OH - Pike County: 8 people from one family dead as police hunt for killer(s) - #28

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
rsd1200 said:
I'm not in the lawyerin bizness but I think that ya'll are correct about that leaning toward RICO. If so, it could be something like blackmail/bribery, laundering money, or obstruction of justice. Obstruction of justice can also be blackmail and bribery, but toss in murder, threatening to burn your granny's house down if you don't do something your told to, etc...only it's against witnesses, LE, people working in positions of the law, etc...
Click to expand...

It also looks like there's a pretty stiff penalty for convictions under this statue, so it could have also been a way to add extra pressure to get people to talk, to cooperate with LE. Not sure.
 
Betty P said:
That may be just speculation at this point. People here are trying to brainstorm what could have caused some last minute problem that set off a violent conflict resulting in the deaths of the Rhoden family. It's based on many recent FB posts and other activity by families just prior to the murders.

Speculation has also considered that Dana R and Chris Sr had purchased Dana's new home as a way to keep the W family from pursuing permanent custody of SR. Getting a new place where mom and kids had their own rooms, nice environment, etc. DR had been posting photos on her FB account getting the place fixed up, looking nice. Some are guessing that W's were going to make a custody case by saying the previous home was not a good environment.
Click to expand...

Gotcha....thanks. I was just wondering if it was a known fact that the W's were going after custody.
 
Agent.99 said:
I'm not sure this will work but ...it doesn't give a name, only an address. The name came up after I googled the address.

http://www.pikecountycourt.org/cgi-bin/mdocket.cgi?pre=CRA&num=1700559&sub=A&type=CR
Click to expand...

I've visited that site numerous times but completely overlooked that. Thanks again! Interesting connection indeed, tho not too surprising. This person is related to AM by marriage. Looks like they left hubs in there tho. Hmmmm


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Betty P said:
It also looks like there's a pretty stiff penalty for convictions under this statue, so it could have also been a way to add extra pressure to get people to talk, to cooperate with LE. Not sure.
Click to expand...

Those charges could be dropped after they get info they ask for, too. The LE in that area run things quite differently...
 
It funny they left the hubby in. I think he is the one that is actually AMs half nephew
 
Jleeryan99 said:
It funny they left the hubby in. I think he is the one that is actually AMs half nephew
Click to expand...

For both of them it would have been $33k. The Cs are a couple / married. I've seen it happen, that if both go in, the male will stay, and the female gets bonded out if there's only enough cash for one. Especially if there are kids. It's not a legal rule. It's like a "couples" rule. May not be the case here, but, any time he serves now, will go toward time he'll get from this mess he's in now, and he probably knows that he's going back, so unless they round up more cash, just man-up, and let her out.
 
JK204 I think it was you who recommended the movie, Shimmer Lake? Just finished it up. Enjoyed!
 
jk204 said:
When we find out who did it, is it going to be the same? Just kidding of course
Click to expand...

At this point? I don't think I'd be surprised by much of anything. Sheesh! It did make one wonder...
 
Dudly said:
http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2923.32 Collecting illegal debt. Those are some large bail numbers....

(1) No person employed by, or associated with, any enterprise shall conduct or participate in, directly or indirectly, the affairs of the enterprise through a pattern of corrupt activity or the collection of an unlawful debt.
(2) No person, through a pattern of corrupt activity or the collection of an unlawful debt, shall acquire or maintain, directly or indirectly, any interest in, or control of, any enterprise or real property.
(3) No person, who knowingly has received any proceeds derived, directly or indirectly, from a pattern of corrupt activity or the collection of any unlawful debt, shall use or invest, directly or indirectly, any part of those proceeds, or any proceeds derived from the use or investment of any of those proceeds, in the acquisition of any title to, or any right, interest, or equity in, real property or in the establishment or operation of any enterprise.
Click to expand...

What is "illegal debt"?
Like gambling?

I also noticed a few evidence tampering and obstruction of justice charges listed on there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
It was reported in MSM Brad Conklin of Kenai saw them. What do we know? Really.

He must be a very friendly guy.
 
Betty P said:
From what I've read, they can't do that easily. IIRC from the link, it's subject to a judge's ruling. If the judge thinks they should answer, they have to answer. No defense lawyers present. GJ is very different from a trial, which may or may not come later.

Some of my memory on this is based on GJ proceedings from other crimes discussed here at WS, including the investigation of the disappearance of Kyron Hormon.
Click to expand...


