Sleuthinsleuther]

Oh, sorry, the shatter operation that is mentioned in news articles and interviews that occurred approximately 1 month, iirc, before the Rhoden murders. NOT implying that they are related in any way. I was just curious as to who was arrested.

Pike prosecutor dropping 'shatter lab' charges

MICHAEL THRONE | EDITOR | 9:07 pm EDT June 20, 2016

WAVERLY - The Pike County prosecutor says charges against two men related to the discovery of an alleged "shatter lab" in January will be dropped.


But that doesn't mean Derek G. Boyer, of Piketon, and Aaron Higgins, of Beaver, are off the hook.

Prosecutor Rob Junk said dropping the four felonies against each man will give investigators more time to process the evidence collected during a Jan. 26 search warrant that resulted in last week's arrest.

Boyer and Higgins, both 26, were charged June 15 with one count each of illegal manufacture of drugs or cultivation of marijuana, illegal assembly or possession of chemicals for the manufacture of drugs, possession of criminal tools and possession of drugs.

 

[Cool Cats]

Cool Cats, please refer to the court entries for dates. IDK if GW was in Alaska or not (after his family left). He very well could have been, and only came back after the notice of hearing went out on 10/5. He would have had to come by air to have arrived by the 7th. But yes, he could have come back for custody issues. TY hope this makes sense!

10/11/2018

• CERTIFIED MAIL # 9414 8149 0234 3537 0039 41 SERVED TO
  WAGNER, GEORGE

• POSTAGE CHARGED

10/09/2018

• COPY OF MOTION FOR CHANGE OF VISITATION RIGHTS AND UCCJEA
  AFFIDAVIT MAILED TO GEORGE WAGNER, IV BY CERTIFIED MAIL.

• CERTIFIED MAIL ISSUED TO WAGNER, GEORGE
  CERTIFIED MAIL # 9414 8149 0234 3537 0039 41

10/05/2018

• HEARING: 10/29/2018 AT 11:00 AM - MOTION

• ASSIGNMENT NOTICE SENT
  S ANDREW STURGILL AND GEORGE WAGNER

09/28/2018

• DEPOSIT - RECEIPT NO. 2181758 IN THE AMOUNT OF $ 100.00

09/27/2018

• MOTION FOR CHANGE OF VISITATION RIGHTS, REQUEST FOR SERVICE
  FILED. (FILED BY S. ANDREW STURGILL, ATTY FOR DEFENDANT)

• PARENTING PROCEEDING AFFIDAVIT, REQUEST FOR SERVICE FILED.
  (FILED BY S. ANDREW STURGILL, ATTY FOR DEFENDANT)

Thankx. We've been discussing this and it's better to have the facts posted. You remind me how important it is to do so! Thankx for delving into this!

The good news is GW4 was easily arrested as opposed to being arrested in Alaska---not a big deal but still more convenient. And the amended custody petition was discharged, good news because I hope that means that TB gets to see her son all she wants. (We don't know if she has custody now. Anyway, where the 2 children are residing now should rightfully remain private.)

 

[Loomis124]

The problem of a witness giving the co defendant or anyone connected with the crime
is not the actual testimony, but the cross examination that the opposing attorney will
have with the witness.

I'm sorry Fresca, but would you please say again? Lol. I'm totally lost. TY!

 

[GoBuckeyes]

Right but the statute of limitations applies to other crimes. What if John Doe was charged with evidence tampering or robbery or obstruction etc...with or without murder charges? The John Doe indictment can then cover crimes that DO have a statute of limitations.

The Wag 4 and even the grandma's are charged with other crimes besides murder.

Ahh, very true!

 

[GoBuckeyes]

Thankx. We've been discussing this and it's better to have the facts posted. You remind me how important it is to do so! Thankx for delving into this!

