GUILTY OH Pike Co., 8 in Rhoden Family Murdered Over Custody Issue, 4 Members Wagner Family Arrested #62

[Cool Cats]

<modsnip>
Humm....

There is also a lot in evidence from the 2 or 3 FWF computers and a list of her businesses.

Not sure how FW giving them money would implicate her?
The murder supplies were not bought by her.

I believe she heard revenge conversations and was told to lie to the GJ. Canepa heard her discussing her GJ
testimony which Canepa said she was told not to do by the judge.

None of this rises to the occasion of being involved after the fact.

Seems it would be the fraud department at the IRS that she needs to worry about if she is being audited.

Laundering money from Wagner theft and drug deals comes to mind. These types of crimes rather than the murders.

 

[Cool Cats]

I going over Chris Sr autopsy report. There is two areas redacted completely at the bottom of one page and top of another under the heading “other injuries” . I missed this up to now.
Early in the investigation it was stated that Chris Sr had defensive wounds.
IMO If there were no other injuries other than the gun shots I don’t think this area would be so large.

I prefer not to get on this topic but want to spell out what we know of their injuries.

Sum total of their injuries we know of:

1.) BJM thought it looked like someone had beaten Chris.
2.) There was soft tissue bruising on some victims.
3.) Chris was shot in the forearm which is the defensive wound, likely because he used his arm to protect himself.
4.) There were muzzle stains on Gary.
5.) BJM said Frankie had a black eye.

Most likely his black eye was from a gunshot unless Frankie woke up, looked Jake in the face and Jake punched him. Which I don't think so because if Frankie looked at him first thing coward Jake would do is shoot him not punch him.

With Jake's .22 blazing and with people in bed he did not need to do anything else to the victims but shoot them. His revenge was overkill.

5 shots HG. He was angry at her but it also could have been revenge on HG's brother, CG. After Hanna left Jake the first boy she dated was CG.

4 shots Dana. 3 in face. Overkill, but I think a specific revenge shot was shooting her under the chin.

Chris Jr. 4 shots 2 on top of his head. Chris Jr. could have been sleeping on the part of his bed not touching the wall, then Jake would see the top of his head as he walked toward the bed. 4 shots is overkill because Chris is male and Jake was paranoid about the male Rhodens taking revenge. They all were cowards and scared of that.

Frankie 3 shots. Overkill because he was paranoid about Frankie taking revenge.

HR 2 shots. Seems he couldn't wait to get out of her room and just did the minimum. Maybe subconsciously he felt something towards her, like guilt.
... 2 Cents ...

 

[ohioexpat63]

JMO

I think if FW had any knowledge pre/post murders JW disclosed it to the prosecutors. I don't see JW protecting anyone but himself at this stage.

 

[Cool Cats]

JMO

I think if FW had any knowledge pre/post murders JW disclosed it to the prosecutors. I don't see JW protecting anyone but himself at this stage.

Never thought of that, interesting. Telling Canepa what FW knew. Humm, unless he didn't mention her.

 

[Fight4justice]

I give my adult children money all the time. I don’t actually know what they spend it on. If they did buy items for a murder kit, I don’t think I could be held responsible, unless they could prove that I knew what the money was being spent on. Then most definitely I should be held accountable. So FW might have known where the money was going but they would have to prove it.

 

[Ann99]

I give my adult children money all the time. I don’t actually know what they spend it on. If they did buy items for a murder kit, I don’t think I could be held responsible, unless they could prove that I knew what the money was being spent on. Then most definitely I should be held accountable. So FW might have known where the money was going but they would have to prove it.

MO
You are right about this - Canepa would have to prove it. I believe she could, even without JW info. The following could also apply to GW4 and AW.

What is Complicity or Accomplice Liability? - FindLaw

Complicity is the act of helping or encouraging another individual to commit a crime...commonly referred to as aiding and abetting.

One who is complicit is said to be an accomplice.
...even though an accomplice does not actually commit the crime, his or her actions helped someone in the commission of the crime.


The concept of accomplice liability means an accomplice faces the same degree of guilt and punishment as the individual who committed the crime.
...accomplices can face the same penalties, including prison time.


