OH - Pike Co - 8 in Rhoden Family Murdered Over Custody Issue - 4 Members Wagner Family Arrested #75

[ColMustard]

Rimfire (.22) cannot be reloaded/reused.
Sometimes (most of the time) a cartridge case will be deformed by the extractor and/or the ejector.

True, but I think the ones in evidence there were centerfire.

 

[Chingaling]

Oh boy Georgie Porgie is pi&&ed. When they can back from break and he went to sit down, he yanked his chair forward and flumpped himself down in it.

 

[abeaman02]

Ohhh I didn't know about enhanced driver licenses. Are they the norm now or do they cost additional money?

You can pay a little extra and they allow you to travel to countries that border the US. I live in Detroit area and travel back and forth quite often (pre covid)

 

[24Roses]

Oh I missed that! Was that said or did they have footage of her carrying 3? I have wondered if they just didn't have Billy's size. His foot seems very large.. maybe 12 or 13. Would be hard to squeeze a 13 in an 11 shoe. Might be what helps them prove George was wearing a pair.

One of the pairs was voided. IMHO-I think it might of been said that one of the shoe purchases was an accidental double on the receipt (not sure how to word that). But, I really doubt it! IMO-AW knew all along that all 3 were going that night. Maybe she was going to buy a pair for Billy and hope they would fit good enough and then changed her mind.

 

[LMDlong]

Oh I missed that! Was that said or did they have footage of her carrying 3? I have wondered if they just didn't have Billy's size. His foot seems very large.. maybe 12 or 13. Would be hard to squeeze a 13 in an 11 shoe. Might be what helps them prove George was wearing a pair.

I don’t think she meant to purchase 3 pairs . The second pair could have been rang up twice as a mistake and then voided to remove them. IMO
BTW the boots found in the backseat area of JW’s truck that was mentioned today were a size 12.

 

[ColMustard]

Oh boy Georgie Porgie is pi&&ed. When they can back from break and he went to sit down, he yanked his chair forward and flumpped himself down in it.

I noticed that too and almost posted the same thing, long day though.

 

[RAISINISBACK]

While I know LE was doing their job, I feel really bad for everyone having to look through all that stuff! And I thought I had alot... not so much! (;

I feel really bad for all the people who looked though that one tub that had George's tax returns in it because whoever did, committed a federal crime. A federal felony.

AC asked MS. Evesledge (I think is the way you spell her name) of the BCI if she had examined every document in one particular plastic tub. Her reply was yes she had, and also that she had taken it back to their headquarters where more BCI agents looked though that plastic tub.

On cross Parker asked her did you look at every document in this tub? Once again she said yes. Then he started pulling out tax returns for I think three years of returns for George and two for George and Tabitha. Then he told her to read the privacy and confidentially warning from the cover sheet of the accounting firm.

We all have that law on our cover sheets to inform the taxpayer and warn anyone who might accidently get hold of someone else's tax return. It says it is a federal crime to view, without taxpayers permission, any tax return belonging to that taxpayer under penalty of federal law.

I have been a CPA and owned my own firm doing accounting and taxes for right at 50 years now. There is a very strict privacy and confidentiality law concerning taxpayers federal tax returns as most of you may have guessed by witnessing how hard it is for anyone, even the US Congress to get copies of the former POTUS tax returns. They have been fighting for years trying to get his tax returns, the AG of NY finally resorted to getting his NEW YORK STATE tax returns. I put that in capital letters so it would stand out they could only get his state tax returns.

There is a very good reason for that. The only people allowed to view a taxpayers return are

1. The taxpayer who's name is on that return.
2. The CPA or tax preparer or tax attorney who is licensed to defend you against the IRS or an EA who prepared that return for the taxpayer and who must sign that tax return and put a CPA license number, a CAF number or a license number issued by the IRS on that return called a PTIN number. If it is filed electronically by anyone other than the taxpayer (taxpayers can file their returns by themselves electronically on sites like TurboTax) then it must also have an ERO number in addition to the preparers signature.
3. The IRS who can view a limited transcript after they have established a legal basis for an audit of that tax return. Even then they must list out separately each tax year they intend to audit and notify you of said audit by U.S.P.S. mail.
4. The DOJ if the IRS suspects a criminal activity pertaining to filing a fraudulent tax return.
5. The Social Security Administration.

