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

[arielilane]

Iirc, 1/6/2025, was the date BW3's trial to begin. BW3's request for change of venue was granted, but location is still undetermined. Why?

Judge grants motion to move Pike County massacre trial out of county

The start of Billy Wagner's murder trial in connection with the 2016 murders of eight members of the Rhoden family in Pike Co. is scheduled to start in early January.

www.wlwt.com

11/25/2024

 

[sunshineray]

I can't speak for Ohio. In the states that I have practiced, if a case is reassigned to a new judge, there is a panel of judges that decides who gets it. That panel is appointed by the Supreme Court. They typically take into account in assigning a new judge, first, a judge that isn't also precluded, qualified, and available due to case load issues. It is common for judges to retire from the bench but still be available as fill ins, magistrates, etc.

Thank you for shedding some light. That panel has some explaining to do, just MO. I can't believe the people ever elected this judge in the first place. The whole thing is foreign to me. In my state the only publically elected judges have been Probate Judges, all others are either nominated and appointed/selected by the General Assembly or the Govenor going back to the early 1880's.

 

[MTW2011]

So Judge Hein was retired, were there no sitting judges active to preside over BW's case? Why give it to a retired judge, lack of personnel? I know the justice system is clogged with cases but the Rhoden/Gilley Family murders are and will always be an extremely high-profile case. Did nobody active want BW's case? If this judge is known for such leniency with violent offenders that he's earned a nickname for it, they would seem such an obvious stay-away-from choice when trying an 8 homicide premeditated massacre assailant. Do you know, who in the State decided to give him the case? TIA if you know.

So he, the judge, says too much time has gone by I'm sentencing them, no matter any plea agreements, then he also changes the venue and takes away the DP charges to further delay the trial date!? I totally agree with the appeals to these rulings and it's in no way the fault of the State. It's the fault of whatever person or State enity who thought handing the last leg of these horrific crimes to a judge with a track record of coddling violent criminals was an appropriate course. Honestly, I now fear that BW is going to walk away a free man/ monster. The people of Pike County must be be outraged. AJMO

No one on the side of the “State” chose Judge Hein to preside over this case, which is why Canepa has been stuck on trying to get him removed from it. Supreme Court Chief Justice Sharon Kennedy appointed him for the case/trial.

 

[Seattle1]

I don't think there is any legal reason that the judge had to dismiss the DP or sentence Angela and Jake before Billy's trial, he just chose to do so. I think there was pressure put on the prosecutor to try to come to an agreement with Billy/defense concerning the DP. Billy has to agree to any agreement that involves him and they could not come to terms on one.

^^rsbm

Until the DP is abolished in Ohio, a defendant charged with a capital offense is still subject to the DP unless the state dismisses the death penalty specifications before trial.

State Statute generally governs when before trial the prosecution must announce its intention to seek the death penalty if the defendant is found guilty, and this decision does not require the approval of the defendant.

The exception here would be if the defendant agrees forgo a trial and negotiate a plea agreement in exchange for taking the DP off the table (i.e., such as JW). Billy Wagner isn't under any plea agreement -- he's going to trial.

It's not clear to me why the parties would even need a separate agreement with Billy to remove the DP specifications unless he was going to take a plea?? JW's agreement already promised to remove the DP for Billy. We know that GW4 had no separate DP agreement before his trial.

11/20/24 - WCPO/9News

Both sides said they've been working toward an agreement with regards to the death penalty Billy currently faces. Under the plea agreement for Jake Wagner, the death penalty is dropped for himself, his mother and his father if he testifies truthfully in trial; that same agreement played a part in George Wagner IV's trial in 2022.

Because such a deal never seems to have been struck before, Prosecutor Angela Canepa said negotions have been slow going. She said they've been working on a deal that would seem to both remove the death penalty specifications ahead of Billy's trial while still being able to have insurance of some kind if Jake were to testify untruthfully at trial.

Hein pointed out that attorneys have had around four months already to come up with such a deal.