The key consideration is whether the individual intentionally and voluntarily encouraged or assisted in the commission of the crime, or (in some cases) failed to prevent it.

Elements of Accomplice Liability

...varies by state, a prosecutor typically must be able to prove the following four elements to convict someone of being an accomplice or aiding and abetting:

• A crime was committed by another individual;
• The defendant "aided, counseled, commanded, or encouraged" the other person in the commission of the crime.
• The defendant acted with the requisite mental state in their jurisdiction, for example, knowingly or purposefully, to assist in the crime.

Examples of Complicity

The following examples illustrate the many ways an individual may be an accomplice to a criminal act:

• Serving as the getaway driver in a bank robbery.
• Turning off the alarm system of a jewelry store in which you work, knowing that it will be robbed later that evening.
• Loaning a handgun to someone who you know is planning to commit a crime

#

 

[Ann99]

Complicity, Accomplice, Conspiracy? All three?

This is from link above.

The Difference Between Complicity and Conspiracy
Each state's criminal charges will vary, but typically if you takes an active role in the planning of a crime, you could be charged with being part of a conspiracy.
A conspirator agrees with others to commit a future crime, while an accomplice assists, in some way, in the actual commission of a crime.
Furthermore, unlike accomplices to a crime, conspirators can be guilty even if their plan is not completed.
#

Did GW4 or FW take an active role in the planning of a crime?

 

[Fight4justice]

Complicity, Accomplice, Conspiracy? All three?

This is from link above.

The Difference Between Complicity and Conspiracy
Each state's criminal charges will vary, but typically if you takes an active role in the planning of a crime, you could be charged with being part of a conspiracy.
A conspirator agrees with others to commit a future crime, while an accomplice assists, in some way, in the actual commission of a crime.
Furthermore, unlike accomplices to a crime, conspirators can be guilty even if their plan is not completed.
#

Did GW4 or FW take an active role in the planning of a crime?

@Ann99 lord honey, I could have used your assistance a couple of weeks ago! There was a murder of a teenager in the small rural town where my husband and I own a farm. The boy with the motive was only charged with complicity. I couldn’t understand so I had to dig. Very confusing! He was charged with this because he took two other boys with him to the victims home and they can’t prove who pulled the trigger. They can prove that he led the other two boys to the victims home, therefore he helped the murder to occur. The laws and the wording of the laws can be so confusing.

 

[IType]

Complicity, Accomplice, Conspiracy? All three?

This is from link above.

The Difference Between Complicity and Conspiracy
Each state's criminal charges will vary, but typically if you takes an active role in the planning of a crime, you could be charged with being part of a conspiracy.
A conspirator agrees with others to commit a future crime, while an accomplice assists, in some way, in the actual commission of a crime.
Furthermore, unlike accomplices to a crime, conspirators can be guilty even if their plan is not completed.
#

Did GW4 or FW take an active role in the planning of a crime?

BBM
In my opinion, GW4 yes but FW no.
Even if GW4 didn't pull a trigger, he did many things to plan/prepare for the murders, i.e., bought a mask, signed forged custody papers placing his son in AW's custody if he died (forged because RN's signature was not her own), bought items for the suppressors and other things used during the murders, etc. Even if all he did was disconnect the security cameras or drive one of the vehicles but never actually killed one of the victims, he still took an active part in planning and committing a crime.
As for FW, if she had participated in any way in the planning stage before the murders were carried out, then she would have been charged accordingly. But, thus far she was only charged with perjury and obstruction of justice for lying to the grand jury. Therefore, IMO she did not have an active role in the planning of a crime (the murders).
Now, with all that being said, there is certainly the possibility that new charges could be filed against FW in the future accusing her of participating in the planning stage or being knowledgeable of what her family was planning/doing before and during the time the murders took place. Right now we don't know all of the info JW provided to AC in his confession process, but it's certainly a possibility that AC could refile against FW at some point down the road if JW gave AC information that implicates FW in the planning stage of the murders.
Again, all my opinion.

