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

[Betty P]

I’ll say it. If the prosecution doesn’t prove their case, GW4 should go free. That is how justice works in America.

So your saying GW4 should be locked up for life or given the death penalty because in your mind he is guilty?

That's up to the jury to decide.
Personally, I'm opposed to the death penalty, so I probably wouldn't be chosen for a jury like this.
As GW4 is a violent, angry, controlling and abusive man who I believe participated in the murders of these 8 people, I think he should get life, probably even LWOP.

He's not remorseful. He's a definite risk to any community outside of prison. JMO

He shot, helped shoot or stood by while someone else shot 8 innocent people. Mothers laying in bed, nursing infants, leaving the babies screaming, drenched in their parent's blood. What kind of person does that?

 

[justtrish]

I have made an effort to try to keep an open mind & consider other’s opinions since the trial started, or at least the opinions as I have read. Even with all that has been written here throughout the trial, there are things I can’t reconcile, mainly why JW & AW would lie about GW’s involvement; before, during or after.

Some here believe Jake taking DP off his sentence was his motivation to lie about GW however, Jake’s plea was for DP to be taken off for WHOLE FAMILY, not just himself. That tells me ALL 4 were directly involved in at least one phase of before, during & after and JAKE believed there was enough evidence to convict ALL 4. Jake also tried to lessen GW’s involvement. That alone tells me GW was there. Jake knew it, he knew BCI knew it and he knew Prosecution knew it. Jake didn’t sell-out GW. He tried to lessen his involvement.

Some think Angela bargaining for only 30 years was her motivation to throw GW under the bus. That doesn’t make sense to me. The very root off all this evil is Angela’s (Jake’s & George’s) obsession with the custody of the minors.

If George wasn’t involved, I believe with every fiber of my being AW & JW would have exonerated George if he were not present during the murders. They would have been insistent he wasn’t involved at all. The most important thing to them was keeping the minors safe and within the family. Both AW & JW would have wanted George free to take the children.

So it’s actually the plea bargaining that has convinced me George was there.

JMO

100%

I wrote a long response, but then I realized that those of us that think he's guilty know why. We get it and explaining it over and over is not doing anything positive here.

 

[LMDlong]

Just popped in to check updates. Won’t comment to posts just likes, my brain is in a fog. Internet reception is off an on here also at Cleveland Clinic hospital . Orthro dr thought my husband had a torn rotator cup that was healing. Was given news that he has 19 cancerous brain tumors, one cancerous tumor on his liver, pancreas, sternum, spinal cord and one pre cancerous tumor in each kidney.

 

[justtrish]

Just popped in to check updates. Won’t comment to posts just likes, my brain is in a fog. Internet reception is off an on here also at Cleveland Clinic hospital . Orthro dr thought my husband had a torn rotator cup that was healing. Was given news that he has 19 cancerous brain tumors, one cancerous tumor on his liver, pancreas, sternum, spinal cord and one pre cancerous tumor in each kidney.

Oh I'm so sorry to read this. I know Cleveland clinic is good and he's in good hands. I hope there is some treatment or options for him. Take care of yourself too. That is a lot to process.

 

[Niner]

Just popped in to check updates. Won’t comment to posts just likes, my brain is in a fog. Internet reception is off an on here also at Cleveland Clinic hospital . Orthro dr thought my husband had a torn rotator cup that was healing. Was given news that he has 19 cancerous brain tumors, one cancerous tumor on his liver, pancreas, sternum, spinal cord and one pre cancerous tumor in each kidney.

 

[Betty P]

Just popped in to check updates. Won’t comment to posts just likes, my brain is in a fog. Internet reception is off an on here also at Cleveland Clinic hospital . Orthro dr thought my husband had a torn rotator cup that was healing. Was given news that he has 19 cancerous brain tumors, one cancerous tumor on his liver, pancreas, sternum, spinal cord and one pre cancerous tumor in each kidney.

Oh, I'm so sorry @LMDlong. Cleveland Clinic is a good place to be, Taussig Cancer Center is known to be top notch. It's always a good idea to be your own advocate, though, especially for cancer. UH Cleveland is also good. Take care of yourself and hubby.

 

[Chelly]

Just popped in to check updates. Won’t comment to posts just likes, my brain is in a fog. Internet reception is off an on here also at Cleveland Clinic hospital . Orthro dr thought my husband had a torn rotator cup that was healing. Was given news that he has 19 cancerous brain tumors, one cancerous tumor on his liver, pancreas, sternum, spinal cord and one pre cancerous tumor in each kidney.

