GUILTY OH Pike Co., 8 in Rhoden Family Murdered Over Custody Issue, 4 Members Wagner Family Arrested #60

[Covert Operative]

Good point. And after reading your other post I have to rephrase. I especially like this:

"I have never heard of any prosecutor giving their exact trial plan to defense."

George would get off if the prosecution did not turn over all the transcripts but as far as I can tell they did. If the judge denies the motion I think George will still be convicted but it could raise grounds for appeals. That he didn't get a fair trial because certain conversations were not pointed out specifically to the defense.

Are Jake's attorneys wanting the same?

Apparently the defense (George) has everything they need but now they want the prosecution to point out which specific conversations of George's they plan to use.

Getting the recordings and transcripts is not enough for them they want to hold hands and be walked through, basically, the entire prosecution of George.

I would like to find out how Jake's attorneys are handling this considering his trial is in months not years anymore.

There was a deadline of Dec 2020 for the prosecution to turn over the transcripts of the recordings. It is in court notes. Court notes always recap the previous hearing. JW,G4,G3 lawyers have all filed motions since that time to compel the prosecution to do so. The prosecution agreed to turn that over months ago. They are not asking for their exact plan/evidence for trial unless others are seeing something in that motion that I am not. There are quite a few reasons that defense would want or need the transcripts for the recordings.

 

[Covert Operative]

Good point. And after reading your other post I have to rephrase. I especially like this:

"I have never heard of any prosecutor giving their exact trial plan to defense."

George would get off if the prosecution did not turn over all the transcripts but as far as I can tell they did. If the judge denies the motion I think George will still be convicted but it could raise grounds for appeals. That he didn't get a fair trial because certain conversations were not pointed out specifically to the defense.

Are Jake's attorneys wanting the same?

Apparently the defense (George) has everything they need but now they want the prosecution to point out which specific conversations of George's they plan to use.

Getting the recordings and transcripts is not enough for them they want to hold hands and be walked through, basically, the entire prosecution of George.

I would like to find out how Jake's attorneys are handling this considering his trial is in months not years anymore.

There was a deadline of Dec 2020 for the prosecution to turn over the transcripts of the recordings. It is in court notes. Court notes always recap the previous hearing. JW,G4,G3 lawyers have all filed motions since that time to compel the prosecution to do so. The prosecution agreed to turn that over months ago.

Yes, the prosecution has already provided the defendants with copies of all the recordings made of Wags conversations on phones, in their work truck, etc. Defendants have had those recordings for over a year now, so the attorneys have had plenty of time to listen to it and make note of what they think are the most incriminating conversations.

I believe they use the transcripts to verify what the prosecution is claiming is said on the recordings.

 

[Covert Operative]

Some reasons that defense asks for transcripts of recordings.

• "The defense has requested the prosecution to furnish transcripts of the recordings being put into evidence so that they can establish speakers' identifications, to determine whether the statements made are clear enough to bear out the contentions in the indictment and to determine whether such statements have been accurately reproduced. Such transcripts should be made and delivered no less than eight weeks before trial so that the defense can have enough time to prepare rebuttals for the defendant and perform whatever investigations may be required to help prepare the case."

 

[Covert Operative]

I agree. What I think about is how this could impact the other trials and Deering must think of that too. It is discovery that spans 4 trials or more. It is not limited to G.4

BW and JW have also filed motions in Feb and March 2021 to compel the prosecution to provide those transcripts that they agreed to provide by Dec 2020. There are reasons that they use or need transcripts of recordings, so they would need to have those done prior to trial. They are not asking in that motion for them to lay our their trial plan or entire trial plan. Did I miss something in that motion that leads to that conclusion?

 

[Betty P]

There was a deadline of Dec 2020 for the prosecution to turn over the transcripts of the recordings. It is in court notes. Court notes always recap the previous hearing. JW,G4,G3 lawyers have all filed motions since that time to compel the prosecution to do so. The prosecution agreed to turn that over months ago.

I believe they use the transcripts to verify what the prosecution is claiming is said on the recordings.

