OH - Pike Co - 8 in Rhoden Family Murdered Over Custody Issue - 4 Members Wagner Family Arrested #83

[Chris_p_bacon]

If the plan was to have two people assault Chris Sr's house (one to get Chris to the door and maybe outside and the other to shoot him with the rifle), The there had to be someone to watch out for Frankie. If Frankie had heard the shots he would have come out armed and ready. They had to be ready for that. That is what the third person was for. Jake and Billy could handle Chris Sr., But someone had to watch their 6 o'clock. If George was not there, Then it would have to have been Angela. The person doing the watching is as much a part of the crime as the shooters.

Yes. exactly. Someone was a look out at each one of the scenes. Someone was the look out at Chris Srs making sure Frankie did not come out. Someone was the look out at Keneth Rhodens (two vehicles, one pulled over), and the look out at Dana's house was making sure Chris Jr did not wake up, etc, etc. From day one, the logistics of carrying out these murders has alway pointed to the fact that there was at least 3 or 4 murderers involved. They have the right people arrested two of them have decided to plead guilty.

 

[Dudly]

No but I did pay close attention to the opening statements.

Go back and listen to the openings where Canepa says George was there but Parker says Jake will testify that George did not plan, participate or even know until later about Jake killing 8 people. Vast difference there and Jake ended up testifying to Canepa's proffer not the one the defense had. So read between the lines.


Plus Canepa said during one of the motions that they got several proffers from Jake before they settled on one. She even said that the one they eventually settled on had many inconstancies with the evidence BCI had.

JMO

Parker saying JW will testify to that and saying the Defense had it in writing from JW are quite different. How much liberty is allowed for @reading between the lines”? You can add a lot with wide spacing.
How is it you know the Defense did not have the same proffer AC went by? It could be that Parker was trying to sway the jury because opening statements are not considered evidentiary.
It was also said that GWIV went along to protect JW from GWIII. That places him at the scene. How would he protect JW without a gun? That would place him at the scene and armed. GWIV couldn’t let JW out of his sight or he couldn’t protect him unless GWIV was with GWIII. That puts him in any home JW or GWIII was in because he had to be with one or the other.
MOO

 

[CIA Team Member]

Maybe she was reluctant because she feared for her life. Why do you say she was pushed by BCI to file for custody? Maybe she finally felt safe to do it…

Additionally, she was poor, has little to no self esteem/confidence, didn't have an income and knew there were other Wagner's out there to possibly be afraid of. CN and Randa at one point were going for custody.
IMO, she was scared and just didn't realize she HAD to file for custody that it wasn't automatic.

 

[Betty P]

Ive been trying to keep up with this trial but difficult with other life commitments
I understand most of what happened over the years and during the trial, but is the only evidence they have against George is that Jake and Angela said he was there and knew about everything.
Im not convinced he will be found guilty....if im questioning his guilt after knowing things the jury may not know then how do the jury send a man to prison for the rest of his life. JMO

No, there's other evidence as well. Actually, more evidence of his involvement than there is of AW, about the same as his brother Jake.

In addition, the testimony of his mother and brother is valid, just as it is considered valid in other murder trials. The belief that they're lying is just CT - conspiracy theory. JMO

 

[FonescaFan]

I still believe (although can’t prove so it’s MOO) that Angela was the ringleader of the murder plot and that Billy, Jake, and George participated. Only the three men know exactly what happened that night. Did the State over-reach by charging George with all counts? Possibly. If there is a hung jury/mistrial, does the prosecution have to re-try George on all of the original charges, or are they able to drop some of the charges and focus on say co-conspiracy or forgery?

 

[rsd1200]

Additionally, she was poor, has little to no self esteem/confidence, didn't have an income and knew there were other Wagner's out there to possibly be afraid of. CN and Randa at one point were going for custody.
IMO, she was scared and just didn't realize she HAD to file for custody that it wasn't automatic.

