OH - Pike Co - 8 in Rhoden Family Murdered - 4 Wagner Family Members Arrested #89

[joe jones]

I'm not sure I believe the judge when he says he was brought in to take care of "problem" plea agreements. They were fine. Nothing wrong with them. Judge Hein will need to provide some evidence that it was his "mandate" to destroy the agreements and give the killers reduced sentences while not requiring they testify.

The state should have sentenced them when they knew the agreements would have been accepted, having researched this judge and his preference for lighter sentences, for rehabilitation alongside punishment he was selected with everybody knowing his opinions, so the Judicial circuit knew he would be changing agreements, and it is obvious he was legally entitled to sentence as he saw fit
AC twice tried to get him recused and failed, they are waiting to see if DP is available for BW, even if it is this Judge won't impose it,
I have seen state successfully gain a longer sentence than the conviction allowed when a jury found a defendant G of second degree not 1st degree murder, state felt second degree would not provide long enough sentence so they asked judge for longer sentence, I think they used an argument that it was especially violent or cruel, JW crimes fit that, I can't remember name of defendant, he dismembered his wife,

 

[joe jones]

We should get one of our WS attorneys to weigh in on this, but I don't see how Jake's old plea deal is still valid. I think he will refuse to testify against Billy and, JMO, Judge Hein will allow him that refusal.

I don't know if either will, he ripped up JW agreement, and although AW got same amount of years in her plea agreement he changed which charges she was sentenced under so hers is not the same, with nothing to compel them to testify why would they, except I think JW may enjoy being able to testify against his father, he may have been scared of BW and now JW has the power over BW, nothing BW can do to him,
I do hope we eventually get to read the proffers of them both

 

[Betty P]

The state should have sentenced them when they knew the agreements would have been accepted, having researched this judge and his preference for lighter sentences, for rehabilitation alongside punishment he was selected with everybody knowing his opinions, so the Judicial circuit knew he would be changing agreements, and it is obvious he was legally entitled to sentence as he saw fit
AC twice tried to get him recused and failed, they are waiting to see if DP is available for BW, even if it is this Judge won't impose it,
I have seen state successfully gain a longer sentence than the conviction allowed when a jury found a defendant G of second degree not 1st degree murder, state felt second degree would not provide long enough sentence so they asked judge for longer sentence, I think they used an argument that it was especially violent or cruel, JW crimes fit that, I can't remember name of defendant, he dismembered his wife,

Again, the plea agreements specified that sentencing would not be finalized until AFTER the defendants had fulfilled their part of the plea agreement - testifying in the trials of Billy and George Wagner.

Billy's trial was the last. To meet the terms of their agreements, the defendants needed to testify in Billy's trial. At the end of Billy's trial, all defendants who made plea deals would be sentenced accordingly.

Sentencing defendants BEFORE they fulfilled the terms of their plea agreement basically nullifies the deal.

There's no mechanism of enforcement now, to compel either Jake or Angela to testify against Billy at his trial. That has been nullified by Judge Hein when he sentenced them before they met the terms of their original plea deal. He not only gave them a break by not making them testify against Billy, he rewarded Jake with a much lighter sentence for murdering 5 or 6 people.

Here's the question we need to ask. Did Judge Hein negate the terms of the original plea deals by accident or deliberately? Did he not realize that the court could no longer compel Jake or Angela to testify against Billy at his trial? Or did he think that Jake and Angela would agree to testify against their co-defendant voluntarily?

I can keep repeating this as often as necessary. I've saved a copy so I can repost if necessary.

If you can find some statute or ruling that allows the judge to compel testimony from Jake and Angie in Billy's trial, that would be great. But for now, the original plea deal is unenforceable.

We must rely on two mass murderers to honor the original deal from the kindness of their hearts. I don't think that will happen and I think the reduced sentence and parole for Jake will actually act as an incentive for him to refuse to testify.

JMO IANAL

 

[Betty P]

The state should have sentenced them when they knew the agreements would have been accepted, having researched this judge and his preference for lighter sentences, for rehabilitation alongside punishment he was selected with everybody knowing his opinions, so the Judicial circuit knew he would be changing agreements, and it is obvious he was legally entitled to sentence as he saw fit
AC twice tried to get him recused and failed, they are waiting to see if DP is available for BW, even if it is this Judge won't impose it,
I have seen state successfully gain a longer sentence than the conviction allowed when a jury found a defendant G of second degree not 1st degree murder, state felt second degree would not provide long enough sentence so they asked judge for longer sentence, I think they used an argument that it was especially violent or cruel, JW crimes fit that, I can't remember name of defendant, he dismembered his wife,

All Judge Hein had to do was hold Billy's trial and allow the state to have Jake and Angela testify against him. That probably would have rendered a guilty verdict and the Judge could have sentenced him as he wished. Simple. JMO

ETA: JMO, I think the feds need to investigate these proceedings and the handling of these decisions.