That's it folks. No one else can view your tax returns without your express permission for ANY reason. Not even the BCI in the murders of 8 people. You must sign a form 4506 to give a bank or finance/mortgage company permission to request your tax return for a loan. You can also sign a 2848 Power Of Attorney to allow a representative to handle your taxes if you are unable to do so.

The fine for a tax preparer releasing a tax return without permission is 1000.00 and 1 year in prison plus court costs PER return.

It is a FEDERAL crime to view a taxpayers return without their permission. In order for the BCI to view Georges tax returns they must first get a subpoena signed by a federal judge in a federal court.

No state agency such as the BCI can look through George's tax returns without his permission or a federal court subpoena signed by a federal judge. Not even the FBI, DEA, ATF, DHS, CIA, Congress, POTUS (well you get the drift) can view your tax return without your permission or a federal Subpoena. If they do so, they commit a federal crime, a felony prosecuted in a federal, not state, court.

So that is why MS. Evesledge had that funny look on her face when Parker asked her if she viewed every document in that tub and she answered yes under oath, in a court of law and then he started pulling out George's tax returns and asked her to read the warning on the cover sheet of the accounting firm. Ms. Evesledge committed a federal crime times however many years of returns she viewed. I noticed AC get very nervous then when she came back after cross and stuck some stickers on some papers her hands were shaking. I bet she viewed them also without George's permission. AC should have known better and BCI especially should have.

I also bet Parker or Nash is on the phone and following up with a letter to the IRS right now. lol.

As an aside the taxpayer can give their tax return to anyone they want to or even publish it in the newspaper. on social media or TV or pass it out to the entire city they live in or give it to LE. But LE looking at it without permission or a federal subpoena is a HUGE no-no.

JMO

 

[RAISINISBACK]

After witnesses handled the bag with the collected "Silver Cell Phone" the prosecution handed him another small flat package marked CC287 and said, ok don't give me your narrative on this one just answer my questions. Questions were just, is it marked that you collected it, was it collected in accordance with all the correct practices and storage blah, blah, blah. He wasn't asked what it was nor was a picture shown.

Wonder what that could be, being kept under wraps for a later date? Very intriguing.

I don't know but they went through a bunch of crap they collected yet entered very little into evidence and published even less for the jury. I bet that jury was falling asleep like i was.

JMO

 

[justtrish]

Okay, I went back to listen again to the house info. It's not clicking what is going on so maybe one of ya'll could piece it together.

Edward Wagner and George Wager IV purchased the 260 Peterson Road. Price 175,000 purchase price and contingency listed = none paid cash

Dec 26, 2013 - agreement to purchase the 260 Peterson road home
March 28, 2014 took possession of the 260 Peterson road home

July 13, 2015 Jake Wager - Errors and Admissions agreement closing of a loan at First State bank for $75,000

Agreement to provide insurance for Peterson Road house - July 13, 2015

Sept 20, 2016 listing 260 Peterson Road change in price from 185,000 to 155,000 and another parcel from 108, 100,000.

So if I am understanding correctly maybe there are 2 properties. Cash was paid for the house. Jake maybe got a loan for the 75,000 that is possibly that second parcel they had listed later for 108,000. But that loan for 75,000 was paid off in July 2015 (3 months after the murders)

Where is all this cash coming from?

Any of these dates trigger anything for anyone? Any of this seem shady? I just wrote down what was said as documents and dates were read off.

 

[RAISINISBACK]

AC's all for one and one for all case is falling apart IMO. She claimed they all shared bank accounts and finances yet there were two bank statements for George from two different banks in those documents.

One looked to be a business account for the trucking company with signatory privileges by several of the W's which is not that uncommon for people who own businesses. I have several people on my business account that can sign checks to vendors or payroll checks in case I am unavailable, including family members.

A second one was in George's name only and probably his personal account.

JMO

 

[sunshineray]

Rimfire (.22) cannot be reloaded/reused.
Sometimes (most of the time) a cartridge case will be deformed by the extractor and/or the ejector.

We're those Rimfire .22's in that picture today? Was that the ammo that killed some of the R's and HHG? TIA

 

[sunshineray]

I don't know but they went through a bunch of crap they collected yet entered very little into evidence and published even less for the jury. I bet that jury was falling asleep like i was.

