OH - Pike Co - 8 in Rhoden Family Murdered Over Custody Issue - 4 Members Wagner Family Arrested #82

[rsd1200]

Thanks for finding the jury questionaire RSD. Would love to have seen some of the answers without any personal data attached to identify any of the jurors though.

You're welcome. Wouldn't that be a find!

 

[rsd1200]

Maybe. I guess Monday will enlighten us somewhat. I wonder why AC didn't call very many of the extended Wagner family? I have thoughts, just no proof so I'll zip it.

It should be interesting to observe with some of the defense's witnesses though. I can hear objection after objection and then some, maybe throw in a few "Jesus's" in too.

I just gotta go back 30 some odd days/weeks/whatever, to the opening statements, when there was an objection, within the first two minutes, of the other legal teams opening, after two days of rambling and uhms, I knew, ohmygod, I knew. It's just so very uncommon and unheard of, jm2. I'm done.

 

[rsd1200]

My theory on defense strategy is they will follow exactly what they said in opening statements:

George is not like the rest of his family.
George did not help plan.
George did not help cover up.
George was not at the crime scene.
George did not know anything about it.

Good luck with that! (insert sarcasm)

MOO

I think there's still damage control they can do. We have AW putting him there and while that's huge, her well-versed testimony, could be seen as, basically what she said, not quoting; My baby JW was not going down for this alone.

All evidence pointed to him. It being his show. It could easily have been him and G3 and some G3 vindictiveness thrown in, but Mommy Dearest could not have that. She wanted to ensure that G4 paid his dues in a DP trial. Awfully Christian of her all of a sudden, but with no remorse for the deceased in the matter, it's easy to see that she could have little thought for her eldest.

If we're going down, HE's going down. HE said it was his footprint? Where are the measurements that line up to it being his footprint that she said the three men had to take? There's only two sets of old men shoe prints isn't there? I'd love to see those measurements and who they lined up with as most likely fitting.

They'll have a defense. They've likely had to back up and punt, b/c most everyone, I'd say, at least now, thinks he's a part of the conspiracy, and that's all that's needed. It will be pretty difficult for the defense, but I'm looking forward to seeing what they've got.

 

[pittsburghgirl]

Jmo maybe I should have said not being honest instead of playing dirty.

The nature of argument itself (in or out of court) is to take a position and argue for it (present your evidence and anticipate counter-arguments. The state is REQUIRED to turn over evidence that is exculpatory (that tends to suggest the defendant is innocent) but the prosecution is not required to highlight that information. That' s up to the defense.

The prosecution is in an extraordinarily strong position because two co-conspirators are testifying against the accused. There is also weeks of information supporting that 4 people were involved in a conspiracy, 2 of whom are testifying for the state, and that the accused participated. The prosecution doesn't have to be sneaky. The state has evidence. We know the Wagners were the killers. The only question at hand is whether George4 participated in the murders before, during and/or after.

 

[Betty P]

The nature of argument itself (in or out of court) is to take a position and argue for it (present your evidence and anticipate counter-arguments. The state is REQUIRED to turn over evidence that is exculpatory (that tends to suggest the defendant is innocent) but the prosecution is not required to highlight that information. That' s up to the defense.

The prosecution is in an extraordinarily strong position because two co-conspirators are testifying against the accused. There is also weeks of information supporting that 4 people were involved in a conspiracy, 2 of whom are testifying for the state, and that the accused participated. The prosecution doesn't have to be sneaky. The state has evidence. We know the Wagners were the killers. The only question at hand is whether George4 participated in the murders before, during and/or after.

Agree. JMO, the state has the evidence supporting involvement before, during and after.

 

[Pru2U]

I think there's still damage control they can do. We have AW putting him there and while that's huge, her well-versed testimony, could be seen as, basically what she said, not quoting; My baby JW was not going down for this alone.

All evidence pointed to him. It being his show. It could easily have been him and G3 and some G3 vindictiveness thrown in, but Mommy Dearest could not have that. She wanted to ensure that G4 paid his dues in a DP trial. Awfully Christian of her all of a sudden, but with no remorse for the deceased in the matter, it's easy to see that she could have little thought for her eldest.

If we're going down, HE's going down. HE said it was his footprint? Where are the measurements that line up to it being his footprint that she said the three men had to take? There's only two sets of old men shoe prints isn't there? I'd love to see those measurements and who they lined up with as most likely fitting.

They'll have a defense. They've likely had to back up and punt, b/c most everyone, I'd say, at least now, thinks he's a part of the conspiracy, and that's all that's needed. It will be pretty difficult for the defense, but I'm looking forward to seeing what they've got.

Just about every time the defense has come up to cross examine, we’ve learned new details, sometimes little things, sometimes big. I’m looking forward to more of the same. I honestly don’t care how info comes out. Just give me more pieces to the puzzle.

 

[skyedaze]

I shouldn't feel sorry for George but I do to a certain extent.
Your own mom (who molded you into the that you are today) testifies against you.
What a great family.