Yeah, I remember the judge saying something about that deadline at that Dec hearing. I was wishing the prosecution would go ahead and give the defense attorneys the darn transcripts so we didn't have to hear them continue to complain about it. They're also trying to create the illusion for the public that the state hasn't given them copies of the recordings at all, which is untrue.

Along those lines, as soon as the defense complains about how long it has taken for the state to provide the transcripts, they come up with another motion that keeps stalling the start of the trials - usually issues and objections that are supposed to be handled at the beginning of the trial, not before.

 

[Ann99]

BW and JW have also filed motions in Feb and March 2021 to compel the prosecution to provide those transcripts that they agreed to provide by Dec 2020. There are reasons that they use or need transcripts of recordings, so they would need to have those done prior to trial. They are not asking in that motion for them to lay our their trial plan or entire trial plan. Did I miss something in that motion that leads to that conclusion?

You didn't miss anything. It is my personal opinion that providing specific transcripts will tip the hand of the Prosecutor. And that includes strategy for next 3 trials.
I could be wrong.
Defense has all recordings. Defense know what is there.
Defense can make transcripts.
Yes, transcripts must be made if recordings are not clear, or just to authenticate, etc. I am not an expert on this and I assume the fact of 4 trials, 4 defendants plays into prosecutors delay.
Prosecution will follow the ruling of the Judge.
At this time, prosecution may not know exactly what they will use. Yes, eventually Prosecution will provide what Deering demands.
They may wait until the very last minute to comply.

I ask you, why do you think the prosecution has not followed thru with providing transcripts per the long passed deadline?

 

[Covert Operative]

Your previous post sounded as though you thought they were expecting the prosecution to lay out their whole plan of trial, not that you were only talking about the recordings which was why I asked.

Since it is the prosecutions evidence I believe they would be the ones required to provide the transcripts. They are the ones that are claiming the recordings say certain things. They do have burden of proof.

I believe they are going to say due to the volume there has been some technical difficulty.

The judge already ruled on motion 59 previously so they do have to provide it.

10/01/2020 THIS MATTER COMES BEFORE THE COURT ON AUGUST 31, 2020, FOR A HEARING ON THE DEFENDANT'S MOTION # 59, FOR AN ORDER REQUIRING THE PROSECUTION TO PROVIDE A TRANSCRIPT OF AUDIO RECORDINGS IT INTENDS TO INTRODUCE AT TRIAL. AFTER DUE CONSIDERATION OF THE DEFENDANT'S MOTION, AND UPON AGREEMENT OF THE PARTIES, DEFENDANT'S MOTION IS GRANTED. IT IS ORDERED THAT THE STATE OF OHIO PROVIDE THE DEFENSE WITH A SUMMARY OF STATEMENTS, AND TRANSCRIPT OF PORTIONS OF THE AUDIO RECORDINGS THE STATE OF OHIO INTENDS TO INTRODUCE AT TRIAL NO LATER THAN DECEMBER 31, 2020. FILED AND MAILED COPIES CDB

The prosecution has missed many deadlines, usually due to technical difficulties or someone not being available etc., but there has never been a motion filed against them asking for sanctions for missing deadlines. I do not think the recordings will be excluded for that fact but he may see fit to speed them along.

 

[Covert Operative]

We should probably have an answer tomorrow on why the state has not provided transcripts for recordings. BW lawyer filed motion to compel transcripts in February.


BW- 02/23/2021 (MOTION 48)--DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL THE PROSECUTION TO PROVIDE TRANSCRIPTS OF AUDIO RECORDINGS IT INTENDS TO INTRODUCE AT TRIAL FILED (FAX) Attorney: COLLINS, MARK C

 

[Ann99]

We should probably have an answer tomorrow on why the state has not provided transcripts for recordings. BW lawyer filed motion to compel transcripts in February.


BW- 02/23/2021 (MOTION 48)--DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL THE PROSECUTION TO PROVIDE TRANSCRIPTS OF AUDIO RECORDINGS IT INTENDS TO INTRODUCE AT TRIAL FILED (FAX) Attorney: COLLINS, MARK C

It will be interesting. I hope the audio is good
Sometimes I can't hear Canepa, and she should have a lot to say on this.

