OH - Pike Co - 8 in Rhoden Family Murdered Over Custody Issue - 4 Members Wagner Family Arrested #79

[pittsburghgirl]

Okay, let me see if I can explain this.

When you go to buy a vehicle, from an individual or a car lot, the title of said vehicle is in whoever owns the vehicles name. So the owner of the vehicle signs the back of the title. That was Silas W.

As an example to clarify:
I own a vehicle. At that point the title to my vehicle is in my name. My name is on the front of the title as the owner of the vehicle. You come to me and give me money to purchase the vehicle. I then sign my name on the back of the title and give you the signed title and the keys to the vehicle and wish you luck as you drive off in your newly purchased vehicle.

So as I said Silas W signed the title as the owner of the truck which was purchased.

The title is supposed to then be taken to a tag agent and be changed over into the new owners name. This is not always done. I suspect Billy or Angie never changed that title over so it remained in Silas W's name. Billy then gave it to Katy W who took the title to the tag agent the next day and changed it into her name.

I hope this helps to clarify this.

JMO

Yeah, that wouldn't be shady at all....
I've never bought a car where the NEW OWNER didn't have to fill out a title application, register the car, show ID and show proof of insurance for the new vehicle. The title is actually transferred and that transfer is processed by someone authorized by the state to change registrations and titles.

But I'm not a Wagner....

 

[RAISINISBACK]

Your Quote:
Jake did everything he could to protect George in his proffer. Jake admitted to killing FR, HHG, DR, CR & HR. Jake named Billy as the killer of CR, GR, and KR. And, according to Jake, GW WAS there and he was supposed to take the first shot but he didn't.

*********************************************************************************************************

It doesn't make any sense to me that Jake is trying to protect George in his proffer by saying George was at the crime scenes. To protect George he would say George stayed home and knew nothing.

Placing George at the crime scenes will get him a guilty verdict. If that jury believes George went along on the murder spree, they will most likely convict him. How could they not?

Jake is putting George in prison by saying he went along on the murders, was "guarding" Chris Jr's door, was hiding in the truck, was trying to shoot Chris SR. but couldn't see over the suppressor, was moving Chris and Gary's bodies....etc....

Without Jake's testimony George would have a tiny chance of being acquitted of murder. Jake did that deal for Jake. Jake's trial was 4 months away and he knew he would end up with the DP. George was the one who had a tiny chance to beat the charges - espescially with such tenacious lawyers - until Jake then Angela threw him under the bus to save themselves.

I don't see enough evidence against George to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he is guilty of murder without Jake's testimony confirming the prosecution's evidence.

George having a lifestyle that is very enmeshed with Angela and Jake is not proof that he committed 8 murders.

Our outspoken precious @RAISINISBACK helped me re-think it. So glad you are well Raisin, and on the thread.

Very well put. I don't know how precious I am. I think some would wish I was anywhere else but on this forum.

George having a lifestyle that is very enmeshed with Angela and Jake is not proof that he committed 8 murders.

I agree.

The R family mirrored that lifestyle. CR having GR live with him, letting FR live on his land, buying a house for DR, letting KR take showers at his home, giving money to his family and even in laws. I think it is just a way of life in that area. I do not think it is seen as being enmeshed, only as being part of a family.

JMO

 

[RAISINISBACK]

Yeah, that wouldn't be shady at all....
I've never bought a car where the NEW OWNER didn't have to fill out a title application, register the car, show ID and show proof of insurance for the new vehicle. The title is actually transferred and that transfer is processed by someone authorized by the state to change registrations and titles.

But I'm not a Wagner....

It's done everyday.

I can see what you are saying. If you buy a car from a car dealership, and you finance that car, you have to fill out an application, show ID, and provide proof of insurance then you are (here) given a paper dealers tag. You have 30 days to go to a tag agent, pay excise tax, get a tag and then a new title to the vehicle will be mailed to you with your name on it.