 

[Dudly]

One question please: If LE is finding evidence on Flying W Farm doesn’t that make Fredericka Wagner an accessories to the murders, just because of the way crimes has been laid out, JMO
PS’ Is the reason the State of Ohio hasn’t arrested Fredericka Wagner again is because of her age and the cost of taking a 79 year old woman to court just doesn’t add up, IMO

U
If evidence was put on your property, would you be guilty of a crime committed?

 

[Chelly]

U
If evidence was put on your property, would you be guilty of a crime committed?

Depends on type of evidence, where it was placed and size of property, I suppose.

 

[IType]

FWF is very large (2000 acres, I think). IMO, there's plenty of space for activities to be going on in the middle of the night while granny is asleep that she would never, ever hear or even be aware of.

As for things being purchased with FWF money, didn't FW employ a bookkeeper? I think I read that somewhere, but not sure. If she did have a bookkeeper, IMO it's very possible that all of the farm bills went straight to the bookkeeper and he just paid them. There's no guarantee that FW ever looked at the credit card statements or any other bills before they were paid and filed away by the bookkeeper.

Another thing to consider is that at the time the murders were being planned and carried out, BW's dad was still alive. He was reportedly in poor health, but still alive. IMO, I also recall someone stating a theory not long ago that BW's dad was helping fund some of the time the W4 spent in Alaska. If that theory is correct, FWF's husband could have been in charge of the money and never looked at the credit card bills, simply gave them to the bookkeeper and told him to pay them.

In my opinion, FW's husband was providing money for the W4 prior to the murders and also the early days in Alaska--but when he died, FW took over the money and shut the W4 off. That is why the W4 left AK--grandpa wasn't funneling them cash anymore. Also, in my opinion, I think the "John Doe" mentioned in count 22 of the indictments is FW's husband. He couldn't be charged as being involved in the "enterprise" or even named (hence "John Doe") because he passed away before the charges were brought against the W4, FW and RN. Again, JMO.

All my opinion.

 

[IType]

U
If evidence was put on your property, would you be guilty of a crime committed?

Not if someone else put it there without my knowledge or assistance, JMO.

 

[Ann99]

@Ann99 lord honey, I could have used your assistance a couple of weeks ago! There was a murder of a teenager in the small rural town where my husband and I own a farm... The laws and the wording of the laws can be so confusing.

You are welcome.Scary to have a murder close by home.
Seems as though when there is a group of teens, the law treats them differently than adults.
Fortunately the Wagners are far from being teenagers...

 

[Ann99]

FWF is very large (2000 acres, I think). IMO, there's plenty of space for activities to be going on in the middle of the night while granny is asleep that she would never, ever hear or even be aware of.

As for things being purchased with FWF money, didn't FW employ a bookkeeper? I think I read that somewhere, but not sure. If she did have a bookkeeper, IMO it's very possible that all of the farm bills went straight to the bookkeeper and he just paid them. There's no guarantee that FW ever looked at the credit card statements or any other bills before they were paid and filed away by the bookkeeper.

Another thing to consider is that at the time the murders were being planned and carried out, BW's dad was still alive. He was reportedly in poor health, but still alive. IMO, I also recall someone stating a theory not long ago that BW's dad was helping fund some of the time the W4 spent in Alaska. If that theory is correct, FWF's husband could have been in charge of the money and never looked at the credit card bills, simply gave them to the bookkeeper and told him to pay them.

In my opinion, FW's husband was providing money for the W4 prior to the murders and also the early days in Alaska--but when he died, FW took over the money and shut the W4 off. That is why the W4 left AK--grandpa wasn't funneling them cash anymore. Also, in my opinion, I think the "John Doe" mentioned in count 22 of the indictments is FW's husband. He couldn't be charged as being involved in the "enterprise" or even named (hence "John Doe") because he passed away before the charges were brought against the W4, FW and RN. Again, JMO.

All my opinion.

MO
I don't know what to think about the Elder Wagner paying bills, etc. and FW left out of the loop.
I see FW as CAREFULLY inspecting everything under and in her domain, including credit card statements, items brought into the home.
I had the impression theElder Wagner was extremely ill and maybe he did pass responsibility on to the "bookkeeper" or FW.
As you mention, the bookkeeper could be the John/Jane Doe.
The bookkeeper woman, LW, was a companion to a man who was a fugitive from NY. -something about guns.
So I wonder, how did that pair happen to end up at FWF, living there for so many years.