 

[Pru2U]

I just gotta go back 30 some odd days/weeks/whatever, to the opening statements, when there was an objection, within the first two minutes, of the other legal teams opening, after two days of rambling and uhms, I knew, ohmygod, I knew. It's just so very uncommon and unheard of, jm2. I'm done.

Go back and watch the Nash’s statement before the objection then what the judge told the jury “Opening statements are not to be considered as evidence”.

This is why I asked (and confirmed) yesterday why George’s interview in Montana wasn’t played. It wasn’t played because George wasn’t testifying and that could be considered testimony.

My understanding of what happened with the state’s objection during opening statements is Nash introduced his version of what George said in the (Montana) interview but would not be able to back it up because the tape couldn’t be played. In essence, Nash was referring to that conversation as evidence but it isn’t actually in evidence - so he doesn’t have evidence to back up his statement — and that’s why AC called him out. JMO

 

[Piffcat]

I shouldn't feel sorry for George but I do to a certain extent.
Your own mom (who molded you into the that you are today) testifies against you.
What a great family.

anytime u think that just imagine g4 guarding crjr room to make sure jake has the time he needs to murder hana on the bed with a newborn and dana in her room. and how gleeful he was in describing the soundtrack. il never feel 1 ounce of pity for any wagner they would murder any one of us if it struck their fancy. animals.

 

[justtrish]

Go back and watch the Nash’s statement before the objection then what the judge told the jury “Opening statements are not to be considered as evidence”.

This is why I asked (and confirmed) yesterday why George’s interview in Montana wasn’t played. It wasn’t played because George wasn’t testifying and that could be considered testimony.

My understanding of what happened with the state’s objection during opening statements is Nash introduced his version of what George said in the (Montana) interview but would not be able to back it up because the tape couldn’t be played. In essence, Nash was referring to that conversation as evidence but it isn’t actually in evidence - so he doesn’t have evidence to back up his statement — and that’s why AC called him out. JMO

Yep, can't introduce evidence without introducing evidence.. if he wants to open that door, then he needs to open it, not try to get something in but not open the dang door.

 

[Pru2U]

Yep, can't introduce evidence without introducing evidence.. if he wants to open that door, then he needs to open it, not try to get something in but not open the dang door.

I’m so glad someone understood my jibberish. I was struggling to explain that.

 

[rsd1200]

Go back and watch the Nash’s statement before the objection then what the judge told the jury “Opening statements are not to be considered as evidence”.

This is why I asked (and confirmed) yesterday why George’s interview in Montana wasn’t played. It wasn’t played because George wasn’t testifying and that could be considered testimony.

My understanding of what happened with the state’s objection during opening statements is Nash introduced his version of what George said in the (Montana) interview but would not be able to back it up because the tape couldn’t be played. In essence, Nash was referring to that conversation as evidence but it isn’t actually in evidence - so he doesn’t have evidence to back up his statement — and that’s why AC called him out. JMO

If G4 had agreed to go on the stand, both could have questioned him. If not, they can't use his tape. Just as AW's MT tape, could be put into evidence, b/c she agreed to testify. I think I've got that right?? Most unusual to interject during opening statements. It is usual to want as much information out there in the jury's heads, as possible, from both sides. There's not a rule against objecting during opening or closing statements but it is usually considered, not done.

EdIt: Is this right? He'd have to be willing to testify for it to be introduced? He's not, so it can't. Or am I still confused.

 

[skyedaze]

anytime u think that just imagine g4 guarding crjr room to make sure jake has the time he needs to murder hana on the bed with a newborn and dana in her room. and how gleeful he was in describing the soundtrack. il never feel 1 ounce of pity for any wagner they would murder any one of us if it struck their fancy. animals.

Thanks I needed that! Where can I go to hear that?
Since I haven't be able to hear any testimony.....

 

[rsd1200]

I shouldn't feel sorry for George but I do to a certain extent.
Your own mom (who molded you into the that you are today) testifies against you.
What a great family.

He's a horrible person but, to have one's own mother, throw you under the bus, your parent, who encouraged this and said it was the right thing to do, and we all stick together, had to be crushing. She's worse than him. She did a lot to twist his mind, along with his co-creator, G3. and as @Piffcat pointed out, they'd as easily murder us. They knew the Rs and HHG, they don't even know us.

 

[rsd1200]

What's that old quote: Familiarity breeds contempt? At some point JW and G3 became very familiar with the Rs. They held it all. HMR had all rights to S in the state of OH. Intent with tattooed wedding bands meant nothing. His surname meant nothing. Unless the appropriate paperwork was done at the hospital, within so many hours of her birth, he meant nothing, in the eyes of the law. Possibly a paternity check, but zero time with the child. There was a new man and a wedding in the future and happy pictures on the FB page. SA is all they had and the potential for SA. JW began to focus on it, AW began to focus on it, what if TC had got B? We know what happened to TC. Bring CPS in, there's no designated pink and blue bedrooms. We have those here, complete with the appropriate bedding. Not enough bedrooms over there, period. Starts to call CPS. A friend gets wind... skids to the phone. Poof, new house. Plenty of space, and away from the grow as well. That didn't work. G3 peeved b/c CR1 owes him some money and he thinks he's used it toward that house. Did you see she told the other baby daddy on FB that her new husband would be raising K. They were moving after they married! This is not happening. They're not winning again.

