OH - Pike Co, 8 in Rhoden Family Murdered Over Custody Issue, 4 Members Wagner Family Arrested #70

[Berrybell]

A victim of the preacher in Alaska also, in my opinion…

I totally agree

 

[Seattle1]

I think it's just an attempt to intimidate her or make her feel scared weather that is so she won't testify or will not say things too incriminating, I don't know, but it just seems in bad taste for them to do this. I read another comment it was so they could interview her neighbors, but why? What would her neighbors be able to say? It's ridiculous to me that a victim of these monsters can be revictimized by their attorneys to try to discredit her, she isn't on trial.

Is this still about EW being added to the witness list?

Clearly, the prosecution has the burden of proof where it is highly unlikely that a defense witness including EW would be called for anything other than to refute alleged evidence by the prosecution or to impeach testimony by a prosecution witness. I doubt the defense has any desire to revictimize any party not charged in this horrific event. MOO

 

[Chelly]

Good News! Former Cincinnati Enquirer reporter, Chris Graves, confirmed she will return to Ohio to cover the entire trial. https://twitter.com/chrisgraves
https://twitter.com/chrisgraves
Chris Graves
@chrisgraves
4h

Ha! I have to do October work I. Sept because headed to Ohio to cover mass murder trial for next 6-8 weeks + teaching here.

 

[pcrum12]

saving my spot -

 

[IType]

A victim of the preacher in Alaska also, in my opinion…

I totally agree

 

[IType]

Is this still about EW being added to the witness list?

Clearly, the prosecution has the burden of proof where it is highly unlikely that a defense witness including EW would be called for anything other than to refute alleged evidence by the prosecution or to impeach testimony by a prosecution witness. I doubt the defense has any desire to revictimize any party not charged in this horrific event. MOO

EW (whose last name is now Freeman, I think, according to the docket) would be a witness for the prosecution if she is subpoenaed to testify. JMO

 

[Betty P]

Is this still about EW being added to the witness list?

Clearly, the prosecution has the burden of proof where it is highly unlikely that a defense witness including EW would be called for anything other than to refute alleged evidence by the prosecution or to impeach testimony by a prosecution witness. I doubt the defense has any desire to revictimize any party not charged in this horrific event. MOO

TBH, the defense for GW4 has been a tad unorthodox at times and very aggressive. As mentioned earlier, this is the second time they've made this request. JMO They also work with attorneys who represent GW4's grandmother, Fredericka Wagner. That legal team was also in court at GW4's hearing, asking the judge to forbid the news media from going to FWF with the jury tour.

 

[Betty P]

Photos of visit to Bethel Hill, location where the Wagners owned a mobile home <modsnip- no link for statement of fact>

Kind of creepy spot way back in the woods. <modsnip>

https://twitter.com/x/status/1565375374695059456

 

[iridized]

Very strange wording used by the judge to describe the clothing the jurors should wear whilst on the "field trip". Why not use the more common description "business casual"?

 

[Seattle1]

EW (whose last name is now Freeman, I think, according to the docket) would be a witness for the prosecution if she is subpoenaed to testify. JMO

I'm sorry my post was unclear. I'm sure it would help if I actually read the defense Motion #109 to Compel Discovery but since I didn't expect to find it posted here, I was instead relying on inferences from others. Nonetheless, now that I have read the motion, I offer the following:

Take note that Defense Motion #109 dated 8/31/22 is specific to OH Crim R. 16 (F)(5) (and State v. McKelton) which states as follows:

(F) Review of Prosecuting Attorney's Certification of Non-Disclosure. Upon motion of the defendant, the trial court shall review the prosecuting attorney's decision of nondisclosure or designation of "counsel only" material for abuse of discretion during an in camera hearing conducted seven days prior to trial, with counsel participating.
[..]

(5) If the court finds no abuse of discretion by the prosecuting attorney, a copy of any discoverable material that was not disclosed before trial shall be provided to the defendant no later than commencement of trial. If the court continues the trial after the disclosure, the testimony of any witness shall be perpetuated on motion of the state subject to further cross-examination for good cause shown.