But if you buy a vehicle from an individual, pay cash for it, that individual signs the back of the title and gives you the keys and pockets the money. You do not have to show an ID or proof of insurance to do this. That is perfectly legal.

You then have 30 days from the date the previous owner signed the back of the title to go to a tag agent, pay excise tax, show an ID, show proof of insurance and change the title over to your name.

Both ways are perfectly legal. Both are done millions of times in this country every time a vehicle is sold.

JMO

 

[gizmobtj]

Jmo it may be about Ew brain condition. I found it odd she stated brain cells died, but no hospitalization no medicine. A young girl going to er or hospital with this condition would need some medical investigation to find cause. This condition I would think would be very concerning at her age. She said it was in Jan 2020 but due to Covid they sent her home. I work in healthcare and I don’t remember hospitals at least on east coast turning away patients in Jan 2020. Jmo

I am in the DC area and I don't remember hospitals turning people away but I do know of instances where they recommended people not come in

 

[gizmobtj]

Your Quote:
Jake did everything he could to protect George in his proffer. Jake admitted to killing FR, HHG, DR, CR & HR. Jake named Billy as the killer of CR, GR, and KR. And, according to Jake, GW WAS there and he was supposed to take the first shot but he didn't.

*********************************************************************************************************

It doesn't make any sense to me that Jake is trying to protect George in his proffer by saying George was at the crime scenes. To protect George he would say George stayed home and knew nothing.

Placing George at the crime scenes will get him a guilty verdict. If that jury believes George went along on the murder spree, they will most likely convict him. How could they not?

Jake is putting George in prison by saying he went along on the murders, was "guarding" Chris Jr's door, was trying to shoot Chris SR. but couldn't see over the suppressor, was moving Chris and Gary's bodies, bought the murder truck, modified the murder truck, and was hiding in the murder truck, etc....

Without Jake's testimony George would have a tiny chance of being acquitted of murder. Jake did that deal for Jake. Jake's trial was 4 months away and he knew he would end up with the DP. Jake was scared shirtless over it. George was the one who had a tiny chance to beat the charges - espescially with such tenacious lawyers - until Jake then Angela threw him under the bus to save themselves.

I don't see enough evidence against George to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he is guilty of murder without Jake's testimony and leading BCI to the truck and guns. Jake's testimony confirms the prosecution's evidence which the prosecution needs, badly, from how the trial is going so far.

George having a lifestyle that is very enmeshed with Angela and Jake - including all their shared money cards and bank accounts - is not proof that he committed 8 murders.

Our outspoken precious @RAISINISBACK helped me re-think it. So glad you are doing well Raisin, and on the thread. And I enjoy arguing our differences in opinions.

I still do not believe Angie went with them, but we can disagree, that's cool.

Here's a question though. What did Jake know about whether the others had turned state's evidence or what they may have said? I am sure the prosecution would want to keep that very ambiguous. He also probably did not know what evidence they had on recordings, videos, etc. He might be a liar but if the prosecutors and investigators played him right he would not have had much room to maneuver away from the truth

 

[Myland]

I am in the DC area and I don't remember hospitals turning people away but I do know of instances where they recommended people not come in

Jmo the first case in United States I believe was in late Jan 2020 however that was on the west coast. I could be wrong jmo I guess I will have to wait to see what the expert is about. Jmo

 

[gizmobtj]

Jmo the first case in United States I believe was in late Jan 2020 however that was on the west coast. I could be wrong jmo

It was the West Coast. Oregon or Washington State, I believe, was the first one reported, not to say there were not some before

 

[Cool Cats]

Here's a question though. What did Jake know about whether the others had turned state's evidence or what they may have said? I am sure the prosecution would want to keep that very ambiguous. He also probably did not know what evidence they had on recordings, videos, etc. He might be a liar but if the prosecutors and investigators played him right he would not have had much room to maneuver away from the truth

Jake was caught in some inconsistencies in his proffer according to Canepa. It is possible he tried to say George wasn't involved at all, not told anything, didn't go with them etc...