JMO

They entered quite a lot into evidence today. Everything talked about and shown (individual items of evidence, group items and pictures of items).

 

[RAISINISBACK]

Looks like two Walmart receipts were mismarked, as in not correctly distinguished from each other. One was in middle of March 2016 (at a Walmart I didn't catch where) and the other at a Waverly Walmart first week of April 2016. Sure hope that doesn't muck up using those receipts as evidence. Nash looked extremely perplexed by that testimony and went to his computer.

New Boston or something. I heard the Boston part anyway. IDK if that is a town since I have never been to OH.

JMO

 

[RAISINISBACK]

Passports are roughly $200 for adults and $150 for children under 16. So 4 adults and 2 children (let's just say at that time it was Angela, Billy, Jake, George, Sophia, and Bulvine) That would be $1100 and even with rush fees or something like that, I don't see how it costs over$3,000 for passports. I heard $900, $900, $750, and one other amount I didn't catch. Were they buying fake ones?

or buying one at a time and carrying balance forward to the next month.

jmo

 

[pittsburghgirl]

I feel really bad for all the people who looked though that one tub that had George's tax returns in it because whoever did, committed a federal crime. A federal felony.

AC asked MS. Evesledge (I think is the way you spell her name) of the BCI if she had examined every document in one particular plastic tub. Her reply was yes she had, and also that she had taken it back to their headquarters where more BCI agents looked though that plastic tub.

On cross Parker asked her did you look at every document in this tub? Once again she said yes. Then he started pulling out tax returns for I think three years of returns for George and two for George and Tabitha. Then he told her to read the privacy and confidentially warning from the cover sheet of the accounting firm.

We all have that law on our cover sheets to inform the taxpayer and warn anyone who might accidently get hold of someone else's tax return. It says it is a federal crime to view, without taxpayers permission, any tax return belonging to that taxpayer under penalty of federal law.

I have been a CPA and owned my own firm doing accounting and taxes for right at 50 years now. There is a very strict privacy and confidentiality law concerning taxpayers federal tax returns as most of you may have guessed by witnessing how hard it is for anyone, even the US Congress to get copies of the former POTUS tax returns. They have been fighting for years trying to get his tax returns, the AG of NY finally resorted to getting his NEW YORK STATE tax returns. I put that in capital letters so it would stand out they could only get his state tax returns.

There is a very good reason for that. The only people allowed to view a taxpayers return are

1. The taxpayer who's name is on that return.
2. The CPA or tax preparer or tax attorney who is licensed to defend you against the IRS or an EA who prepared that return for the taxpayer and who must sign that tax return and put a CPA license number, a CAF number or a license number issued by the IRS on that return called a PTIN number. If it is filed electronically by anyone other than the taxpayer (taxpayers can file their returns by themselves electronically on sites like TurboTax) then it must also have an ERO number in addition to the preparers signature.
3. The IRS who can view a limited transcript after they have established a legal basis for an audit of that tax return. Even then they must list out separately each tax year they intend to audit and notify you of said audit by U.S.P.S. mail.
4. The DOJ if the IRS suspects a criminal activity pertaining to filing a fraudulent tax return.
5. The Social Security Administration.

That's it folks. No one else can view your tax returns without your express permission for ANY reason. Not even the BCI in the murders of 8 people. You must sign a form 4506 to give a bank or finance/mortgage company permission to request your tax return for a loan. You can also sign a 2848 Power Of Attorney to allow a representative to handle your taxes if you are unable to do so.

The fine for a tax preparer releasing a tax return without permission is 1000.00 and 1 year in prison plus court costs PER return.

It is a FEDERAL crime to view a taxpayers return without their permission. In order for the BCI to view Georges tax returns they must first get a subpoena signed by a federal judge in a federal court.

No state agency such as the BCI can look through George's tax returns without his permission or a federal court subpoena signed by a federal judge. Not even the FBI, DEA, ATF, DHS, CIA, Congress, POTUS (well you get the drift) can view your tax return without your permission or a federal Subpoena. If they do so, they commit a federal crime, a felony prosecuted in a federal, not state, court.

So that is why MS. Evesledge had that funny look on her face when Parker asked her if she viewed every document in that tub and she answered yes under oath, in a court of law and then he started pulling out George's tax returns and asked her to read the warning on the cover sheet of the accounting firm. Ms. Evesledge committed a federal crime times however many years of returns she viewed. I noticed AC get very nervous then when she came back after cross and stuck some stickers on some papers her hands were shaking. I bet she viewed them also without George's permission. AC should have known better and BCI especially should have.