 

[Covert Operative]

It will be interesting. I hope the audio is good
Sometimes I can't hear Canepa, and she should have a lot to say on this.

Since they moved the camera to the back of the court it is very hard to hear.

 

[Cool Cats]

It will be interesting. I hope the audio is good
Sometimes I can't hear Canepa, and she should have a lot to say on this.

Billy

04/05/2021 1:30 PM MOTION HEARING

 

[BuckeyeGal]

According to Angela's attorney he wants to try to "find a jury in Pike County"
before requesting a change of venue.

I never thought of that, thanks, that Jake's attorneys could try to seat a Pike County jury and decide they can't find one to their liking so they try to move it out of Pike.

Delay Delay Delay.....

IMO, there is not anywhere in Ohio that the potential juror pool would not be aware of this case.

 

[Cool Cats]

IMO, there is not anywhere in Ohio that the potential juror pool would not be aware of this case.

It's ok to know about a case.

 

[Covert Operative]

Billy

04/05/2021 1:30 PM MOTION HEARING

We know of the two motions that will be heard and there could be some older ones still outstanding they may throw in.


BW - 02/25/2021 (MOTION 48)--DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL THE PROSECUTION TO PROVIDE TRANSCRIPTS OF AUDIO RECORDINGS IT INTENDS TO INTRODUCE AT TRIAL FILED (ORIGINAL) Attorney: COLLINS, MARK C

BW - 03/05/2021 (MOTION # 48) DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE TO PRECLUDE OTHER ACTS EVIDENCE FILED (FAX) Attorney: COLLINS, MARK C; Attorney: HAYES, THOMAS F

I believe they have a typo and that should be motion 48 and 49.

 

[Cool Cats]

We know of the two motions that will be heard and there could be some older ones still outstanding they may throw in.


BW - 02/25/2021 (MOTION 48)--DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL THE PROSECUTION TO PROVIDE TRANSCRIPTS OF AUDIO RECORDINGS IT INTENDS TO INTRODUCE AT TRIAL FILED (ORIGINAL) Attorney: COLLINS, MARK C

BW - 03/05/2021 (MOTION # 48) DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE TO PRECLUDE OTHER ACTS EVIDENCE FILED (FAX) Attorney: COLLINS, MARK C; Attorney: HAYES, THOMAS F

I believe they have a typo and that should be motion 48 and 49.

Typo, yes. These look outstanding......Any opinions on some of these?

12/23/2020 (MOTION 42)
MOTION REQUESTING A PRE-TRIAL DAUBERT HEARING TO DETERMINE THE ADMISSIBILITY OF BALLISTICS EVIDENCE AND OPINIONS

12/23/2020 (MOTION 43)
MOTION REQUESTNG A PRE-TRIAL DAUBERT HEARING TO DETERMINE THE ADMISSIBILITY OF SHOEPRINT EVIDENCE AND OPINIONS

12/23/2020 (MOTION 44)
MOTION TO REVOKE ANDREW WILSON'S APPOINTMENT AS SPECIAL PROSECUTING ATTORNEY

12/23/2020 (MOTION 45)
MOTION REQUESTING A PRETRIAL EVIDENTIARY HEARING TO DETERMINE THE ADMISSIBILITY OF ANY NON-TESTIFYING CO-DEENDANT STATEMENTS THE STATE INTENDS TO PRESENT

12/23/2020 (MOTION 46)
DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR AN ORDER REQUIRING THE PROSECUTION TO PROVIDE A TRANSCRIPT OF AUDIO RECORDINGS IT INTENDS TO INTRODUCE AT TRIAL

12/23/2020 (MOTION 47)
MOTION FOR AN ORDER COMPELLING THE STATE OF OHIO TO PROVIDE THE DEFENDANT WITH ALL FORENSIC EXPERT REPORTS AND UNDERLYING DATA

 

[Cool Cats]

Applying to ballistics and shoe print evidence in the Wagners' Daubert Motions. Billy Motions 42 and 43.

Daubert Standard (Admissibility of Expert Witness In Court)

Objective of the Daubert standard

The objective of the Daubert Standard is to prevent parties from introducing “pseudoscientific” evidence or “junk science” in the court of law.