[h=4]b. You can choose to remain quiet out of a concern over self-incrimination. The Grand Jury can't violate your 5th amendment rights and force you to testify against yourself. So, in other words, you can plead the 5th before a Grand Jury. The way to do this is to give your name and then take the 5th, and literally say no more.[/h][h=4]c. If you do choose to talk even just a little, be careful, for an apparently innocuous fact may be considered "incriminating" if it provides a lead to other evidence or if it circumstancially corroborates other evidence already available to the Grand Jury.[/h][h=4]d. Another reason to be quiet up front is that once a line of questioning has begun and you have answered a few questions, you can't suddenly decide to stop answering. You can't choose to answer some questions and not others along a line of inquiry. Disclosure of any incriminating fact waives the privilege as to the details of those facts. (Unlike a consent search scenario)[/h][h=4]e. Suppose you plead the 5th, but the Grand Jury would really like to hear from you. They can in essence force testimony by granting you immunity. If you fail to testify now, once granted immunity, you could be held in contempt and jail[/h]
http://www.unl.edu/eskridge/grandjur211.htm
 
I was once called as a witness in front of a GJ. A few weeks prior the federal prosecutor showed up at my work place and interviewed me.First she offered my immunity if I cooperated, answered all of her questions and agreed to testify. I answered all of her questions truthfully that day. The GJ was far away from where I lived at the time, so I caught a ride with two others who were called to testify the same day. (we all had worked together at one point. The investigation was directed at my ex-employer) I had nothing to hide and fervently believed my ex-employer had done nothing illegal. The day of the proceedings she asked mostly the same questions I had already answered, except for one. That question was about my tax filings. It was a little cash job and I was young and dumb, it never even occurred to me to file taxes for it. She phrased the question with, "sitting beside me is Mr X from the IRS and he has agreed not to prosecute you as you are cooperating". I was floored.
The other two I drove there with, one took the 5th on the very first question (she had told us on the drive that was her intent, she didn't do anything illegal either, she was a little "backward", too) They then asked her if she intended to answer the same way to all of their questions, she answered affirmatively, then she was dismissed. The second person had intended to answer all of their questions, like me, he didn't believe he nor my ex-employer had broken any laws. He answered a bunch of questions and then they asked about his old gambling debt/winnings. He stopped there and said he was taking the 5th. He and the prosecutor were then called into the judges chambers to discuss the matter. He told the judge, when he spoke with the FP prior, he told them he would answer anything they liked about the employer as long as they didn't drag his past into it. The judge ruled, if that was what was agreed upon then so be it. He went back on the stand and finished answering all of their questions relating to the employer.
In the end, no charged were brought against my employer.
 
Agent.99 said:
I was once called as a witness in front of a GJ. A few weeks prior the federal prosecutor showed up at my work place and interviewed me.First she offered my immunity if I cooperated, answered all of her questions and agreed to testify. I answered all of her questions truthfully that day. The GJ was far away from where I lived at the time, so I caught a ride with two others who were called to testify the same day. (we all had worked together at one point. The investigation was directed at my ex-employer) I had nothing to hide and fervently believed my ex-employer had done nothing illegal. The day of the proceedings she asked mostly the same questions I had already answered, except for one. That question was about my tax filings. It was a little cash job and I was young and dumb, it never even occurred to me to file taxes for it. She phrased the question with, "sitting beside me is Mr X from the IRS and he has agreed not to prosecute you as you are cooperating". I was floored.
The other two I drove there with, one took the 5th on the very first question (she had told us on the drive that was her intent, she didn't do anything illegal either, she was a little "backward", too) They then asked her if she intended to answer the same way to all of their questions, she answered affirmatively, then she was dismissed. The second person had intended to answer all of their questions, like me, he didn't believe he nor my ex-employer had broken any laws. He answered a bunch of questions and then they asked about his old gambling debt/winnings. He stopped there and said he was taking the 5th. He and the prosecutor were then called into the judges chambers to discuss the matter. He told the judge, when he spoke with the FP prior, he told them he would answer anything they liked about the employer as long as they didn't drag his past into it. The judge ruled, if that was what was agreed upon then so be it. He went back on the stand and finished answering all of their questions relating to the employer.
In the end, no charged were brought against my employer.
Click to expand...

Thank you for sharing your personal experience as a witness with a GJ! Great information!!!! I'm no good at deciphering legal jargon so typically lean on our amazing attorneys here on WS to explain, but you answered all my questions in this post Agent99. [emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
rsd1200 said:
For both of them it would have been $33k. The Cs are a couple / married. I've seen it happen, that if both go in, the male will stay, and the female gets bonded out if there's only enough cash for one. Especially if there are kids. It's not a legal rule. It's like a "couples" rule. May not be the case here, but, any time he serves now, will go toward time he'll get from this mess he's in now, and he probably knows that he's going back, so unless they round up more cash, just man-up, and let her out.
Click to expand...

Agree 100% with the reasoning that if a couple it's usually the Mom that would be bailed out. A part of me wonders though if someone was concerned AC may be the easiest one to "break" and provide LE with information were she kept in?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 130 more.
Total: 1,856 (members: 131, guests: 1,725)

Online statistics

Members online
131
Guests online
1,725
Total visitors
1,856
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
602,559
Messages
18,142,548
Members
231,436
Latest member
Quantum-Dark
Back
Top