 

[Covert Operative]

^^rsbm

Until the DP is abolished in Ohio, a defendant charged with a capital offense is still subject to the DP unless the state dismisses the death penalty specifications before trial.

State Statute generally governs when before trial the prosecution must announce its intention to seek the death penalty if the defendant is found guilty, and this decision does not require the approval of the defendant.

The exception here would be if the defendant agrees forgo a trial and negotiate a plea agreement in exchange for taking the DP off the table (i.e., such as JW). Billy Wagner isn't under any plea agreement -- he's going to trial.

It's not clear to me why the parties would even need a separate agreement with Billy to remove the DP specifications unless he was going to take a plea?? JW's agreement already promised to remove the DP for Billy. We know that GW4 had no separate DP agreement before his trial.

11/20/24 - WCPO/9News

Both sides said they've been working toward an agreement with regards to the death penalty Billy currently faces. Under the plea agreement for Jake Wagner, the death penalty is dropped for himself, his mother and his father if he testifies truthfully in trial; that same agreement played a part in George Wagner IV's trial in 2022.

Because such a deal never seems to have been struck before, Prosecutor Angela Canepa said negotions have been slow going. She said they've been working on a deal that would seem to both remove the death penalty specifications ahead of Billy's trial while still being able to have insurance of some kind if Jake were to testify untruthfully at trial.

Hein pointed out that attorneys have had around four months already to come up with such a deal.

The lawyers cannot reach a deal if Billy will not agree to it. It's not just up to the lawyers to agree. I believe it is a cost issue and the fact of having to seat a DP qualified jury for Billy's trial and then the DP would be removed if Jake testified as it was in George's trial. I believe pressure was put on the State to find a deal, and that is why they were trying to come to an agreement on the DP.
Both sides tried to tell the judge that Billy was not open to anything that had been presented to him. They cannot make him agree to a DP deal. The deal the prosecution wanted was to drop the DP, but if Jake did not testify then the DP would be put back on Billy. I can't say that I blame Billy for not agreeing to this, I doubt he is going to help the state prosecute him. By not agreeing he was rewarded with his DP being removed anyway.
Yes, G4 had no seperate plea agreement or DP agreement before trial and Billy's trial would have been the same.
In Billy's recent pretrial the judge said something to Canepa that when he sees social media (whatever that means) he understands more about the DP issue she has. He didn't understand it before?

 

[Covert Operative]

Iirc, 1/6/2025, was the date BW3's trial to begin. BW3's request for change of venue was granted, but location is still undetermined. Why?

Judge grants motion to move Pike County massacre trial out of county

The start of Billy Wagner's murder trial in connection with the 2016 murders of eight members of the Rhoden family in Pike Co. is scheduled to start in early January.

www.wlwt.com

11/25/2024

There is an appeal on the venue and an appeal on the DP still outstanding. I would think the judge could/should not announce a venue or date of trial until those two things are cleared and ruled on. Victim T.R. has asked of the court of appeals to also allow oral arguments on the venue appeal. I have the brief that was filed by Victim T.R., I will try to see if it will upload. A lot of times a big file will not upload in WS for me. The person is identifed as Victim T.R. in the filings.

 

[sunshineray]

No one on the side of the “State” chose Judge Hein to preside over this case, which is why Canepa has been stuck on trying to get him removed from it. Supreme Court Chief Justice Sharon Kennedy appointed him for the case/trial.

Thanks much for that info. When I said "State" I didn't mean the prosecutors. I meant it as anyone on a state panel or court that decided what judge to appoint to the case. Being as it's a State Supreme Judge who did it, there will probably be no replacing him and the appeals about venue and DP will probably go nowhere. Very disheartening and now even more time until BW's trial starts.

 

[Seattle1]

From what I can tell, since his January 6th trial date has come and gone, the late filing for a change of venue granted by Judge Hein has put a stop to his trial once again. The State is appealinging the change of venue.

What I don't understand is didn't Judge Deering already rule against a change of venue long ago?

I know the prosecution opposed the Motion for Change of Venue but not that the this decision was appealed. Unless I missed something, the appeals have been to remove Hein from the presiding over Billy Wagner's trial (twice denied), and Hein dismissing the DP specifications.