A Small-Town Official Was Ousted and Headed to Prison. Then He Vanished.

 

[IType]

MO
I don't know what to think about the Elder Wagner paying bills, etc. and FW left out of the loop.
I see FW as CAREFULLY inspecting everything under and in her domain, including credit card statements, items brought into the home.
I had the impression theElder Wagner was extremely ill and maybe he did pass responsibility on to the "bookkeeper" or FW.
As you mention, the bookkeeper could be the John/Jane Doe.
The bookkeeper woman, LW, was a companion to a man who was a fugitive from NY. -something about guns.
So I wonder, how did that pair happen to end up at FWF, living there for so many years.

A Small-Town Official Was Ousted and Headed to Prison. Then He Vanished.

BBM: I didn't say I think the bookkeeper is John Doe. I said I think FW's husband is John Doe ("John" is the how it is stated in count 22 of indictments).

Italics by me: Sounds pretty fishy to me!
JMO

 

[Ann99]

BBM: I didn't say I think the bookkeeper is John Doe. I said I think FW's husband is John Doe ("John" is the how it is stated in count 22 of indictments).

Italics by me: Sounds pretty fishy to me!
JMO

Sorry, I worded that incorrectly.

 

[Covert Operative]

BBM: I didn't say I think the bookkeeper is John Doe. I said I think FW's husband is John Doe ("John" is the how it is stated in count 22 of indictments).

Italics by me: Sounds pretty fishy to me!
JMO

Isn't John Doe used in the legal world as a type of placement so the prosecution can prosecute later if they needed to. It may be that there is some unknown DNA/hair at one of the scenes. To make sure they could prosecute someone later if needed they do that in their legal documents. It would be very easy for an unknown person's DNA to be at one of the scenes just from normal circumstances. I am not positive on that but I believe that is why that term is used in Documents.

 

[Sillybilly]

ADMIN NOTE:

This post lands at random.

Stop with the direct or indirect accusations and insinuations about FW. She has NOT been charged as an accomplice or an accessory in this crime, and she has not been officially named as a POI or suspect.

To those members who think it's okay to make such accusations and insinuations, please read Websleuths Victim Friendly policy until you fully understand it:

The "victim friendly" rule extends to family members of victims and suspects. Sleuthing family members, friends, or others who have not been officially designated by law enforcement or in mainstream media as a Person of Interest or suspect is not allowed (i.e. Sleuthing out this type of information, and publicly posting their personal information, including names, addresses, and background data -- even if it is public is not allowed and such posts will be removed, along with any posts that encourage such sleuthing).

This does not mean, however, that statements made by family members and other third parties cannot come into discussion as the facts of the case are reported in the media. Members may reasonably discuss what is said in MSM by them or about them, but do not make random accusations, insinuations, suggest their involvement, bash and attack them, or speculate negatively about them.

Failure to adhere to the above very basic WS policy may result in a loss of posting privileges, temporary or permanent.

 

[Cool Cats]

Isn't John Doe used in the legal world as a type of placement so the prosecution can prosecute later if they needed to. It may be that there is some unknown DNA/hair at one of the scenes. To make sure they could prosecute someone later if needed they do that in their legal documents. It would be very easy for an unknown person's DNA to be at one of the scenes just from normal circumstances. I am not positive on that but I believe that is why that term is used in Documents.

Yes. It is to get around the statute of limitations if sometime down the road LE arrests another suspect for the crime.

Say 6 years from now someone is arrested for helping to hide Wagner evidence after the fact.

The statute of limitations could technically be up for that specific crime but because John Doe was named in the indictment it covers the person arrested and voids the statute of limitations.

Very common standard procedure to add in John Does.

‘John Doe’ indictment leads to conviction in 18-year-old rape case


|“John Doe” Indictment Leads to Conviction in 18-Year-Old Rape Case, WMC Action News 5 (Oct. 15, 2019)