Delete if not allowed, I've been drinking.

 

[justtrish]

What's that old quote: Familiarity breeds contempt? At some point JW and G3 became very familiar with the Rs. They held it all. HMR had all rights to S in the state of OH. Intent with tattooed wedding bands meant nothing. His surname meant nothing. Unless the appropriate paperwork was done at the hospital, within so many hours of her birth, he meant nothing, in the eyes of the law. Possibly a paternity check, but zero time with the child. There was a new man and a wedding in the future and happy pictures on the FB page. SA is all they had and the potential for SA. JW began to focus on it, AW began to focus on it, what if TC had got B? We know what happened to TC. Bring CPS in, there's no designated pink and blue bedrooms. We have those here, complete with the appropriate bedding. Not enough bedrooms over there, period. Starts to call CPS. A friend gets wind... skids to the phone. Poof, new house. Plenty of space, and away from the grow as well. That didn't work. G3 peeved b/c CR1 owes him some money and he thinks he's used it toward that house. Did you see she told the other baby daddy on FB that her new husband would be raising K. They were moving after they married! This is not happening. They're not winning again.

Delete if not allowed, I've been drinking.

I think this makes sense. I still think Billy had other motives and those aren't going to come out because it implicates him in drug activity. Same reason they likely didn't want to turn in CrSr because of drugs.. Billy was wrapped up in that so if CrSr goes down for drugs, guess who might sing like a canary over all Billy's insurance scams and other illegal activity CrSr knew about?

 

[rsd1200]

I think this makes sense. I still think Billy had other motives and those aren't going to come out because it implicates him in drug activity. Same reason they likely didn't want to turn in CrSr because of drugs.. Billy was wrapped up in that so if CrSr goes down for drugs, guess who might sing like a canary over all Billy's insurance scams and other illegal activity CrSr knew about?

If you'll remember, the Staley girl, I think it was, remarked about JWs pink bedroom. Aw remarked about the pink and blue rooms if IRC, not hearing and having testimony to refer to is difficult at times, but I think one of them did. I believe they started preparing the rooms, too. What if CPS wants to make sure our home is okay. G3 was not going to rat his friend out, oh boo hoo, I'd rather kill him. Give me a break. I've seen grown men rat other men out for 1/2 ounce of weed that sent the other guy to prison for five years! No one died. They wanted them dead b/c they could not beat them otherwise. the Rhodens outsmarted them and they held the Ace card. S. It's as old as time. I can't beat you so I'll kill you and take it from you.
Edit: He wasn't afraid of CR1 outing him or killing him. Look how easy it was for him to kill CR1. CR1 was totally unsuspecting. They ambushed that man and GR. I think he legit thought they were there to talk business and he was bringing GR in, in KR's place, like KR's son said. I think G3 had thought it should have been him, and he was peeved b/c they'd bought that house. There was mention of owed money to G3 somewhere through here. I'm not going to dig too deep but I think that's the surface of it. There was no way for them to win, otherwise.

 

[Pru2U]

If G4 had agreed to go on the stand, both could have questioned him. If not, they can't use his tape. Just as AW's MT tape, could be put into evidence, b/c she agreed to testify. I think I've got that right?? Most unusual to interject during opening statements. It is usual to want as much information out there in the jury's heads, as possible, from both sides. There's not a rule against objecting during opening or closing statements but it is usually considered, not done.

EdIt: Is this right? He'd have to be willing to testify for it to be introduced? He's not, so it can't. Or am I still confused.

Yes, that’s right.

 

[Gardenista]

Go back and watch the Nash’s statement before the objection then what the judge told the jury “Opening statements are not to be considered as evidence”.

This is why I asked (and confirmed) yesterday why George’s interview in Montana wasn’t played. It wasn’t played because George wasn’t testifying and that could be considered testimony.

My understanding of what happened with the state’s objection during opening statements is Nash introduced his version of what George said in the (Montana) interview but would not be able to back it up because the tape couldn’t be played. In essence, Nash was referring to that conversation as evidence but it isn’t actually in evidence - so he doesn’t have evidence to back up his statement — and that’s why AC called him out. JMO

Is this an OH thing? I watch trials all of the time and the state always plays a defendant's interview when they don't testify. The only time they don't is if the defendant was not properly mirandized.

 

[altojack]

I shouldn't feel sorry for George but I do to a certain extent.
Your own mom (who molded you into the that you are today) testifies against you.
What a great family.

I feel the same way as you. How can a mother stand there and do that to her son. He was involved I know he took part in some aspects and he will be locked away for life. No wonder George couldn't each lunch that day, and he got a ticket for it if I remember correctly.