Or, feared she wouldn't get it b/c of the abuse her mother covered up that she and her sisters suffered. Her mother chose the man over her children. Happens all the time. The courts failed her miserably during the divorce custody determinations. Family court, one of the most important courtrooms in this land, does not provide public defenders for those who cannot afford to fight for their rights.

 

[rsd1200]

I still believe (although can’t prove so it’s MOO) that Angela was the ringleader of the murder plot and that Billy, Jake, and George participated. Only the three men know exactly what happened that night. Did the State over-reach by charging George with all counts? Possibly. If there is a hung jury/mistrial, does the prosecution have to re-try George on all of the original charges, or are they able to drop some of the charges and focus on say co-conspiracy or forgery?

The prosecution CAN retry him, and likely will, but they will face another round of exorbitant expense, paying for his legal defense, a new jury will have to be seated, and if the evidence didn't convince that jury, what's to say putting everyone on the witness stand, through another trial, will convict him a second time? There may be a few on the fence, and the judge can legally use what's called a dynamite charge. He can "encourage" those on the fence, to rethink their thinking. Basically, I'd be stunned if he isn't convicted, however, that doesn't mean I think the Prosecution proved their case.

 

[rsd1200]

Parker saying JW will testify to that and saying the Defense had it in writing from JW are quite different. How much liberty is allowed for @reading between the lines”? You can add a lot with wide spacing.
How is it you know the Defense did not have the same proffer AC went by? It could be that Parker was trying to sway the jury because opening statements are not considered evidentiary.
It was also said that GWIV went along to protect JW from GWIII. That places him at the scene. How would he protect JW without a gun? That would place him at the scene and armed. GWIV couldn’t let JW out of his sight or he couldn’t protect him unless GWIV was with GWIII. That puts him in any home JW or GWIII was in because he had to be with one or the other.
MOO

BIBM

Canepa; OBJECTION! A sidebar, then disrupts opening of defense, when defense states that at the MT border the BCI says to GW4, "you're not like the rest, you can help us" loosely quoting. I want to hear the MT interview of the man being prosecuted. Obviously Canepa thought it was evidentiary b/c she didn't want it stated, voiced, nor played for some reason that we don't know. I know, a win in her pocket.

 

[Chingaling]

I just chalked it up to there were things that needed to be removed before hand.

But who among us would be clueless enough to remove anything, even a hair, from a murder scene. Every single thing in that crime scene, even fibers from clothes, is evidence. Many trials have turned on exactly that, forensic evidence, a single fiber from a perps clothes. Who would not know that? Anyone who ever watched TV would.

There is one rule in forensics that is iron clad. Every single killer either brings something into the crime scene or takes something out without noticing. Hair, fiber, dirt, dust, and any of the other assorted miniscule particles that can attach to a persons clothes, hair, body. That is why you never ever enter what you know is a crime scene. That is also why I was so surprised by the lack of forensics in this case.

The pictures of that living room floor tell the whole story. No way could anyone lose that much blood and still be alive. You would have to be blind not to see that.

JMO

Exactly. I wasn't talking about taking hairs and fibers or DNA out the scene, but I just leave it there.

 

[Betty P]

Yes. exactly. Someone was a look out at each one of the scenes. Someone was the look out at Chris Srs making sure Frankie did not come out. Someone was the look out at Keneth Rhodens (two vehicles, one pulled over), and the look out at Dana's house was making sure Chris Jr did not wake up, etc, etc. From day one, the logistics of carrying out these murders has alway pointed to the fact that there was at least 3 or 4 murderers involved. They have the right people arrested two of them have decided to plead guilty.

That pretty much sums it up, Chris_p_bacon. The defense has offered next to no evidence or testimony. They have none. They're trying to take advantage of the complexity of the murder spree - all the evidence, crime scenes, weapons, ballistics.

 

[Betty P]

BIBM

Canepa; OBJECTION! A sidebar, then disrupts opening of defense, when defense states that at the MT border the BCI says to GW4, "you're not like the rest, you can help us" loosely quoting. I want to hear the MT interview of the man being prosecuted. Obviously Canepa thought it was evidentiary b/c she didn't want it stated, voiced, nor played for some reason that we don't know. I know, a win in her pocket.