And where State v. McKelton provides that TW testified to witnessing domestic violence between McKelton and murder victim A, and McKelton's argument citing the exception:

b. Crim.R. 16(D) and (F)
{¶ 51} As an exception to the general rule requiring the disclosure of
witness names prior to trial, a prosecutor may seek relief from disclosure under
Crim.R. 16(D)(1) if the prosecutor has “reasonable, articulable grounds to believe
that disclosure will compromise the safety of a witness, victim, or third party, or
subject them to intimidation or coercion.” Such grounds include “the nature of the
case, the specific course of conduct of one or more parties, threats or prior instances
of witness tampering or intimidation, * * * and any other relevant information.”
Crim.R. 16(D).

{¶ 52} Upon a defendant’s motion, an in camera hearing must be conducted
seven days prior to trial. Crim.R. 16(F). If the trial court finds an abuse of
prosecutorial discretion, then the prosecutor must immediately disclose the
material. 2010 Staff Note, Crim.R. 16(F). Otherwise, the material must be
disclosed “no later than commencement of trial.” Crim.R. 16(F)(5). We review a
lower court’s rulings on discovery matters for an abuse of discretion. State ex rel.
Duncan v. Middlefield, 120 Ohio St.3d 313, 2008-Ohio-6200, 898 N.E.2d 952,
¶ 27.

https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/0/2016/2016-ohio-5735.pdf

GW4's attorneys are filing another motion demanding the prosecution tell them where Jake's wife, Elizabeth Wagner is located. The Judge refused the same kind of motion on August 5.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1565054901083934722

Nash & Parker are up to 109 Motions now. Imagine how many "objections" they'll file during the trial.

These stalker motions demonstrate exactly why GW4's attorneys should NOT have access to this witness's location.

^^ It follows that the Court denied the Motion on 8/5/22 since the trial had not yet commenced.

 

[Puzzles8]

Nice coverage today on CourtTV.

IMO, my summary of highlights.

Judge Deering ruled this morning that a statement made by HMR over Facebook will be admissible in Court. It was the statement she wrote, paraphrasing - 'they will have to kill me first '.

Another interesting point made by the reporter is that the prosecution may not elect to use JW's confession in the trial as JW seems to claim, 'George didn't shoot anyone'.

So maybe just use AW's confession? An interesting angle I had not thought about.

Ohio Family Massacre Trial: Jury Views Crime Scenes

The jury was taken on a tour of crime scenes where eight members of the Rhoden family were killed as George Wagner IV stands trial.

www.courttv.com

All JMO

 

[justtrish]

Is this still about EW being added to the witness list?

Clearly, the prosecution has the burden of proof where it is highly unlikely that a defense witness including EW would be called for anything other than to refute alleged evidence by the prosecution or to impeach testimony by a prosecution witness. I doubt the defense has any desire to revictimize any party not charged in this horrific event. MOO

I thought EW was a prosecution witness and the defense wants her address. They have successfully kept that from being released to them. I think if the prosecution wants to call her it's to speak about the living arrangements or the dynamic of that family and what she experienced as his wife and possibly what conversations she overheard. It might corroborate Jakes testimony when he's called. I think the defense would want to intimidate her because she likely knows things that would be damning if released. I don't know what they'd want to interview her neighbors where she currently lives or any other reason they need her address. Maybe there is something I'm missing though!

 

[Puzzles8]

I thought EW was a prosecution witness and the defense wants her address. They have successfully kept that from being released to them. I think if the prosecution wants to call her it's to speak about the living arrangements or the dynamic of that family and what she experienced as his wife and possibly what conversations she overheard. It might corroborate Jakes testimony when he's called. I think the defense would want to intimidate her because she likely knows things that would be damning if released. I don't know what they'd want to interview her neighbors where she currently lives or any other reason they need her address. Maybe there is something I'm missing though!

IMO EW is a prosecution witness. She ran for her life soon after she and the W4 moved back to Ohio. There is an incident report in Discovery filed by EW in Summer 2018.