Sending love and caring thoughts. You have friends here.

 

[RAISINISBACK]

I know you and Raize have been here since the beginning, with the rest of us, doing great work and analysis.

I agree, the dumb Ohio law allowing anyone to opt out of A/V recording has backfired in this trial. It's caused some mistrust of those watching the proceedings. Hopefully, the Ohio GA and DeWine will get rid of or change this law. For now, we can trust the jury, who has been seeing and hearing all the testimony, and Judge Deering. JMO

I trust the jury and I trust the judge, I even trust Junk and Superman. The one I do not trust is Canepa. I think she has at the very least shown herself to be unethical. Before you go off on me let me give a few reasons why.

The burned DVR.
She showed that burned DVR about twenty times. Had about ten witnesses testify about finding it in a burn pile on Peterson Rd. Showed a brand new one BCI bought just like it. Showed the Walmart receipt where it was bought. Had Ryan S publish it to the jury so they could get a close up look at it. To make them think this was some iron clad piece of evidence. That it was used to surveil the Rhodens. Then we find out Jake bought it and installed it at Peterson rd but Billy made him take it down. That it had absolutely nothing to do with the murders or what was bought for the murders. She did every bit of that to poison the jury's minds.

The guns.
She put on hours of testimony about the guns found at FWF. Brought up @rsd1200 's boyfriend to waste days testifying about them. To the point the judge had to admonish the jury that just because people own a lot of guns it does not follow that they did or will they ever murder someone. Even Junk made the comment "You should see all the guns I own." She did that to poison the jury's mind hoping there was at least one anti gun person on the jury.

The casings that did not match the calibers used in the murders.
Ditto. See above. The only good that came out of that was @rsd1200 got to see the boyfriend a few more days. But it was more deliberate poisoning of the jury's minds.

The purchases.
Not one single purchase of anything used in the murders was bought by George. Not one. Every one of them were bought by Jake and Angie. She tried to bring in the purchase of an oil filter and was left with egg on her face when it was proved to be bought from Angie's bank account. She tried to bring in the parts bought at O'Rielly's auto parts but was caught flat footed when it was clearly marked on the receipt those parts were for a 2009 Chevy Silverado that was owned by George. They were not even anything that could be remotely used to make a silencer either. All this was done to poison the jury's minds.

The bank accounts.
She told the jury the W's all co-mingled finances to the point they all had a single bank account where all the money was deposited and they all could draw on that account. She did this to show they were an "enmeshed" family. Then we find out that the W's had many bank accounts. Angie and Billy had two, jake had a personal one, and the business Jake and George owned together had one as any CPA will advise you to set up when you own a business and George in fact only had one bank account that was personal. There was no co-mingling of funds. George and Jake wrote checks out of their personal bank accounts to Angie clearly marked Child Care. So she deceived the jury. Misled them.

Insurance money.
She tried to say George filed an insurance claim and received 40 thousand dollars which was deposited in his bank account. Both Canepa and the states forensic auditor was left red faced by making a rookie mistake of not checking the birthdate on the application for the account. Turned out it was Billys and Angie's account, not George and Angie's. That was a rookie mistake by that forensic auditor and by Canepa, but nevertheless I think it was not deliberate deceit, but extreme carelessness in a DP case.

The shoes.
Much has been made of those shoeprints and shoes. George, Billy and jake were all called in to have molds made of their feet. The Walmart receipt for those shoes was shown about ten times. Mentioned about 50 times. Angie was shown carting them out of Walmart. A king of shoeprint experts was brought in to testify. But in the end, us and the jury was left confused as to whether the mold of Georges foot matched the shoe and the jury was never told what size shoe George actually wore. Then the Shoeprint King was caught off guard by the defense showing him at a conference holding a pair of shoes with the exact same sole design sold at Walmart and other stores under a different brand name. We then found out the shoe molds were outsourced and there could be thousands of different companies using that mold under a different brand name. And we never did learn what size shoe George actually wore. So again, she misled the jury. And will we ever find out George's shoe size?

The tattoo.
That tattoo was endlessly testified to by the prosecution witnesses. Show at least 20 times to the jury. Implied it was a trophy George had to brag about killing 8 people. This was done deliberately to poison the jury's minds against George because when it was all said and done the tattoo artist testified it was his idea and not George's to use that particular tattoo to cover up an existing tattoo George had. You know BCI knew that because you know BCI talked to that tattoo artist long before the W's were arrested. