GUILTY OH Pike Co., 8 in Rhoden Family Murdered Over Custody Issue, 4 Members Wagner Family Arrested #64

[IType]

I am just wondering why she would take a LWOP plea when that is the worse she could get in a trial anyway unless she is just ready to move on to prison.

I think maybe she's just given up. If she went to trial, all the gory details of her horrible actions would be laid out for all the world to see. IMO, her ego couldn't handle that. She's been large and in charge for a long, long time but now she doesn't have a leg to stand on and she has no support from her mom or youngest son. IMO she is no longer in control and she can't handle it. All JMO

 

[Covert Operative]

I think maybe she's just given up. If she went to trial, all the gory details of her horrible actions would be laid out for all the world to see. IMO, her ego couldn't handle that. She's been large and in charge for a long, long time but now she doesn't have a leg to stand on and she has no support from her mom or youngest son. IMO she is no longer in control and she can't handle it. All JMO

If G4 and BW got to trial, details of the crime will come out anyway. I guess the difference would be that she would not have to be in the courtroom herself and take part unless she also has to testify. If she makes a deal testifying could be part of it, or her agreement could be totally different than JW's.

 

[Ann99]

I don't see AC agreeing to anything but lwop for AW. The evidence is too strong and really leaves no room for AW to wiggle out of any of the charges. JMO

I agree.

MO. I can not defend this thought any better that what I say here.
It is based my faith in AC and her abilities as a Prosecutor.

As I see it, AC would not have structured a deal that has any wiggle room for any of the remaining 3 Wagners. This entire case, all remaining 3, are too high profile to suddenly start more negotiations. AC has spoken.

I see it that the deal is...you must plead guilty and then the DP is off the table and it is LWOP.

DP is off only after a guilty plea.
No negotiating.

Go to trial and Jake will testify against you and the DP is back on.

I know others do not read it as I do.
I know this is not a popular opinion, and the documents are not clearly worded as such. However they are not clearly worded in the opposite either.

I did see the word "yet" used a few times. This word is Critical.
Look how many ways this word can be used.
AC is a master of words.

Yet definition and meaning | Collins English Dictionary

Yes. I base this theory on the word YET.

MOO

 

[IType]

Would AW be concerned about her own Mother, RN? Would AW plead guilty and accept LWOP to spare her Mom?
If AC wanted to play hardball, she could come up with with a few new serious charges against RN.
Maybe AW will see the light and plead guilty to stop it all from moving forward publicly and save her Mom the ordeal of a trial and potentially additional bad deeds coming out.

IMO, RN was just an innocent bystander in all of this mess. I don't really expect any other charges against RN, but there might be. Time will tell. JMO

 

[Betty P]

I agree.

MO. I can not defend this thought any better that what I say here.
It is based my faith in AC and her abilities as a Prosecutor.

As I see it, AC would not have structured a deal that has any wiggle room for any of the remaining 3 Wagners. This entire case, all remaining 3, are too high profile to suddenly start more negotiations. AC has spoken.

I see it that the deal is...you must plead guilty and then the DP is off the table and it is LWOP.

DP is off only after a guilty plea.
No negotiating.

Go to trial and Jake will testify against you and the DP is back on.

I know others do not read it as I do.
I know this is not a popular opinion, and the documents are not clearly worded as such. However they are not clearly worded in the opposite either.

I did see the word "yet" used a few times. This word is Critical.
Look how many ways this word can be used.
AC is a master of words.

Yet definition and meaning | Collins English Dictionary

Yes. I base this theory on the word YET.

MOO

Great observation about AC using "yet". I agree, she's no fool. She's constructed this plea bargain offer very carefully with little wiggle room. Defense attorneys who think they can manipulate it to their client's benefit should reconsider.

I don't envy the defense attorneys, their job with the Wagner family is probably a difficult ordeal. They're violent narcissists who are well accustomed to getting their way. They're also elitists. Even though everyone now knows they're guilty, they remain in denial. The defense attorneys must struggle to make them understand the impossible odds of ever getting out of prison.

 

[Covert Operative]

I agree.

MO. I can not defend this thought any better that what I say here.
It is based my faith in AC and her abilities as a Prosecutor.

As I see it, AC would not have structured a deal that has any wiggle room for any of the remaining 3 Wagners. This entire case, all remaining 3, are too high profile to suddenly start more negotiations. AC has spoken.