Can anyone help me with a link to that in the Discoveries?

JMO

 

[Cool Cats]

IMO EW is a prosecution witness. She ran for her life soon after she and the W4 moved back to Ohio. There is an incident report in Discovery filed by EW in Summer 2018.

Can anyone help me with a link to that in the Discoveries?

JMO

Angela Wagner | PDF
Uploaded by
Local12WKRC

It was for harassment and identity theft. She was listed as homeless. Sounds like she ran for her life like George's ex did. Canepa said she pled for her life.

 

[Piffcat]

Nice coverage today on CourtTV.

IMO, my summary of highlights.

Judge Deering ruled this morning that a statement made by HMR over Facebook will be admissible in Court. It was the statement she wrote, paraphrasing - 'they will have to kill me first '.

Another interesting point made by the reporter is that the prosecution may not elect to use JW's confession in the trial as JW seems to claim, 'George didn't shoot anyone'.

So maybe just use AW's confession? An interesting angle I had not thought about.

Ohio Family Massacre Trial: Jury Views Crime Scenes

The jury was taken on a tour of crime scenes where eight members of the Rhoden family were killed as George Wagner IV stands trial.

www.courttv.com

All JMO

court tv is reaching in a dangerous by responding to the g4 chinese whispers campaign.g4 lawyers think if they repeat that statement enough it will come true even though it has no legal bearing due to the conspiracy count.
jw statement establishes the motive, mode, planning, execution and cover up of the murders. the statement inextricably ties g4 into the 8 aggravated murder conspiracy. the strongest piece of evidence to convict g4.

conspiracy law says that if 2 or more individuals enter a criminal conspiracy(defined by commiting 1 or more overt acts to further a pattern of corrupt behavior and the crime) all members of the conspiracy can be held for the top count of said conspiracy. in order to prove conspiracy direct evidence is needed to tie the group and crime together whether it be before during or after. this could include wire taps and other communication, testimony from 1 of the conspirators, or eye witness first hand accounts.
g4 could be convicted under jw testimony even if he didnt bring a weapon to the murders. he worked together with premeditation with others to accomplish the group goal of making sure all 8 people died. jws statement includes multiple overt acts by g4-

purchasing murder kit weaponry 40 glock, night scope, murder truck
modifying the murder truck he bought to accomodate jw and g4 to ride with g3 to rhodens but not be seen. in order to kill from afar with the night scope.

JW is the only witness who can testify to the actual murders since it is "claimed" that aw was not there. i cannot imagine a situation where jw does not testify. more likely he will be caught in a lie trying to protect g4 which will reinstate death penalty which is what all 4 deserve!
that being said, jury nullification is always a threat in conspiracy cases., canepa im sure has a strong gameplan to bury the smokescreen tactics of g4s disgusting attorneys

 

[Betty P]

Nice coverage today on CourtTV.

IMO, my summary of highlights.

Judge Deering ruled this morning that a statement made by HMR over Facebook will be admissible in Court. It was the statement she wrote, paraphrasing - 'they will have to kill me first '.

Another interesting point made by the reporter is that the prosecution may not elect to use JW's confession in the trial as JW seems to claim, 'George didn't shoot anyone'.

So maybe just use AW's confession? An interesting angle I had not thought about.

Ohio Family Massacre Trial: Jury Views Crime Scenes

The jury was taken on a tour of crime scenes where eight members of the Rhoden family were killed as George Wagner IV stands trial.

www.courttv.com

All JMO

Thanks. I reject the reporter’s premise that Jake only said that GW4 never shot anyone. That reporter needs to stop listening to the lies being told by Nash and Parker.

Canepa has said that Jake said that in the beginning of his nearly 12 hour long proffer. His story changed later. If this reporter would do their homework, it might help. GW4 took his weapon along that night and he used it to shoot at least one victim.

JMO, they’re going way out on a limb offering their own conspiracy theories and pretending to speak for the prosecution. It’s sad they’re taking advantage of the situation knowing that Canepa is honoring the gag order and will not respond to their rumors.