 

[sunshineray]

^^rsbm

Fortunately, I don't doubt the twelve members of the Parole Board will have better judgement than the Court (i.e., Hein) in the matter of deciding public safety when it comes to reviewing release of an 8x murderer, and more importantly, eligibility does NOT equate to parole suitability.

https://drc.ohio.gov/systems-and-services/1-parole/ohio-parole-board

PAROLE

Parole in Ohio is subject to the absolute discretion of the Board. Discretion, by its very nature, is subject to the changing norms and context in which it is exercised. The Board is vested with the responsibility to determine when an incarcerated adult is suitable for release. Under Ohio law, an incarcerated adult has neither the constitutional nor inherent right to be conditionally released on parole before the expiration of the maximum term of their sentence. [..]

GENERAL PAROLE DECISION MAKING CONSIDERATIONS

• The following general principles are supported by research and are inherent in the parole decision making process:

• Parole eligibility does not equate to parole suitability. Parole is a conditional release involving a demonstration of suitability after the incarcerated adult has become eligible for release pursuant to the applicable statutes and policies. Parole suitability involves a balance between public safety and incarcerated adult rehabilitation. Parole involves the determination of a change in the incarcerated adult regarding rehabilitation and an understanding that release will not unduly place the community at risk.... [..]

https://dam.assets.ohio.gov/image/upload/drc.ohio.gov/Forms/SysServ_Parole%20Board%20Handbook.pdf

But the way the judge ruled allows for EJW to be released after serving 32 years, correct? So the parole board can deny parole for 12 years (the 12 yr span from eligibility at 20 yrs to 32 yrs) and then he gets out? Am I understanding it correctly?

 

[Betty P]

But the way the judge ruled allows for EJW to be released after serving 32 years, correct? So the parole board can deny parole for 12 years (the 12 yr span from eligibility at 20 yrs to 32 yrs) and then he gets out? Am I understanding it correctly?

It's also possible the parole board could grant him parole before the 32nd year. After this fiasco, nothing surprises me.

I feel badly for the victims families, having to continue living in fear that Jake will be released in 20 yrs. I've no doubt he would plot some revenge against members of the Rhoden and Gilley families, as well as his former wife. He believes he has God on his side now.

 

[Covert Operative]

I don't know if either will, he ripped up JW agreement, and although AW got same amount of years in her plea agreement he changed which charges she was sentenced under so hers is not the same, with nothing to compel them to testify why would they, except I think JW may enjoy being able to testify against his father, he may have been scared of BW and now JW has the power over BW, nothing BW can do to him,
I do hope we eventually get to read the proffers of them both

Surely Jake's religion will compel him to testify? (should stop my sarcasm)
The Judge does not believe in LWOP so he would probaby give Billy a chance for parole sometime during his sentence, whatever it is he decides for his sentence. He probably would never impose the DP even if it is reinstated.
I think Angela's lawyer mumbled something yesterday about Angela still intends to cooperate but I am not positive that is what he said and I am surely not positive she will do that when the time comes.

 

[Covert Operative]

But the way the judge ruled allows for EJW to be released after serving 32 years, correct? So the parole board can deny parole for 12 years (the 12 yr span from eligibility at 20 yrs to 32 yrs) and then he gets out? Am I understanding it correctly?

He is up for parole in 32 years, I could not see him ever getting parole but the world will be a lot different in 32 years and strange things do happen. He does not get out after 32 years unless the parole board lets him out.

 

[Cool Cats]

Can anyone sum up WTH is going on?

 

[Covert Operative]

Again, the plea agreements specified that sentencing would not be finalized until AFTER the defendants had fulfilled their part of the plea agreement - testifying in the trials of Billy and George Wagner.

Billy's trial was the last. To meet the terms of their agreements, the defendants needed to testify in Billy's trial. At the end of Billy's trial, all defendants who made plea deals would be sentenced accordingly.

Sentencing defendants BEFORE they fulfilled the terms of their plea agreement basically nullifies the deal.

There's no mechanism of enforcement now, to compel either Jake or Angela to testify against Billy at his trial. That has been nullified by Judge Hein when he sentenced them before they met the terms of their original plea deal. He not only gave them a break by not making them testify against Billy, he rewarded Jake with a much lighter sentence for murdering 5 or 6 people.

Here's the question we need to ask. Did Judge Hein negate the terms of the original plea deals by accident or deliberately? Did he not realize that the court could no longer compel Jake or Angela to testify against Billy at his trial? Or did he think that Jake and Angela would agree to testify against their co-defendant voluntarily?