But then the prosecution - with evidence and interrogation and threatening the DP - was able to get him to admit George went with them after all.

Jake's way to maneuver from the truth looks to me like he is trying to minimize George's involvement that night by saying George didn't shoot anyone and he doesn't know who shot everyone. That George tried to talk them out of it, he only went at the last minute, and he only went to protect Jake from Billy.

Have your cake and eat it too. Reveal to the prosecution enough to save yourself and get your plea deal, but at the same time minimize your brother's involvement.

 

[Pru2U]

Your Quote:
Jake did everything he could to protect George in his proffer. Jake admitted to killing FR, HHG, DR, CR & HR. Jake named Billy as the killer of CR, GR, and KR. And, according to Jake, GW WAS there and he was supposed to take the first shot but he didn't.

*********************************************************************************************************

It doesn't make any sense to me that Jake is trying to protect George in his proffer by saying George was at the crime scenes. To protect George he would say George stayed home and knew nothing.

Placing George at the crime scenes will get him a guilty verdict. If that jury believes George went along on the murder spree, they will most likely convict him. How could they not?

Jake is putting George in prison by saying he went along on the murders, was "guarding" Chris Jr's door, was trying to shoot Chris SR. but couldn't see over the suppressor, was moving Chris and Gary's bodies, bought the murder truck, modified the murder truck, and was hiding in the murder truck, etc....

Without Jake's testimony George would have a tiny chance of being acquitted of murder. Jake did that deal for Jake. Jake's trial was 4 months away and he knew he would end up with the DP. Jake was scared shirtless over it. George was the one who had a tiny chance to beat the charges - espescially with such tenacious lawyers - until Jake then Angela threw him under the bus to save themselves.

I don't see enough evidence against George to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he is guilty of murder without Jake's testimony and leading BCI to the truck and guns. Jake's testimony confirms the prosecution's evidence which the prosecution needs, badly, from how the trial is going so far.

George having a lifestyle that is very enmeshed with Angela and Jake - including all their shared money cards and bank accounts - is not proof that he committed 8 murders.

Our outspoken precious @RAISINISBACK helped me re-think it. So glad you are doing well Raisin, and on the thread. And I enjoy arguing our differences in opinions.

I still do not believe Angie went with them, but we can disagree, that's cool.

My guess isJake believed the footprints would put George firmly at the scene because George WAS at the scene. Just a hunch. Still waiting for the shoe/foot expert to testify. BCI didn't take all those foot measurements & foam impressions for nothing. And there's a reason the shoes were sitting out Friday (?) morning but they didn't get to them.

JMO but if Jake is lying...well...I still have issues with him saying Hanna saw him but coroner says she was shot from behind (did he talk to her?, did he tell her he won?). And the number of times HHG (5) & DR (6?) were shot. (Did he talk to Dana?) Those are the kind of things I believe he would keep to himself.

Any thoughts on whether we'll hear a recording of Jake's confession before he actually testifies?

 

[Chingaling]

Very well put. I don't know how precious I am. I think some would wish I was anywhere else but on this forum.

George having a lifestyle that is very enmeshed with Angela and Jake is not proof that he committed 8 murders.

I agree.

The R family mirrored that lifestyle. CR having GR live with him, letting FR live on his land, buying a house for DR, letting KR take showers at his home, giving money to his family and even in laws. I think it is just a way of life in that area. I do not think it is seen as being enmeshed, only as being part of a family.

JMO

Lord help us we must be enmeshed too. My daughter lived on my land 17 yrs and when she moved out my son moved in. I have a grandson having a hard and I s
send him money and take him food when he needs it. They are mine and I won't allow them to go homeless or hungry. So I guess I'm a proud enmeshed tribe, i love having them close.