It will be no surprise. He wasn't under oath. He will lie, like he always does.

If you want to hear him, get his attorneys to put him on the stand. He needs to be under oath.

His mother testified under oath.
His brother testified under oath.

He hasn't testified under oath. He should.

 

[Betty P]

Then why did the defense file all these motions regarding the death penalty?

09/03/2019 MOTION NO. 14: DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS CAPITAL COMPONENTS OF THIS CASE DUE TO CONSTITUTIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL LAW VIOLATIONS FILED
Attorney: NASH, JR, RICHARD M

09/03/2019 MOTION NO. 30: DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR INDIVIDUAL SEQUESTERED VOIR DIRE ON DEATH PENALTY, PUBLICITY, AND OTHER ISSUES FILED
Attorney: NASH, JR, RICHARD M

09/03/2019 MOTION NO. 33: DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO HAVE THE COURT FOLLOW THE O.R.C. § 2945.25(C) STANDARD FOR "DEATH QUALIFICATION" OF VENIREPERSONS FILED
Attorney: NASH, JR, RICHARD M

09/03/2019 MOTION NO. 34: DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO EXCLUDE VENIREPERSONS WHO CANNOT FAIRLY CONSIDER MITIGATING EVIDENCE AND/OR WHO WOULD AUTOMATICALLY VOTE FOR DEATH UPON A FINDING OF GUILT IN THE CULPABILITY PHASE FILED
Attorney: NASH, JR, RICHARD M

09/03/2019 MOTION NO. 35: DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO PROHIBIT THE STATE'S USE OF PEREMPTORY CHALLENGES TO EXCLUDE VENIREPERSONS WITH CONCERNS ABOUT IMPOSING THE DEATH PENALTY FILED
Attorney: NASH, JR, RICHARD M

09/03/2019 MOTION NO. 47: DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO PROHIBIT REFERENCES TO THE JURY THAT A DEATH PENALTY VERDICT IS ONLY A RECOMMENDATION TO THE TRIAL JUDGE FILED
Attorney: NASH, JR, RICHARD M

09/24/2021 MOTION #73--MOTION TO DISMISS AGGRAVATED MURDER COUNTS AND/OR DEATH SPECIFICATIONS FILED
Attorney: NASH, JR, RICHARD M AND Attorney: PARKER, JOHN PATRICK

12/17/2021 DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY REGARDING DEFENDANT'S MOTION NO 75 -- HAVING BEEN ADVISED AND INFORMED IN THE PREMISES, THE COURT FINDS THAT DEFENDANT'S MOTION NO. 75 IS NOT WELL TAKEN; IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT DEFENDANT'S MOTION NO. 75 IS HEREBY OVERRULED AND DENIED; THIS DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY SHALL NOT CONSTITUTE A RULING UPON THE MERITS OF DEFENDANT'S MOTION NO. 73 ENTITLED MOTION TO DISMISS AGGRAVATED MURDER COUNTS AND/OR DEATH SPECIFICATIONS, AND THE COURT'S DECISION UPON THE DEFENDANT'S MOTION NO. 75 MAY BE RECONSIDERED FOLLOWING A HEARING OF THE ORAL ARGUMENTS OF THE PARTIES UPON DEFENDANT'S MOTION NO. 73

01/10/2022 MOTION NO. 80 DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SUPPRESS TESTIMONY OF JAKE AND ANGELA WAGNER AND TO DISMISS THE DEATH SPECIFICATIONS FILED
Attorney: PARKER, JOHN PATRICK
Attorney: NASH, JR, RICHARD M

The Court then proceeded to hear the oral arguments of counsel for the Defendant in support of Defendant's Motion No. 73, filed on September 24, 2021, entitled "DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS AGGRAVATED MURDER COUNTS AND/OR DEATH SPECIFICATIONS," and to hear the oral arguments of the State of Ohio's counsel in opposition to such motion. Having been fully informed in the premises through the stipulations of counsel, and through the oral and written arguments of counsel, the Court finds that Defendant's Motion No. 73 is not well taken, and it is ordered that Defendant's Motion No. 73 is hereby overruled and denied.