The party introducing the expert evidence has the burden of proof to demonstrate that the expert witness’s testimony is considered as “scientific knowledge” and follows a methodology or technique that is generally accepted in the scientific community.

Landmark Forensics Cases – Gordon's Digital Portfolio

 

[Johnny B Bad]

In the IHART podcast episode 4, speaks about the boy that was going to beat Chris jr up (RM) how LE checked his DNA and that cleared him as a suspect, JMO that is a good sign that (LE) has DNA, so a few of the Wagners 4 is screwed,,,, JMO

 

[Cool Cats]

In the IHART podcast episode 4, speaks about the boy that was going to beat Chris jr up (RM) how LE checked his DNA and that cleared him as a suspect, JMO that is a good sign that (LE) has DNA, so a few of the Wagners 4 is screwed,,,, JMO

He submitted DNA and we can assume his DNA was not found at the crime scenes but that doesn't prove your innocent. George's DNA is not at the crime scenes either.

Since George didn't leave DNA there probably isn't any DNA from the other 3 as well.

All their discoveries list DNA but BCI tested many DNA samples from family like the Manleys and C-Rob and JM's wife AM, etc...

Of course they tested the Wagners' also.

 

[Covert Operative]

Typo, yes. These look outstanding......Any opinions on some of these?

12/23/2020 (MOTION 42)
MOTION REQUESTING A PRE-TRIAL DAUBERT HEARING TO DETERMINE THE ADMISSIBILITY OF BALLISTICS EVIDENCE AND OPINIONS

12/23/2020 (MOTION 43)
MOTION REQUESTNG A PRE-TRIAL DAUBERT HEARING TO DETERMINE THE ADMISSIBILITY OF SHOEPRINT EVIDENCE AND OPINIONS

12/23/2020 (MOTION 44)
MOTION TO REVOKE ANDREW WILSON'S APPOINTMENT AS SPECIAL PROSECUTING ATTORNEY

12/23/2020 (MOTION 45)
MOTION REQUESTING A PRETRIAL EVIDENTIARY HEARING TO DETERMINE THE ADMISSIBILITY OF ANY NON-TESTIFYING CO-DEENDANT STATEMENTS THE STATE INTENDS TO PRESENT

12/23/2020 (MOTION 46)
DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR AN ORDER REQUIRING THE PROSECUTION TO PROVIDE A TRANSCRIPT OF AUDIO RECORDINGS IT INTENDS TO INTRODUCE AT TRIAL

12/23/2020 (MOTION 47)
MOTION FOR AN ORDER COMPELLING THE STATE OF OHIO TO PROVIDE THE DEFENDANT WITH ALL FORENSIC EXPERT REPORTS AND UNDERLYING DATA

#42,#43 - I think shoeprints and Ballistics will be admitted whenever they have the Daubert hearing. (The shoe expert was the expert in a well known trial of a football player. The expert was correct about what type of shoes it was however they did not find the pic of him wearing that type of shoe until after the trial. Not sure it would have made a difference. He had said he did not own that type of shoe.)

#44 - I do not think Wilson will be removed.

#45 - I am not sure if the co-defendant means RN or it means the 4 W's or both.

#46 - If this motion hand not been ruled on I am not sure why they would be now asking the judge to compel the state to turn over the transcripts.

#47 I think it will be granted/given it if has not already.

 

[Betty P]

I do not think the judge will approve for the recordings to be excluded if they do not have the transcripts yet. I think the prosecution knows what they can get away with and what they cannot, so I certainly hope and do not think they have messed up that bad. The recordings of G4 do seriously implicate him.
AW implicated them when she said she bought the shoes for them that were matched to the type found at crime scenes. She probably did not know at that time they had been matched.

All the prosecution has to do is play the recordings of George's incriminating statements in the courtroom for everyone to hear. Transcription or not, the facts will be there.

JMO, a lot of recordings will be played in the courtroom during the trial and they'll all be recordings the defense teams have had for years. There will also be lots of photos of crime scenes, weapons, evidence, social media posts, etc. Some of those recordings will include GW4 making threats of kidnapping and violence against the governor of Ohio, law enforcement, etc.