I also bet Parker or Nash is on the phone and following up with a letter to the IRS right now. lol.

As an aside the taxpayer can give their tax return to anyone they want to or even publish it in the newspaper. on social media or TV or pass it out to the entire city they live in or give it to LE. But LE looking at it without permission or a federal subpoena is a HUGE no-no.

JMO

I read the available information on the IRS website about "viewing" tax returns. What I found was restrictions against the IRS allowing people or agencies to view tax returns via the IRS. I'm not sure why this would apply to a law enforcement official with a legal warrant encountering a tax return and noting it as such. For example, if LE has a warrant to collect certain papers and notes a tax return sitting on a table. Certainly it would not break federal law to encounter a tax return in the wild, so to speak, so long as there was a warrant. But I am not a CPA or a lawyer or a police officer. I just can't find any mention anywhere of LE officials coming across a tax return itself being illegal. It would of course, be illegal to disclose anything found therein.

 

[justtrish]

I read the available information on the IRS website about "viewing" tax returns. What I found was restrictions against the IRS allowing people or agencies to view tax returns via the IRS. I'm not sure why this would apply to a law enforcement official with a legal warrant encountering a tax return and noting it as such. For example, if LE has a warrant to collect certain papers and notes a tax return sitting on a table. Certainly it would not break federal law to encounter a tax return in the wild, so to speak, so long as there was a warrant. But I am not a CPA or a lawyer or a police officer. I just can't find any mention anywhere of LE officials coming across a tax return itself being illegal. It would of course, be illegal to disclose anything found therein.

That defense guy was trying to be shady PERIOD. If his intent was to somehow jam her up for saying she viewed all the documents in that tub and then to ask about tax returns. I am going on a limb here, but if you have a search warrant and are looking for receipts and you are shifting through a tote of documents, it's safe to say you saw all the papers yes, but I really doubt she was sitting there reading every line of all of it. I could see scanning it quickly noting it's a tax return, scanning the next document, house agreement, next receipts, next custody document, etc. So to say she saw them all yes because you are looking for specific items and would need to look at the papers to determine what they are. She didn't commit a crime by gathering evidence, but he wants to point out she said she looked at all the papers. Well word games at this point are ridiculous. Just because she scanned it briefly to identify it doesn't mean she sat down, read it, and did something illegal or had malice intent. Defense just trying to be a jerk.

 

[RAISINISBACK]

Also, another point that little ledger of expenses shows it that they were operating as one with the bills too.

I wonder what prosecutors would say if they knew my sister, who had two small children and a full time job, opened a bank account in mine and her name so I could pay her bills every month.

Or that me and hubby have separate accounts but our son and oldest GS is on them in case we die together in an accident. Our son can pay for our funeral and other expenses out of both our accounts plus any bills we leave behind.

Then I have a business account with family and employees on it so they can pay vendors and payroll.

Then hubby and I have an account together with our son's name on it. And a savings account.

Hubby and myself is on our son and GS's accounts.

We all live in different houses. I allow my Bible thumping son limited visits to my home. My GS's do fly by visits. Not an enmeshed family by any means, just a practical one I guess. My sister just lazy.

lol

JMo

 

[justtrish]

I wonder what prosecutors would say if they knew my sister, who had two small children and a full time job, opened a bank account in mine and her name so I could pay her bills every month.

Or that me and hubby have separate accounts but our son and oldest GS is on them in case we die together in an accident. Our son can pay for our funeral and other expenses out of both our accounts plus any bills we leave behind.

Then I have a business account with family and employees on it so they can pay vendors and payroll.

Then hubby and I have an account together with our son's name on it. And a savings account.

Hubby and myself is on our son and GS's accounts.

We all live in different houses. I allow my Bible thumping son limited visits to my home. My GS's do fly by visits. Not an enmeshed family by any means, just a practical one I guess. My sister just lazy.

lol

JMo

I think you might be overthinking this. Many people have a second person on their accounts for various reasons. Many people live with their parents, their children, etc. We are seeing all the small details that ADD UP BIG because something went wrong with this family and what they have done is not normal.