06/07/2022 MOTION NO. 92 MOTION TO DISMISS DEATH SPECIFICATIONS FILED
Attorney: PARKER, JOHN PATRICK

AS TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION NO. 14, ENTITLED "DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS CAPITAL COMPONENTS OF THIS CASE DUE TO CONSTITUTIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL LAW VIOLATIONS."
The State of Ohio opposes Defendant's Moton No. 14.
The Court finds that Defendant's Motion No. 14 is not well taken, and it is ORDERED that Defendant's Motion No. 14 is hereby overruled and denied.

AS TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION NO. 33, ENTITLED "DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO HAVE THE COURT FOLLOW THE O.R.C. §2945.25(C) STANDARD FOR 'DEATH-QUALIFICATION' OF VIREPERSONS."
The State of Ohio opposes Defendant's Motion No. 33.
It is the Court's intention to comply with all requirements of the Ohio Revised Code in this action.
The Court finds that Defendant's Motion No. 33, as framed, is not well taken, and it is ORDERED that Defendant's Motion No. 33 is overruled and denied.

AS TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION NO. 35, ENTITLED "DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO PROHIBIT THE STATE'S USE OF PEREMPTORY CHALLENGES TO EXCLUDE VENIREPERSONS WITH CONCERNS ABOUT IMPOSING THE DEATH PENALTY."
The State of Ohio opposes Defendant's Motion No. 35.
The Court finds that Defendant's Motion No. 35 is without merit. Each side in a criminal action has wide discretion in the use of peremptory challenges, provided such challenges are not used as a pretext to exclude persons based upon race or gender.
The Court concludes that Defendant's Motion No. 35 is not well taken, and it is ORDERED that Defendant's Motion No. 35 is hereby overruled and denied.

AS TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION NO. 47, ENTITLED "DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO PROHIBIT REFERENCES TO THE JURY THAT A DEATH PENALTY VERDICT IS ONLY A RECOMMENDATION TO THE TRIAL JUDGE."
The State of Ohio opposes Defendant's Motion No. 47.
Under the law of Ohio, it is an accurate statement of the law to instruct the jury that their finding of death is a recommendation.
The Court intends to follow the law of Ohio, including OJI in instructing the jury in this case.
The Court concludes that Defendant's Motion No. 47 is not well taken, and Defendant's Motion No. 47 is hereby overruled and denied.


well - that is a few of the motions filed & denied.

@Betty P - is that not correct?




But the Judge has denied to drop the death penalty - as I posted them above.

Bringing forward Niner's post containing all the motions filed by defense requesting removal of the death penalty for GW4 and the judge's decisions.

For reference, in case it comes up again.

 

[pittsburghgirl]

Good post, well thought out.

Something I don't get though. All this time I thought the shell casings that were found at Peterson Rd that match the shell casings found at the crime scenes were all from Jake's Colt 22 not George's 40 Glock.

Can you give me some links or lead me to this information? I believe you but I want to look into it, find where it says this etc.... Thanks.

Hi RAISINISBACK,

I hear what your saying and I am nervous George will be found not guilty when I know he is.

However, to me the shell casings at the house on peterson road matching the shell casings found at the crime scene match George's glock. This to me is huge.

As a law abiding, responsible gun owner ( & property owner), this is huge. So an item that George owns that is worth approximately $500-600 bucks turns up missing and George is not concerned. I know I would be. But not only that, this item is a firearm and George is not concerned it is missing ever. Especially not after the murder of 8 people in the middle of the night in his county. If 8 people were murdered in the middle of the night in my county and someone living in my household was in anyway connected, and a gun I owned is missing, I would be extremely concerned. But George does not ever report this gun missing after the murders. Keep in mind a Glock .40 is a nice gun to have in Alaskan Bear country.