I can keep repeating this as often as necessary. I've saved a copy so I can repost if necessary.

If you can find some statute or ruling that allows the judge to compel testimony from Jake and Angie in Billy's trial, that would be great. But for now, the original plea deal is unenforceable.

We must rely on two mass murderers to honor the original deal from the kindness of their hearts. I don't think that will happen and I think the reduced sentence and parole for Jake will actually act as an incentive for him to refuse to testify.

JMO IANAL

There was never anything I have seen that was written that said they could not be sentenced until after they testify. I could have missed something. It was an understanding between the lawyers, parties and the court (previous judge) that they would not be sentenced until after all the trials.
The judge fully realized what he was doing by sentencing them now. He even cited State vs Gilbert at Billy's last hearing when he told the prosecutor he would sentence them.

 

[Covert Operative]

Can anyone sum up WTH is going on?

S-itshow? Jake has was sentenced to life with a chance at parole after 32 years. I can't see he would ever get it, but strange things happen.

 

[Cool Cats]

S-itshow? Jake has was sentenced to life with a chance at parole after 32 years. I can't see he would ever get it, but strange things happen.

Minus 6 years served he would be out after 26 years.

 

[Covert Operative]

Minus 6 years served he would be out after 26 years.

Yes that may be, If he were granted parole. Horrible to think.

 

[Betty P]

There was never anything I have seen that was written that said they could not be sentenced until after they testify. I could have missed something. It was an understanding between the lawyers, parties and the court (previous judge) that they would not be sentenced until after all the trials.
The judge fully realized what he was doing by sentencing them now. He even cited State vs Gilbert at Billy's last hearing when he told the prosecutor he would sentence them.

Common sense dictates that a plea agreement with a quid pro quo of testifying against a co-defendant at trial means that the reward comes after the defendant testifies. It's implicit in the agreement.

Good luck trying to get Jake to testify against Billy now. Yes, the judge knew the risk of early sentencing. Apparently, that's why he did it. If not, what was the reason he felt compelled to push through sentencing now? There was no rush. His job was to get Billy's trial underway. All he's done so far is throw that into chaos. JMO

 

[Betty P]

Yes that may be, If he were granted parole. Horrible to think.

No reason to think he won't be granted parole. For some reason Ohio's criminal justice system really likes Jake Wagner and thinks he needs favorable treatment. He's one lucky mass murderer. He should be buying lottery tickets.

Could you imagine a judge giving John Wayne Gacy parole or a 32 yr sentence? Or Richard Ramirez or Ted Bundy or Rex Heuermann or Richard Allen? Way to go Ohio.

 

[Covert Operative]

No reason to think he won't be granted parole. For some reason Ohio's criminal justice system really likes Jake Wagner and thinks he needs favorable treatment. He's one lucky mass murderer. He should be buying lottery tickets.

Could you imagine a judge giving John Wayne Gacy parole or a 32 yr sentence? Or Richard Ramirez or Ted Bundy? Way to go Ohio.

This judge is the gift that keeps on giving.

 

[Betty P]

This judge is the gift that keeps on giving.

Yes. Imagine what he has planned for Billy. He'll probably turn him loose and make the state pay him reparations for his inconvenience./s

 

[Covert Operative]

Common sense dictates that a plea agreement with a quid pro quo of testifying against a co-defendant at trial means that the reward comes after the defendant testifies. It's implicit in the agreement.

Good luck trying to get Jake to testify against Billy now. Yes, the judge knew the risk of early sentencing. Apparently, that's why he did it. If not, what was the reason he felt compelled to push through sentencing now? There was no rush. His job was to get Billy's trial underway. All he's done so far is throw that into chaos. JMO

Yes, common sense to everyone but Judge Hein. I wish I could post that 2nd affadavit of disqualification and it is a little more clear in there. (the file must be to big as it never will post) Judge Junk even submitted a letter in her support stating that they had an understanding that they would not be sentenced until after the trials.

 

[Covert Operative]

Yes. Imagine what he has planned for Billy. He'll probably turn him loose and make the state pay him reparations for his inconvenience./s

I was surprised he did not let him walk yesterday and take him to lunch.

 

[Betty P]

Yes, common sense to everyone but Judge Hein. I wish I could post that 2nd affadavit of disqualification and it is a little more clear in there. (the file must be to big as it never will post) Judge Junk even submitted a letter in her support stating that they had an understanding that they would not be sentenced until after the trials.

Junk agreed with Angela Canepa? Perhaps we can get another copy of that affidavit. Again, JMO, this all needs to be investigated by the feds.