- Joined
- Oct 31, 2008
- Messages
- 23,349
- Reaction score
- 124,591
Hi, Betty P. I was under the impression that the Ohio Supreme Court ruled against Dewine. Do you have a link to that ruling? I remember after the ruling, media reviewed what I thought were the autopsies in the Rhoden case. But I might be mistaken. TIA for helping me clear up my confusion.
Slight correction, they ruled in DeWine's favor. The lawsuits concerned the ability of news media to continue to have access to view unredacted final autopsy reports. That ruling against the newspapers still stands.
Public Docket
Public Docket
At the time of the Wagner arrests, the court was asked whether the ruling also applied to unredacted preliminary autopsy reports. The court ruled in favor of allowing the news media to view the preliminary ARs. Assume DeWine did this when they were ready to arrest the Wagners to make it easier for the public to understand how the murders happened. Most news reporters didn't make the distinction between the two types of reports at the time. Here's one newspaper that did get it right
Ohio Supreme Court allows newspapers to review Rhoden family preliminary autopsy reports
As of today, unredacted final autopsy reports can't legally be released to the news media. Hope this clears things up. That can probably change easily, considering DeWine's son serves on the Ohio Supreme Court and it operates differently than the US Supreme Court.