This isn't a family that had a parent on an account to help out or a child on the account to pay bills for them if something happened. This is something different. I understand you are adding a different perspective, but to suggest that this evidence has no value because many people share accounts or do some of the things this family does I don't understand.

They didn't just share some accounts or a house or their lives. This is showing a pattern of everything they did being entangled. Jake and George owned that home together. Their work was all together hauling loads in a truck and Angela documented it all. Not unusual on it's own to work with a brother or a father. Their wives and kids lived all together. Mom controlled a lot of that including paying bills for her grown sons and documenting custody issues, journaling when they had their kids and didn't, etc. Any of these things alone might not be alarming, a few of these things might not be alarming, but when 8 people end up dead and witnesses say this family acted together, they did everything together, mom/grandma was super controlling and then 2 of the 4 co conspirators confirm that and evidence is backing that up, it's really very different. It's showing the criminal enterprise that this family was. They conspired together and committed some horrible acts. Maybe each piece alone isn't a huge red flag, but when you go through tons of evidence that just shows every part of their life is entangled, it tells a story.

Even if they each have a separate account, something in their own name only or did something on their own, it doesn't change the facts that a majority of what they did was together.

 

[BeckyF]

I don't know but they went through a bunch of crap they collected yet entered very little into evidence and published even less for the jury. I bet that jury was falling asleep like i was.

JMO

If jurors were falling asleep, they would be admonished by the judge.

 

[RAISINISBACK]

I read the available information on the IRS website about "viewing" tax returns. What I found was restrictions against the IRS allowing people or agencies to view tax returns via the IRS. I'm not sure why this would apply to a law enforcement official with a legal warrant encountering a tax return and noting it as such. For example, if LE has a warrant to collect certain papers and notes a tax return sitting on a table. Certainly it would not break federal law to encounter a tax return in the wild, so to speak, so long as there was a warrant. But I am not a CPA or a lawyer or a police officer. I just can't find any mention anywhere of LE officials coming across a tax return itself being illegal. It would of course, be illegal to disclose anything found therein.

BBM
It is not illegal to encounter a tax return during a search warrant, but it is illegal to look at (view, examine) it without the permission of the taxpayer. That includes local, state and federal LE.

IRC 6103(d) provides that return information may be shared with state agencies responsible for tax administration. The state agency must request this information in writing, and the request must be signed by an official designated to request tax information. provides guidance for securing approval from the taxpayer to use or disclose information for purposes other than preparing and filing their tax returns.


And there are many other laws regarding this. It is illegal for any LE who comes across a tax return in the course of a regular search warrant to look at it. They must leave it alone or secure it in a safe place and if they suspect criminal activity report said suspicions to the IRS criminal investigation division. They may not act on it themselves.

It's pretty well known on this thread that Hubby worked for one of the alphabet agencies for years. He retired now but he cut his teeth on the Murrah building in OKC and militia groups. He knows better than to look at a tax return that is not his.

I had a client about 8 years ago that was a better liar than Jake. The client came in and we did their taxes. 4 years later I got a call from the criminal investigation arm of the IRS. They asked for a meeting which we set up. When they came in properly armed with their guns and badges and IDs I asked for the name of the client. Then I pulled that clients file and sat down across the conference table from them. They asked a few questions about who did the intake (I did) did I ask the client if they had any other income (I did) and some other general information on what kind of due diligence the firm practiced. I told them. I did not offer them the file nor allow them to see the file. They did not ask to see the file as they were aware they needed a federal warrant.

They returned 2 days later with a subpoena signed by a federal judge for the file and a gag order from said federal judge. I asked what this was in regard to and they informed me the client had embezzled 1.9 million dollars from the clients employer. They then asked me under oath if I had asked about any other income legal or illegal (I did) and if the client had reported to me the 1.9 million dollars they embezzled (they did not) and what the client had told me was their job title at the company along with a few other general accounting firm practices. They left with the file reminding me that myself and all my employees were under a gag order and I may be called to testify if this tax evasion and fraud case went to court. I wasn't, because the client took a plea deal.

I have been in this business almost 50 years and have to take continuing education every year just to keep up with the new laws. Even the CI arm of the IRS has to have a federal subpoena signed by a federal judge to see someone's tax return.

So trust me, I know who can see a tax return and who cannot. Not going to pick it apart with you, but will say this, they offer degrees in taxation in most universities now.

JMO