I see it that the deal is...you must plead guilty and then the DP is off the table and it is LWOP.

DP is off only after a guilty plea.
No negotiating.

Go to trial and Jake will testify against you and the DP is back on.

I know others do not read it as I do.
I know this is not a popular opinion, and the documents are not clearly worded as such. However they are not clearly worded in the opposite either.

I did see the word "yet" used a few times. This word is Critical.
Look how many ways this word can be used.
AC is a master of words.

Yet definition and meaning | Collins English Dictionary

Yes. I base this theory on the word YET.

MOO

Yes, I do not read JW's agreement that way. His plea agreement was attached to motion 51 and the wording in there does not say they have to take LWOP for the DP specifications to be dropped. You probably have seen it but if not let me know and I will attach for you. There could be some wording in there that you understand better than I do that means they have to accept a LWOP for the DP to be dropped.

 

[IType]

If G4 and BW got to trial, details of the crime will come out anyway. I guess the difference would be that she would not have to be in the courtroom herself and take part unless she also has to testify. If she makes a deal testifying could be part of it, or her agreement could be totally different than JW's.

That's a good point. I would anticipate she would have to testify against her co-defendants, including FW if charges would be refiled. Maybe AW thinks the scrutiny she would be under if she testifies against the others would not be as bad as the intense scrutiny of sitting every day in court through her own trial where all eyes would be focused on her 100% of the time. JMO, just a thought

 

[Betty P]

IMO, RN was just an innocent bystander in all of this mess. I don't really expect any other charges against RN, but there might be. Time will tell. JMO

I think it's possible she knew the 4 Wagners committed the murders, after the fact. JMO, I think AC will honor the agreement with RN, though.

 

[Covert Operative]

IMO, RN was just an innocent bystander in all of this mess. I don't really expect any other charges against RN, but there might be. Time will tell. JMO

I believe she knew things other than the forgery. I do not think more charges will be filed against her though. I suspect both grannies may go around a little nervous all the time worried that something may come out on them.

 

[Ann99]

Yes, I do not read JW's agreement that way. His plea agreement was attached to motion 51 and the wording in there does not say they have to take LWOP for the DP specifications to be dropped. You probably have seen it but if not let me know and I will attach for you. There could be some wording in there that you understand better than I do that means they have to accept a LWOP for the DP to be dropped.

I do respect your opinion.
I have seen it and I simply do not think AC would easily 'give it all away' meaning remove the DP without a guilty plea.
JMO.
I don't believe AC would make it within reach of the remaining 3 sets of Attorneys to go into court without those attorneys considering the serious consequence to their clients.
Attorney's must give guidance and advise their clients what is best, according to the law and the known evidence.
While all 4 sets of attorneys have attacked the evidence, no big deal, that is all they can do. No attorney has provided one bit of exculpatory evidence for their client.
In the end, each attorney MUST ADVISE his/her client. Go to trial or plead guilty.
Also a defense attorney can not bring into trial known falsehoods, lies.
An attorney can not permit perjury.
Again they can only attack the evidence, try to prevent the State from proving guilt.
Seems to me this means the remaining 3 Wagners could not testify in their own defense or the defense of another W.
So what could these 3 sets of attorneys possibly advise their clients.
AC has them all in a vice grip.
MO

 

[Ann99]

IMO, RN was just an innocent bystander in all of this mess. I don't really expect any other charges against RN, but there might be. Time will tell. JMO

Right.
MO I don't expect more charges against RN, ( although I believe she is far from an innocent grannie) but AC could use this threat against AW. And AW would likely know there is more that could be said.

 

[Covert Operative]

I do respect your opinion.
I have seen it and I simply do not think AC would easily 'give it all away' meaning remove the DP without a guilty plea.
JMO.
I don't believe AC would make it within reach of the remaining 3 sets of Attorneys to go into court without those attorneys considering the serious consequence to their clients.
Attorney's must give guidance and advise their clients what is best, according to the law and the known evidence.
While all 4 sets of attorneys have attacked the evidence, no big deal, that is all they can do. No attorney has provided one bit of exculpatory evidence for their client.
In the end, each attorney MUST ADVISE his/her client. Go to trial or plead guilty.
Also a defense attorney can not bring into trial known falsehoods, lies.
An attorney can not permit perjury.
Again they can only attack the evidence, try to prevent the State from proving guilt.
Seems to me this means the remaining 3 Wagners could not testify in their own defense or the defense of another W.
So what could these 3 sets of attorneys possibly advise their clients.
AC has them all in a vice grip.
MO

I respect your opinion also and I do have different thoughts about it. By giving up the DP she got so much in return, the evidence, his confession and still kept the upper hand so I can definitely see her agreeing to remove the DP and in the paperwork it appears that way.
She did not give away all, they still have to plea or go to trial. She may have given up an important barganing tool with the DP dismissal agreement but it was well worth it for what she got in return.
Saying she was not going to remove the DP "yet" is because there was not a date in the agreement of when that had to be done. I assume BW lawyer wants the judge to set a date for it to be done, order it done immediately or to clarify when it should be done.

