Wasn't it JW who changed his story about "when" he picked up Sophie? First it was a week before and next it was that night. IMO, from everything I've read about the W's, they seem like people that wouldn't want to get their own hands dirty. So could they have supplied the guns and ammo and a vehicle for the murders? I agree with the statements about JM and BJM. There's been something fishy about them and LM being there that morning from the beginning. And didn't I read somewhere that LM was seen going through some junk in CRsr's yard the next day after the murders or soon thereafter? I do think that the W's were questioned many times before they left for there "dream home" in Alaska. Weren't they still making improvements to their place in June? A barn I think. Why did JW need all that money for an attorney to get custody of SW if he was the father? (had go fund me page) Wasn't he already on her birth certificate?
As for the autopsies, why did it say that KR2 and Tony does not want the public to know what is in them? That's the first I've actually seen that in print (I think). And IMO, if that was my family I would want anything and everything done to find out who murdered my family. So, are they just scared, do they really believe that, or has LE told them enough about evidence or supposed suspects to keep them quiet? Do I believe the W's actually killed the victims, no, but I believe they were involved in some way. Just like I believe some Manley's may be involved. And to me, anyone involved in any way is just as guilty as the ones who pulled the triggers. I also believe others were involved.
Did anyone notice that in one of the articles it was written:
"Details such as how many times the victims were shot and weather anyone injested alcohol, drugs or other poisons were removed from the provided records" statement? Kind of an odd thing to include?
BBM
Changing pick up time. You are correct amauet1
HMR and JW shared custody of S, who was supposed to be with her mom that fateful Friday evening, he said. But JW picked her up a day earlier than normal: "I reckon we missed it by just hours." (7/29/2016)
https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2016/07/29/rhoden-case-hate-seeing-my-daughter-cry/87645382/
From my own post in Thread 29, post #9:
He picked her up that night at 10:30, a day early.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime...lls/ar-AAj4KpB (This link no longer works.)
However, it can be found below, in an October 15, 2015 article, that states: "
Correction: An earlier version of this article incorrectly reported when HMR's daughter went to stay with her father, JW. HMR dropped her daughter off on Friday, April 15, 2016."
https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2016/10/15/pike-county-death-foothills/91496698/
Then, June 8, 2017:
AW, and JW, sent a combined email to the Cincinnati, and JW's part re: S's pick up and drop off, is stated as:
"However the week before the killings, Rhoden dropped Sophia off on Friday, April 15, Wagner said. He was to return the towheaded toddler to her mom the following Friday, which was April 22 the day the bodies were discovered."
(Emails are convenient because you get to state what you want, no interruptions, and can blow off any questions very easily. It is a very one sided form of communication.)
Something else that I found interesting in the June 8 email to the Cincinnati:
AW:
""What has happened to us in the last few weeks has been devastating and will follow us for the rest of our lives,''
I've always found her choice of words a bit odd. Devastating to little S's family, yes, and it will be difficult having to tell her about what happened, to her maternal family, in the future, very difficult. But devastating to AW, and family? Not seeing it. Maybe I'm just nitpicking.
Published 4:36 p.m. ET June 8, 2017 | Updated 11:35 a.m. ET June 26, 2017
https://www.cincinnati.com/story/ne...family-targeted-police-raids-talks/377988001/
JW may have needed monies for seeking custody, if they'd never performed a dna test, to determine, legally, that S was his child. Having your name on a birth cert, if you are unmarried, is not enough these days. There is a form that one can fill out, right after the infant is born, at the hospital, but I'd say that many folks don't think to do that. When my grandchild's father died, there was already legal docs proving paternity. However, he and his new s/o had just had a newborn, when he passed. They'd not had paternity established, legally, as the baby was only a few days old. The mother thought that him being on the birth cert was enough. It wasn't. She did not know this, until after the father had been cremated. She had to get dna from both of his bio parents, and my grandchild, in order to legally establish paternity so her child would also be eligible for any monies through the father.
I can't put my hands on it, right now, but I think I remember TR and KR2 mentioning in separate articles that they were okay with the autopsies not being revealed. Personally, it would depend upon what was in the autopsies as to whether I would be okay with them being released. I see them as a final medical document, and, unless it would specifically assist the investigation, I'd likely want them private too.
Hope this isn't too scrambled to make sense.