Relative to seeking a change of venue long after Judge Deering ruled against the defense Motion, Billy's defense successfully argued that on this date, no jury could truthfully answer that they have no prior knowledge of the horrendous facts of this case. This is yet another disadvantage of delaying Billy's trial. MOO

Jan 3, 2025 - WLWT.COM

The start of Billy Wagner's murder trial in connection with the 2016 murders of eight members of the Rhoden family in Pike Co. is scheduled to start in early 2025.

Presiding Judge Jonathan Hein granted Wagner's request for a change of venue, which prosecutors opposed.

"The Court finds that the intense scope of media coverage in this case - and other closely related cases - was so pervasive that prejudice is presumed. The small population of Pike County and the intense media coverage leads the Court to conclude that no jury could truthfully answer that they have no prior knowledge of the horrendous facts of this case," the ruling states.

Hein added that until a new venue is specified all pleadings filed and proceedings will be held in Pike County.

"The Court finds that making the venue decision well in advance of trial reduces delay and reduces implicit bias. Such benefits serve the State, the Defendant, the victims and the judicial process," the ruling states.


ETA: Jan 3, 2025 - Attorney for the Victims Appealed the Trial Court's Decision for Change of Venue -- Oral Argument Requested.

 

[LMDlong]

I can't imagine they would have any of them housed in an Ohio prison.

As of last night nothing had been updated on the courtview site . Last thing posted was before the sentencing.

 

[Seattle1]

Victim T.R. filed an appeal on the venue change. The state has appealed the DP decision.
There was a decision not to change venue by the previous judge but as we all know and have been told numerous times by Judge Hein he does not have to abide by anything the other judges did or agreed to.

Can you please provide link about appeal by "TR." Thank you!

 

[Covert Operative]

Can you please provide link about appeal by "TR." Thank you!

I will try, if it will upload.

 

[Covert Operative]

As of last night nothing had been updated on the courtview site . Last thing posted was before the sentencing.

They may have not bee moved yet. Angela has been in Scioto County since the day of court.

 

[Seattle1]

• 2018CR000157 STATE OF OHIO -vs- WAGNER, III, GEORGE WASHINGTON

https://cpcourt.pikecounty.oh.gov/eservices/searchresults.page?x=r*WTCl461qgO2VvSjQ5zbLTYypZy9OjctugxiqgirqHErpmYXUpQQ2KEchLNZwh2UVLViwR-HvJiyeuHLcSASQ

[td]09/03/2024[/td][td]DEFENDANT'S AMENDED MOTION FOR CHANGE OF VENUE FILED Attorney: COLLINS, MARK C[/td]

Oct 7, 2024 -- Motions heard in Pike County; Victims not present/not represented by counsel at hearing.

[td]11/25/2024[/td][td]DECISION - GRANTING MOTION FOR CHANGE OF VENUE FILED COPIES FILED EMAILED TO COUNSEL[/td]

Jan 3, 2025 - Victims appealed change of venue - request oral argument.

Ohio victims have the right to appeal violations of their constitutional rights and any other right provided by law regardless of the existence of a final appealable order as defined in R.C. 2505.02.

Appellee Defendant alleges the trial court erred in changing the venue of the trial without considering input from the victims because the change of venue will violate the victim's constitutional and statutory rights to be present for the entirety of trial and their rights be treated with fairness and respect for their dignity.

I know the Prosecution is not the legal representative for the Victims but where was the Victims Advocate in the three months between defense filing its Amended Motion for Change of Motion and the Courts Nov ruling? I'm so disappointed for the Victims here.