But it is at the Montana border he can no longer plead ignorance. your vehicle is held up at the border for you and 3 other members of your family to be interviewed by a State law enforcement agency 1600+ miles away investigating those 8 murders. If you are 100% innocent and know nothing of these crimes but are missing a firearm what actions would you take? If you had limited involvment in assisting your family but did not know they were going to murder 8 people what actions would you take? But if you are actively involved in the planning, you were there that night either as a look out or in the actual killings, and/or you actively helped cover up the crimes what actions would someone like that take after the Montana interviews. George purchasing the bug detector, the murder truck, sitting in the vehicle when the murder shoes are purchased, helping buid the "goose box" with the cement buckets that later have the guns found in them.

After the Montana interviews would not an innocent person get an attorney and with the assistance of the attorney let Law enforcement know #1 I am missing a gun that I own. #2 I was with my family when we purchased a truck but I now no longer know the whereabouts of said truck #3 I noticed a purchase on my credit card for a bug detector but I did not know the significance of it at that time. #4 After the murders I helped build a "goose box" with my family(that are now suspects) and we anchored said goose box with buckets of cement.

George does none of these things. His actions seem to be consistent with someone who was actively involved in the murders of 8 people. Then we have the testimony of Jake and Agnela. Both say he was involved. And now we have the wire tap evidence.

But most importantly in all this, If I was the guardian of a small child and I even began to suspect that someone I was living with (family or not) was involved in the murder of anyone what actions would I take. Would I fear for the safety of that small child and my own safety? Would I get out of that living arrangemen? Tabbi and Beth feared for their Life and knew to get out?

Definitely the shell casings at Peterson road matching shell casings at the crime scene, matching George's Glock speaks volumes to me.

Just asking you to consider the above information.

I'd add that if the whole maternal family of my niece is murdered because my brother and my mother wanted full custody, and if I knew that both that my ex-wife had been discussing her desire to get custody of my son, I'd be worried that the ex-wife and her family was in danger. And I'd be worried that BCI might connect another half-dozen murders of my ex's family to what happened to the Rhodens, because going to prison would mean losing my son.

 

[Betty P]

Parker saying JW will testify to that and saying the Defense had it in writing from JW are quite different. How much liberty is allowed for @reading between the lines”? You can add a lot with wide spacing.
How is it you know the Defense did not have the same proffer AC went by? It could be that Parker was trying to sway the jury because opening statements are not considered evidentiary.
It was also said that GWIV went along to protect JW from GWIII. That places him at the scene. How would he protect JW without a gun? That would place him at the scene and armed. GWIV couldn’t let JW out of his sight or he couldn’t protect him unless GWIV was with GWIII. That puts him in any home JW or GWIII was in because he had to be with one or the other.
MOO

The defense is allowed to "shade the truth" about evidence in trials, but they may be pushing the boundaries with this one.

 

[justtrish]

Parker saying JW will testify to that and saying the Defense had it in writing from JW are quite different. How much liberty is allowed for @reading between the lines”? You can add a lot with wide spacing.
How is it you know the Defense did not have the same proffer AC went by? It could be that Parker was trying to sway the jury because opening statements are not considered evidentiary.
It was also said that GWIV went along to protect JW from GWIII. That places him at the scene. How would he protect JW without a gun? That would place him at the scene and armed. GWIV couldn’t let JW out of his sight or he couldn’t protect him unless GWIV was with GWIII. That puts him in any home JW or GWIII was in because he had to be with one or the other.
MOO

Parker also said George wasn't like his family. We heard he did participate in all the insurance fraud and other crimes just like they did. Then we heard all those recordings where George sounds exactly like the rest of his family. He allowed his mother to dictate his relationship with Tabatha just like she did Jake and Hannah. He didn't stand up to her. He helped his mother push Beth out also. He didn't defend Beth at all. He was just as paranoid about Beth and some type of abuse that might happen to his kid just like his mother was. He was talking about harming BCI agents. I don't buy it was just venting. I don't think it's okay at all for "venting" to include physically harming LE nor is it okay to google specific agent's addresses. If George was so scared and paranoid because BCI was accusing him of something he was not involved in, then he should have went to them and talked. They tried and he ignored them and did exactly as his family did. If you know you aren't involved and your family has done something so horrific and BCI is reaching out to you to talk, then you go in and talk.. you don't threaten BCI with specific things you will do to specific agents and look up info on where that agent lives. That is so beyond venting or being paranoid that they are wrongly accusing you and you might be arrested at any time. Below is part of Parkers opening statement.