The good news is GW4 was easily arrested as opposed to being arrested in Alaska---not a big deal but still more convenient. And the amended custody petition was discharged, good news because I hope that means that TB gets to see her son all she wants. (We don't know if she has custody now. Anyway, where the 2 children are residing now should rightfully remain private.)

Any thoughts on why G4 may have stayed behind in Alaska?

 

[pepper 34]

Putting out the timeline to include all known events is very very helpful. Thank you for this.

My thoughts on this scenario. Pure supposition. Pls delete if improper.

I don’t believe GW4 purposely told LE anything. But I do think he gave the info away.

If finding of silencer parts
(if found in a well on property previously owned by JW on Peterson Road)
happened to coincide with GW4 return to Ohio, perhaps GW4 was being closely observed or monitored ( through *various methods) by LE during that return to Ohio. Perhaps GW4 made a casual trip over to Peterson Road to stroll through the property to see if the well had been discovered or disturbed. Thus giving away the location.

*Speculating on the various methods, did he drive? Maybe GPS on Vehicle - its been done before.
Drone observation
Cameras on Peterson Road property
Follow pings of GW4 cell phone
Old fashioned basic following GW4 by a few LE
Add to this list if you think it’s possible he was observed in some way

I can’t believe LE did not seize upon a chance to keep a member of the Wagner Family under laser focus, close observation upon a return to the area. I also can’t believe GE4 would be able to resist the urge to check the location of the most valuable piece of evidence to ease his guilty mind.

On this line of thinking I'd like to add a possible, jmo, reason why the silencer part was found on the farm where the W's used to live as opposed to using any infinite number of permanent places or ways to dispose of the item where it would never be found. ... because the killer didn't want to dispose of it forever... he wanted to keep the silencer part as a remembrance of his exciting night of killing the R's. Jmo.... but it only tells me that someone had a wonderful and exhilarating time that night and, so much so, he couldn't follow through on the plan to get rid of all the evidence as planned. A bad emotional decision imo. He made it by hand... he tested it... he used it... it would be easy to fix... he wanted to keep it. ALL Jmo. The W's owned a lot of land and there's no way to know how easy or hard that well is to find. I'm guessing it fits the description; "If you didn't know where it was, you'd never find it." It could have been sealed up and covered long ago.
Entire comment is speculation.

 

[Betty P]

Cool Cats, please refer to the court entries for dates. IDK if GW was in Alaska or not (after his family left). He very well could have been, and only came back after the notice of hearing went out on 10/5. He would have had to come by air to have arrived by the 7th. But yes, he could have come back for custody issues. TY hope this makes sense!

10/11/2018

• CERTIFIED MAIL # 9414 8149 0234 3537 0039 41 SERVED TO
  WAGNER, GEORGE

• POSTAGE CHARGED

10/09/2018

• COPY OF MOTION FOR CHANGE OF VISITATION RIGHTS AND UCCJEA
  AFFIDAVIT MAILED TO GEORGE WAGNER, IV BY CERTIFIED MAIL.

• CERTIFIED MAIL ISSUED TO WAGNER, GEORGE
  CERTIFIED MAIL # 9414 8149 0234 3537 0039 41

10/05/2018

• HEARING: 10/29/2018 AT 11:00 AM - MOTION

• ASSIGNMENT NOTICE SENT
  S ANDREW STURGILL AND GEORGE WAGNER

09/28/2018

• DEPOSIT - RECEIPT NO. 2181758 IN THE AMOUNT OF $ 100.00

09/27/2018

• MOTION FOR CHANGE OF VISITATION RIGHTS, REQUEST FOR SERVICE
  FILED. (FILED BY S. ANDREW STURGILL, ATTY FOR DEFENDANT)

• PARENTING PROCEEDING AFFIDAVIT, REQUEST FOR SERVICE FILED.
  (FILED BY S. ANDREW STURGILL, ATTY FOR DEFENDANT)

Good work! Make sure to include your link. Assume this is from the Pike County Courts database?

 

[Cool Cats]

Delete got date wrong.....