Why didn't the Prosecution inform the Court of the Victim's objections for the court to consider these objections prior to the ruling on the Motion pursuant to [ORC 2930.08]? No doubt, the Appellate is going ask the Prosecution why they dropped the ball --forcing the appellee to make a procedural issue the higher court's problem! Not a good look! JMO

I could only find a news video clip of the Oct 7, Motions hearing but not the full hearing:

Pike County murder suspect asks for change of venue

Pike County murder suspect Billy Wagner appeared in court on Monday, Oct. 7, 2024. His attorneys filed a motion to change venue and move his case to another court outside Pike County.

www.fox19.com

VICTIM RIGHTS | Crime Victim Services

 

[Covert Operative]

• 2018CR000157 STATE OF OHIO -vs- WAGNER, III, GEORGE WASHINGTON

https://cpcourt.pikecounty.oh.gov/eservices/searchresults.page?x=r*WTCl461qgO2VvSjQ5zbLTYypZy9OjctugxiqgirqHErpmYXUpQQ2KEchLNZwh2UVLViwR-HvJiyeuHLcSASQ

[td]09/03/2024[/td][td]DEFENDANT'S AMENDED MOTION FOR CHANGE OF VENUE FILED Attorney: COLLINS, MARK C[/td]
Oct 7, 2024 -- Motions heard in Pike County; Victims not present/not represented by counsel at hearing.


[td]11/25/2024[/td][td]DECISION - GRANTING MOTION FOR CHANGE OF VENUE FILED COPIES FILED EMAILED TO COUNSEL[/td]
Jan 3, 2025 - Victims appealed change of venue - request oral argument.

Ohio victims have the right to appeal violations of their constitutional rights and any other right provided by law regardless of the existence of a final appealable order as defined in R.C. 2505.02.

Appellee Defendant alleges the trial court erred in changing the venue of the trial without considering input from the victims because the change of venue will violate the victim's constitutional and statutory rights to be present for the entirety of trial and their rights be treated with fairness and respect for their dignity.

I know the Prosecution is not the legal representative for the Victims but where was the Victims Advocate in the three months between defense filing its Amended Motion for Change of Motion and the Courts Nov ruling? I'm so disappointed for the Victims here.

Why didn't the Prosecution inform the Court of the Victim's objections for the court to consider these objections prior to the ruling on the Motion pursuant to [ORC 2930.08]? No doubt, the Appellate is going ask the Prosecution why they dropped the ball --forcing the appellee to make a procedural issue the higher court's problem! Not a good look! JMO

I could only find a news video clip of the Oct 7, Motions hearing but not the full hearing:

Pike County murder suspect asks for change of venue

Pike County murder suspect Billy Wagner appeared in court on Monday, Oct. 7, 2024. His attorneys filed a motion to change venue and move his case to another court outside Pike County.

www.fox19.com

VICTIM RIGHTS | Crime Victim Services

They probably thought that he would abide by the previous judge ruling/decision and not grant a change of venue. Just like the prosecution probably thought Hein would abide by the DP and Sentencing that the previous judge/s had agreed upon.

 

[Covert Operative]

• 2018CR000157 STATE OF OHIO -vs- WAGNER, III, GEORGE WASHINGTON

https://cpcourt.pikecounty.oh.gov/eservices/searchresults.page?x=r*WTCl461qgO2VvSjQ5zbLTYypZy9OjctugxiqgirqHErpmYXUpQQ2KEchLNZwh2UVLViwR-HvJiyeuHLcSASQ

[td]09/03/2024[/td][td]DEFENDANT'S AMENDED MOTION FOR CHANGE OF VENUE FILED Attorney: COLLINS, MARK C[/td]
Oct 7, 2024 -- Motions heard in Pike County; Victims not present/not represented by counsel at hearing.


[td]11/25/2024[/td][td]DECISION - GRANTING MOTION FOR CHANGE OF VENUE FILED COPIES FILED EMAILED TO COUNSEL[/td]
Jan 3, 2025 - Victims appealed change of venue - request oral argument.

Ohio victims have the right to appeal violations of their constitutional rights and any other right provided by law regardless of the existence of a final appealable order as defined in R.C. 2505.02.

Appellee Defendant alleges the trial court erred in changing the venue of the trial without considering input from the victims because the change of venue will violate the victim's constitutional and statutory rights to be present for the entirety of trial and their rights be treated with fairness and respect for their dignity.