 

[Betty P]

Here's a question though. What did Jake know about whether the others had turned state's evidence or what they may have said? I am sure the prosecution would want to keep that very ambiguous. He also probably did not know what evidence they had on recordings, videos, etc. He might be a liar but if the prosecutors and investigators played him right he would not have had much room to maneuver away from the truth

Jake knew what his attorneys knew, which was everything the state turned over to him. By the time he took the plea deal, nearly all of the evidence had been provided to his attorneys. Had they done otherwise, they could have lost their licenses to practice law. Death Penalty cases are closely scrutinized.

During pre-trial, the other defendants couldn't communicate with each other. So no one knew if another was negotiating a plea deal until after it was signed.

 

[Pyrite]

Jake was caught in some inconsistencies in his proffer according to Canepa. It is possible he tried to say George wasn't involved at all, not told anything, didn't go with them etc...

But then the prosecution - with evidence and interrogation and threatening the DP - was able to get him to admit George went with them after all.

Jake's way to maneuver from the truth looks to me like he is trying to minimize George's involvement that night by saying George didn't shoot anyone and he doesn't know who shot everyone. That George tried to talk them out of it, he only went at the last minute, and he only went to protect Jake from Billy.

Have your cake and eat it too. Reveal to the prosecution enough to save yourself and get your plea deal, but at the same time minimize your brother's involvement.

Thinking as a juror hearing Jake changed his story until he told the truth (AC’s view), wouldn’t you be thinking ‘or Jake changed his story until he found one the prosecutor’s wanted to hear’? I’m pretty cynical and that is what I would think and discount Jake’s testimony. I’ll be shocked if the defense doesn’t bring this up for the jury’s consideration.

MOO

 

[justtrish]

Jake knew what his attorneys knew, which was everything the state turned over to him. By the time he took the plea deal, nearly all of the evidence had been provided to his attorneys. Had they done otherwise, they could have lost their licenses to practice law. Death Penalty cases are closely scrutinized.

During pre-trial, the other defendants couldn't communicate with each other. So no one knew if another was negotiating a plea deal until after it was signed.

Do you know if the attorneys for co-defendants were allowed to sit in on the pre-trial hearings for the others? So when George had a pre-trial in early April 2021 would Jake's attorneys be allowed to sit in? Just trying to piece together the timing of Jake's plea with maybe the hearings for other co defendants.

 

[Cool Cats]

My guess isJake believed the footprints would put George firmly at the scene because George WAS at the scene. Just a hunch. Still waiting for the shoe/foot expert to testify. BCI didn't take all those foot measurements & foam impressions for nothing. And there's a reason the shoes were sitting out Friday (?) morning but they didn't get to them.

JMO but if Jake is lying...well...I still have issues with him saying Hanna saw him but coroner says she was shot from behind (did he talk to her?, did he tell her he won?). And the number of times HHG (5) & DR (6?) were shot. (Did he talk to Dana?) Those are the kind of things I believe he would keep to himself.

Any thoughts on whether we'll hear a recording of Jake's confession before he actually testifies?

Your Quote:
Any thoughts on whether we'll hear a recording of Jake's confession before he actually testifies?

****************************************************************************************************

We heard his guilty confession when he went to court and pled guilty.

A proffer is nothing more than testimony the defendant gives the prosecution - normally in exchange for a plea deal.

When Jake is on the stand and gives his testimony, we will be hearing what he said in his proffer. We will be hearing the testimony he gave the prosecution.

I do not think Jake's actual proffer will be given to the media and the prosecution may not even use - when Jake is on the stand - all of his testimony that he gave them.

But hopefully the media will have many tweets and articles about what Jake says on the stand, so then we will get a clearer picture of that night. A clearer picture of what Jake said in his proffer.

Poor jury, has to decide what to believe. How believable will Jake sound to the Jury? The jury could believe some of his testimony but not all of it, or think he is a total fake lier, or think he did a really good job and find him quite believeable.

Juries decide if they believe any witness. Some they believe, some they don't, some they partially believe.

 

[Chingaling]

We're all watching the wrong trial. Check out Darrell Brooks.Whew wee

 

[Chris_p_bacon]

Okay, let me see if I can explain this.

