OH - Pike Co - 8 in Rhoden Family Murdered Over Custody Issue - 4 Members Wagner Family Arrested #80

[MTW2011]

The private exchange between AC and Jake’s attorney, then him placing a paper back on the podium AND then now bolstering his argument with a list of previous cases was interesting. I couldn’t tell if the paper came from AC or her team, but it was clear they talked while GW IV’s defense was speaking.

Edit I just rewound and rewatched it appeared to me that AC pointed towards him, he leaned over and they spoke briefly; when leaning back to the podium with a paper he placed on top of his things. Then it appeared he referenced this later on, when he started citing several previous cases. Interesting, I wonder, if AC and team gave those notes to him- it looked like it to me JMOO.

 

[sunshineray]

Where has the notion of mistrial come in?

It didn't...yet...you had mentioned it

 

[sunshineray]

Court being asked by prosecutor if he needs testimony from whomever about the safety if JW issue

 

[sunshineray]

Where has the notion of mistrial come in?

Betty just brought it up, it hasn't been mentioned in court

 

[Pru2U]

It didn't...yet...you had mentioned it

No I did not, lol.

It was in a tweet I shared, from the reporter who started all this. A tweet I specifically cautioned was “his opinion only” when I posted it. Lot of good that caution did. LOL

 

[sunshineray]

Media lawyer saying you've git to follow the court order, JW is just another witness, trials are broadcast every day throughout the state to no detriment if the proceedings.. AC wants testimony about Inmate safety, judge permit such testimony if state or JW has such witnesses...about the saftey if JW when he goes back to prison

 

[Betty P]

Where has the notion of mistrial come in?

First, it's mentioned in the 4 District Appeals Court's decision. If the judge makes a wrong move in following out their order (which is vague and without details on how to follow the order) then a mistrial is declared.

Second, if they can't figure out how to meet the questionable legal requirements of the 4 District Appeals Court without violating the order, it will have to go to a higher court for further clarification.

For all practical purposes, this trial might be dead in the water because of a vague and legally questionable decision made by the appeals court. What happens when the court doesn't know how to proceed because of a vague appeals court decision? Do they change direction and call other witnesses to testify?

Looks like that's what they're doing. They're skipping Jake's testimony to go to another witness.

 

[sunshineray]

Chillicothe Cirrections officer testifying about security with inmates, what would make them a target in prison

 

[sunshineray]

No I did not, lol.

It was in a tweet I shared, from the reporter who started all this. A tweet I specifically cautioned was “his opinion only” when I posted it. Lot of good that caution did. LOL

sorry not you Pru2U, it was Betty that just mentioned maybe this was all a ploy for a mistrial, I was just commenting that was not mentioned at all...yet...it's all been about JW's 12C-2 rights being changed midstream testimony and his safety back in prison because if that

 

[Pru2U]

First, it's mentioned in the 4 District Appeals Court's decision. If the judge makes a wrong move in following out their order (which is vague and without details on how to follow the order) then a mistrial is declared.

Second, if they can't figure out how to meet the questionable legal requirements of the 4 District Appeals Court without violating the order, it will have to go to a higher court for further clarification.

For all practical purposes, this trial might be dead in the water because of a vague and legally questionable decision made by the appeals court. What happens when the court doesn't know how to proceed because of a vague appeals court decision? Do they change direction and call other witnesses to testify?

Looks like that's what they're doing. They're skipping Jake's testimony to go to another witness.

Are they not still holding the hearing to decide if JW goes live on TV?

 

[Seattle1]

Jake is afraid of being labeled a "snitch?"

This dude is as cold as a cold-blooded killer comes!

 

[sunshineray]

Judge is probably going to rule for JW's rights in that it will put his saftey in peril

 

[joe jones]

the state does not want JW testimony live streamed, as they have BW trial yet to come and they do not want BW attorneys to see how JW testifies, how well he does on cross (Or poorly we haven't got to cross yet), they do not want to give BW attorney any edge on how they may approach JW testifying,

normally the state has no issue with a codefendant testifying, they don't care what happens to JW in prison as these attys are arguing they do, JW is a means to an end, the only evidence that places BW and GW at the crime scenes, the only evidence that BW shot anybody comes from JW, once he has fulfilled his bargain, he is of no use to them,

 

[sunshineray]

Jake is afraid of being labeled a "snitch?"

This dude is as cold as a cold-blooded killer comes!

I think this is quite the lame argument..."snitches get stitches" was just said...like as long as JW is off camera no inmates will know JW took a deal to testify!? Cone on, it's no secret

 

[Pru2U]

Jake is afraid of being labeled a "snitch?"

This dude is as cold as a cold-blooded killer comes!

Yeah, because he doesn’t know what a fair fight is. Not that prison attacks are (fair) but he’s not going to have a spotlight in prison to blind & poach his opponents.

 

[sunshineray]

Media lawyer now questioning witness, basically what I said about, the inmates in prison all know already

 

[sunshineray]

JW's safety wins, no camera, audio allowed

 

[Pru2U]

Judge just set precedent for Angela to opt out.

 

[sunshineray]

Are they not still holding the hearing to decide if JW goes live on TV?

Yes they are, judge just ruled JW's safety issues trump being on camera/audio

 

[Pru2U]

If this somehow makes it to SCOTUS, this trial will set precedent.