 

[LMDlong]

This got put on the calendar pretty quickly and suddenly. My imagination may be over doing it.
AW -
09/08/2021 """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" Judge: DEERING, RANDY D Event: MOTION HEARING Date: 09/10/2021 Time: 02:00 PM

This should be very interesting. IMO it’s about her phone privileges or she’s going to change her plea.

 

[Ann99]

I respect your opinion also and I do see it the same. By giving up the DP she got so much in return, the evidence, his confession and still kept the upper hand so I can definitely see her agreeing to remove the DP and in the paperwork it appears that way.
She did not give away all, they still have to plea or go to trial. She may have given up an important barganing tool with the DP dismissal agreement but it was well worth it for what she got in return.
Saying she was not going to remove the DP "yet" is because there was not a date in the agreement of when that had to be done. I assume BW lawyer wants the judge to set a date for it to be done, order it done immediately or to clarify when it should be done.

Ok friendly debate. You and I interpret these words and meaning differently.

Saying she was not going to remove the DP "yet" is because there was not a date in the agreement of when that had to be done. *

I assume BW lawyer wants the judge to set a date for it to be done, order it done immediately or to clarify when it should be done.**

* I say the DP is removed after a guilty plea. That's the date.

**BW lawyer knows clarification on this issue is needed. He knows what AC means, but he plays his Defense Role.

I will add, I believe on DP cases, and on sentencing for Felony charges in general, the Judge has a responsibility for contributing opinion to sentencing decisions.
So there is that factor.
Would Judge Deering have an opinion. Judge Deering knows the evidence.
idk.

 

[IType]

I think it's possible she knew the 4 Wagners committed the murders, after the fact. JMO, I think AC will honor the agreement with RN, though.

I agree.

 

[LMDlong]

I cannot see them clearing or making sure the attorneys on both sides calendars were clear for a phone motion and having to fit that. So it is suspicious. If it is a plea do you think it will be a plea of LWOP?

IMO Either LWOP or mental illness, which I don’t think will fly.

 

[IType]

I believe she knew things other than the forgery. I do not think more charges will be filed against her though. I suspect both grannies may go around a little nervous all the time worried that something may come out on them.

They should be nervous! IMO

 

[LMDlong]

I am just wondering why she would take a LWOP plea when that is the worse she could get in a trial anyway unless she is just ready to move on to prison.

I wonder if it has anything to do with the information AC received that caused the delay turning the proffer over.

 

[Covert Operative]

Ok friendly debate. You and I interpret these words and meaning differently.

Saying she was not going to remove the DP "yet" is because there was not a date in the agreement of when that had to be done. *

I assume BW lawyer wants the judge to set a date for it to be done, order it done immediately or to clarify when it should be done.**

* I say the DP is removed after a guilty plea. That's the date.

**BW lawyer knows clarification on this issue is needed. He knows what AC means, but he plays his Defense Role.

I will add, I believe on DP cases, and on sentencing for Felony charges in general, the Judge has a responsibility for contributing opinion to sentencing decisions.
So there is that factor.
Would Judge Deering have an opinion. Judge Deering knows the evidence.
idk.

There certainly is no wording in the documents that leads me to believe that the DP will only be removed if they plead guilty.

I do not think it matters what AC means, I think it matters what is in the agreement.

 

[IType]

This should be very interesting. IMO it’s about her phone privileges or she’s going to change her plea.

With this being the first event scheduled in her case for more than 14-1/2 months and the fact it was squeezed into the court's schedule only two days later, my money is on plea change. It appears to me that the prosecution rushed to get this hearing in right before GW4's hearing, thus showing GW4 and his team that the prosecution clearly has the upper hand here and that yet another co-defendant will be testifying against GW4 if he were foolish enough to go to trial. All JMO.