When you go to buy a vehicle, from an individual or a car lot, the title of said vehicle is in whoever owns the vehicles name. So the owner of the vehicle signs the back of the title. That was Silas W.

As an example to clarify:
I own a vehicle. At that point the title to my vehicle is in my name. My name is on the front of the title as the owner of the vehicle. You come to me and give me money to purchase the vehicle. I then sign my name on the back of the title and give you the signed title and the keys to the vehicle and wish you luck as you drive off in your newly purchased vehicle.

So as I said Silas W signed the title as the owner of the truck which was purchased.

The title is supposed to then be taken to a tag agent and be changed over into the new owners name. This is not always done. I suspect Billy or Angie never changed that title over so it remained in Silas W's name. Billy then gave it to Katy W who took the title to the tag agent the next day and changed it into her name.

I hope this helps to clarify this.

JMO

I was wondering if this was the case with the murder truck. They purchased it from one family member then gave it to another but never registered it in any of the Wagner 4 name. Their thinking is this would eliminate any link to them if the murder truck was spotted the night of the murders. I think LE did not have any info on their truck till they put out the request for public assistance in any weapons, ammo, or vehicles owned by the wagners.

 

[RAISINISBACK]

Here's a question though. What did Jake know about whether the others had turned state's evidence or what they may have said? I am sure the prosecution would want to keep that very ambiguous. He also probably did not know what evidence they had on recordings, videos, etc. He might be a liar but if the prosecutors and investigators played him right he would not have had much room to maneuver away from the truth

Hubby said something tonight that gave me food for thought. He said that being in law enforcement he had to talk to prosecutors all the time.

He said Canepa probably told Jake she would not take the DP off the table unless he gave her all 4 of the Wagners. So Jake being Jake, he did.

A lot of people think that Chris N and Randa H knew nothing about the murders and believed the W's were innocent right up until the day Jake confessed. Keep in mind that Chris N lived next door to Angie and Jake after they came back from AK and saw them every day. Beth lived in the house with them and did not believe they were guilty until Jake and Angie threatened her.

So why is it such a stretch that Jake and Angie planned and carried out the murders without George knowing anything about it. All they had to do is plan while George was gone off somewhere. George never bought any supplies for the silencers. Jake and Angie did.

We have only Jakes word about the truck being modified or that George went with them to buy it.

As far as Jake and Angie's proffers matching, don't forget Angie gave that proffer months after Jake, and there were relatives visiting back and forth between the two. We know Angie and probably Jake used code words to tell others what to say. So what's to say Jake didn't tell a relative to relay messages to Angie so she would know what to say in her proffer?

If we take everything Jake and Angie said in their proffers out of the mix, what do we have left as evidence against George?

I think I am going to do that. Treat the proffers as rumor not fact.

JMO

 

[Myland]

Jmo I believe the Jake had to give all four for the deal. No matter if true or not that was the only way the deal would be made. Jmo

 

[RAISINISBACK]

Lord help us we must be enmeshed too. My daughter lived on my land 17 yrs and when she moved out my son moved in. I have a grandson having a hard and I s
send him money and take him food when he needs it. They are mine and I won't allow them to go homeless or hungry. So I guess I'm a proud enmeshed tribe, i love having them close.

It's not unusual. Many families do it. How many of you remember that TV show Dallas? Old Miss Ellie kept her sons, DILs and GK's living right in the house on Southfork with her and Jock.

A lot of poor people and wealthy people all live together in the same house or on the same land. Very common.

JMO

 

[RAISINISBACK]

Here's a question though. What did Jake know about whether the others had turned state's evidence or what they may have said? I am sure the prosecution would want to keep that very ambiguous. He also probably did not know what evidence they had on recordings, videos, etc. He might be a liar but if the prosecutors and investigators played him right he would not have had much room to maneuver away from the truth

I am sure FW and RW who visited them all kept Jake well informed as did Rita and Chris N.

JMO