I know the Prosecution is not the legal representative for the Victims but where was the Victims Advocate in the three months between defense filing its Amended Motion for Change of Motion and the Courts Nov ruling? I'm so disappointed for the Victims here.

Why didn't the Prosecution inform the Court of the Victim's objections for the court to consider these objections prior to the ruling on the Motion pursuant to [ORC 2930.08]? No doubt, the Appellate is going ask the Prosecution why they dropped the ball --forcing the appellee to make a procedural issue the higher court's problem! Not a good look! JMO

I could only find a news video clip of the Oct 7, Motions hearing but not the full hearing:

Pike County murder suspect asks for change of venue

Pike County murder suspect Billy Wagner appeared in court on Monday, Oct. 7, 2024. His attorneys filed a motion to change venue and move his case to another court outside Pike County.

www.fox19.com

VICTIM RIGHTS | Crime Victim Services

[td]10/07/2024[/td][td]STATE'S MEMORANDUM CONTRA DEFENDANT'S AMENDED MOTION FOR CHANGE OF VENUE FILED Attorney: CANEPA, ANGELA R[/td]

Judge Corbin had already ruled that they would try to seat in Pike County before the Oct request by the defense.



[td]11/20/2023[/td][td]JUDGMENT ENTRY -- THE COURT FINDS AND ORDERS THAT THE DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR CHANGE OF VENUE AND HIS AMENDED MOTION FOR CHANGE OF VENUE ARE HEREBY DENIED AND OVERRULED, WITHOUT PREJUDICE; THESE MOTIONS ARE DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE IN ORDER THAT SHOULD VOIR DIRE REVEAL THAT A FAIR AND IMPARTIAL JURY CANNOT BE SECURED, THEN THESE MOTIONS FOR CHANGE OF VENUE CAN BE RENEWED BY THE DEFENDANT AND GRANTED AS APPROPRIATE COPIES FILED EMAILED TO ALL COUNSEL OF RECORD[/td]

 

[Vaderman]

I'm just now watching the recent sentencing and can't get over this judge. So far, it feels like he's admonishing the victims' families for being emotional.

 

[Seattle1]

They probably thought that he would abide by the previous judge ruling/decision and not grant a change of venue. Just like the prosecution probably thought Hein would abide by the DP and Sentencing that the previous judge/s had agreed upon.

This was a Motion hearing subject to a ruling-- and the state being lazy or negligent if they did not notify and/or include the Victims here. IMO, the appropriate place to make their argument about the Victims constitutional rights (i.e., Marsy's law) made in their appellate brief was during the Motions hearing prior to Hein's ruling -- not the Appellate Court.

[td]10/07/2024[/td][td]STATE'S MEMORANDUM CONTRA DEFENDANT'S AMENDED MOTION FOR CHANGE OF VENUE FILED Attorney: CANEPA, ANGELA R[/td]

Judge Corbin had already ruled that they would try to seat in Pike County before the Oct request by the defense.



[td]11/20/2023[/td][td]JUDGMENT ENTRY -- THE COURT FINDS AND ORDERS THAT THE DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR CHANGE OF VENUE AND HIS AMENDED MOTION FOR CHANGE OF VENUE ARE HEREBY DENIED AND OVERRULED, WITHOUT PREJUDICE; THESE MOTIONS ARE DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE IN ORDER THAT SHOULD VOIR DIRE REVEAL THAT A FAIR AND IMPARTIAL JURY CANNOT BE SECURED, THEN THESE MOTIONS FOR CHANGE OF VENUE CAN BE RENEWED BY THE DEFENDANT AND GRANTED AS APPROPRIATE COPIES FILED EMAILED TO ALL COUNSEL OF RECORD[/td]

Except that was not the Court's ruling by Judge Corbin following the defense's June 2023 Motion/Amended Motion for Change of Venue!

Here, in denying the Motion, the Court ultimately recognized the possibility Pike County may not remain the appropriate venue following GW4's trial, and denied the defense Motion WITHOUT prejudice-- citing the Motion could be renewed by the defendant, and granted as appropriate. Nowhere did Corbin ever state the venue for the trial was one and done!