 

[Cool Cats]

Nice coverage today on CourtTV.

IMO, my summary of highlights.

Judge Deering ruled this morning that a statement made by HMR over Facebook will be admissible in Court. It was the statement she wrote, paraphrasing - 'they will have to kill me first '.

Another interesting point made by the reporter is that the prosecution may not elect to use JW's confession in the trial as JW seems to claim, 'George didn't shoot anyone'.

So maybe just use AW's confession? An interesting angle I had not thought about.

Ohio Family Massacre Trial: Jury Views Crime Scenes

The jury was taken on a tour of crime scenes where eight members of the Rhoden family were killed as George Wagner IV stands trial.

www.courttv.com

All JMO

Another interesting point made by the reporter is that the prosecution may not elect to use JW's confession in the trial as JW seems to claim, 'George didn't shoot anyone'.

Reporter sounds clueless. Reporting opinion not fact.

JW has to testify, it's part of his plea deal, this is what his confession is - his testimony on the stand.

 

[Seattle1]

I thought EW was a prosecution witness and the defense wants her address. They have successfully kept that from being released to them. I think if the prosecution wants to call her it's to speak about the living arrangements or the dynamic of that family and what she experienced as his wife and possibly what conversations she overheard. It might corroborate Jakes testimony when he's called. I think the defense would want to intimidate her because she likely knows things that would be damning if released. I don't know what they'd want to interview her neighbors where she currently lives or any other reason they need her address. Maybe there is something I'm missing though!

^^BBM

Defense Motion #109 to Compel Discovery, filed 8/31/22, is a matter of law.

As we know, Rule 16 provides that prosecutors generally have a duty to share Discovery with the defense as soon as possible, pursuant to OH Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 16 -- Discovery and Inspection.

However, and most likely for the reasons you cite including protecting the victim from threat, harassment, and/or harm, it's apparent that the prosecution previously provided the Court good cause to rely on an exception to Rule 16 for non-disclosure.

But at this time, since the defense has no guarantee that the prosecution will actually call EW as a witness, it's a matter of law pursuant to Rule 16 (F)(5), (and the Sixth Amendment that a defendant has the right to confront a witness against them in a criminal action) where the prosecution has to provide the witness information at the commencement of trial:

OH Crim R. 16 (F)(5):

(5) If the court finds no abuse of discretion by the prosecuting attorney, a copy of any discoverable material that was not disclosed before trial shall be provided to the defendant no later than commencement of trial. If the court continues the trial after the disclosure, the testimony of any witness shall be perpetuated on motion of the state subject to further cross-examination for good cause shown.

https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/LegalResources/Rules/criminal/CriminalProcedure.pdf

 

[ohioexpat63]

JW will testify. Id bet my monthly retirement check on it. He can claim 4 didnt shoot anyone all he wants, it doesn't matter. You lie you die. It is that simple.

I hope EW isnt needed as a witness. I still say if JW and AW testify to the family dynamics she isnt needed. She can only corroborate what AW and JW testify about. Im sure the prosecutors have already nailed down any inconsistencies.

So, if EW says one thing and AW and JW says another, who is to believed? Will the death penalty be brought back on the table?

None of this family dynamic crap means anything anyway. JW and AW implicated 4 in the planning and at a minimum being on the scene of the murders. He is on tape threatening LEO and authorities. I dont know what else is needed. It is just my simple minded opinion. KISS

 

[Dudly]

I thought EW was a prosecution witness and the defense wants her address. They have successfully kept that from being released to them. I think if the prosecution wants to call her it's to speak about the living arrangements or the dynamic of that family and what she experienced as his wife and possibly what conversations she overheard. It might corroborate Jakes testimony when he's called. I think the defense would want to intimidate her because she likely knows things that would be damning if released. I don't know what they'd want to interview her neighbors where she currently lives or any other reason they need her address. Maybe there is something I'm missing though!

Likely the Defense wants to interview neighbors trying find something to discredit EW…
MOO