Jake will tell you that George had

nothing to do with the planning of these

murders

Jake will tell you that George shot no

one

Jake will tell you that George did

nothing to destroy any evidence



So he didn't say Jake would say George didn't know until later. The defense claims George didn't know until later. Then when the defense is saying what Jake will testify to he says the above. Jake saying George shot no one is not the same as Jake saying George didn't participate.

They can say whatever they want in opening and twist whatever they want.. saying Jake will say he didn't shoot anyone is not the same as Jake saying he didn't shoot anyone. Just going that night was participation.

 

[justtrish]

The defense is allowed to "shade the truth" about evidence in trials, but they may be pushing the boundaries with this one.

I just went back to listen and posted what Parker said above.

Defense claims George didn't know until the Montana border.

Then when saying what Jake will say, he doesn't say Jake will say George didn't participate, he says Jake will say George shot no one.

Shooting no one doesn't mean he wasn't there and it doesn't mean Jake ever said he wasn't there. Nice way for them to as you said "shade the truth".

He also said George knew his family committed lots of crimes, but he never knew them to commit a crime of violence. (and poor innocent George didn't participate in any of the crimes his family committed?) Mommy and daddy pulling a gun on someone isn't violent? Mommy throwing a 2x4 at Tabatha and threatening to go get a gun isn't violent? They claimed Billy and George got into fist fights, but George has never known his family to commit crimes of violence? I guess he has a different view of violence.

 

[Betty P]

I just went back to listen and posted what Parker said above.

Defense claims George didn't know until the Montana border.

Then when saying what Jake will say, he doesn't say Jake will say George didn't participate, he says Jake will say George shot no one.

Shooting no one doesn't mean he wasn't there and it doesn't mean Jake ever said he wasn't there. Nice way for them to as you said "shade the truth".

He also said George knew his family committed lots of crimes, but he never knew them to commit a crime of violence. (and poor innocent George didn't participate in any of the crimes his family committed?) Mommy and daddy pulling a gun on someone isn't violent? Mommy throwing a 2x4 at Tabatha and threatening to go get a gun isn't violent? They claimed Billy and George got into fist fights, but George has never known his family to commit crimes of violence? I guess he has a different view of violence.

I'm sure the jury has figured out by now that GW4's defense team is "shading the truth" on all of their arguments and that those who testified under oath are telling the truth.

 

[RAISINISBACK]

That pretty much sums it up, Chris_p_bacon. The defense has offered next to no evidence or testimony. They have none. They're trying to take advantage of the complexity of the murder spree - all the evidence, crime scenes, weapons, ballistics.

The defense has offered next to no evidence or testimony.

The defense has not began their case yet. That begins on Tuesday. I do believe they have witnesses to call and evidence to introduce.

JMO

 

[Chelly]

The defense has offered next to no evidence or testimony.

The defense has not began their case yet. That begins on Tuesday. I do believe they have witnesses to call and evidence to introduce.

JMO

True. The prosecution actually hasn't rested its case yet.

 

[RAISINISBACK]

BIBM

Canepa; OBJECTION! A sidebar, then disrupts opening of defense, when defense states that at the MT border the BCI says to GW4, "you're not like the rest, you can help us" loosely quoting. I want to hear the MT interview of the man being prosecuted. Obviously Canepa thought it was evidentiary b/c she didn't want it stated, voiced, nor played for some reason that we don't know. I know, a win in her pocket.

I didn't even know there could be an objection in an opening statement. But Canepa sure jumped up fast to interrupt the defenses opening statement.

JMO