Local residents and legal analysts alike all agree it makes sense to move the trial at this time-- believing it unlikely to seat an impartial jury in Pike County following GW4 trial:

ETA:
Waverly resident Mike Thomas is not shocked the trial for Wagner, 53, will happen somewhere else in the Buckeye State.

"It does not surprise me. I mean, it would be hard to get an unbiased jury. It's 50-50. Should it be handled here? Yeah." Thomas said. "But everybody here knows that trial - have heard it for years. So they've already cemented in (their) mind - their verdict, I believe."

Waverly resident speaks

 

[Betty P]

Iirc, 1/6/2025, was the date BW3's trial to begin. BW3's request for change of venue was granted, but location is still undetermined. Why?

Judge grants motion to move Pike County massacre trial out of county

The start of Billy Wagner's murder trial in connection with the 2016 murders of eight members of the Rhoden family in Pike Co. is scheduled to start in early January.

www.wlwt.com

11/25/2024

I have the impression that the judge is trying to force the State to accept some awful plea deal that he cooked up. It's probably something egregious like reducing Billy's charges to a few misdemeanors. Judge Hein may be the first judge I've seen who tries to play the role of judge, prosecutor and jury.

In the end, he will have drawn out Billy's trial much longer than it would have been if they just moved ahead with Judge Deering. Much more expensive, too.

IF Billy's trial is allowed to proceed normally with evidence from Jake and Angela's testimony from George's trial allowed, the change of venue won't matter. Nothing changes the horror of the Rhoden/Gilley Massacre and the collective hubris and arrogance of the Wagner family.

ICBW, JMO

 

[Vaderman]

Now I'm listening to Jake's proselytizing. I don't look down my nose at criminals who find peace, comfort or hope in an otherwise hopeless place. But this was not the place for preaching. I'm glad the victims are walking out.

Edit -- thank God (pun kinda intended) the judge just told him to wrap it up.

 

[Covert Operative]

This was a Motion hearing subject to a ruling-- and the state being lazy or negligent if they did not notify and/or include the Victims here. IMO, the appropriate place to make their argument about the Victims constitutional rights (i.e., Marsy's law) made in their appellate brief was during the Motions hearing prior to Hein's ruling -- not the Appellate Court.


Except that was not the Court's ruling by Judge Corbin following the defense's June 2023 Motion/Amended Motion for Change of Venue!

Here, in denying the Motion, the Court ultimately recognized the possibility Pike County may not remain the appropriate venue following GW4's trial, and denied the defense Motion WITHOUT prejudice-- citing the Motion could be renewed by the defendant, and granted as appropriate. Nowhere did Corbin ever state the venue for the trial was one and done!

Local residents and legal analysts alike all agree it makes sense to move the trial at this time-- believing it unlikely to seat an impartial jury in Pike County following GW4 trial:

The last ruling was Hein's ruling on venue. Just like it was his ruling on DP and sentencing. Corbin stated that they would try to seat a jury in Pike county before another venue was considered. I posted Corbin's ruling for you. Corbin ruled in Nov 2023 which is after July 2023.
Again- if a fair and impartial jury cannot be secured, then these motions can be renewed. That is after they have tried to seat a jury in Pike County.

[td]1/20/2023[/td][td]JUDGMENT ENTRY -- THE COURT FINDS AND ORDERS THAT THE DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR CHANGE OF VENUE AND HIS AMENDED MOTION FOR CHANGE OF VENUE ARE HEREBY DENIED AND OVERRULED, WITHOUT PREJUDICE; THESE MOTIONS ARE DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE IN ORDER THAT SHOULD VOIR DIRE REVEAL THAT A FAIR AND IMPARTIAL JURY CANNOT BE SECURED, THEN THESE MOTIONS FOR CHANGE OF VENUE CAN BE RENEWED BY THE DEFENDANT AND GRANTED AS APPROPRIATE COPIES FILED EMAILED TO ALL COUNSEL OF RECORD[/td]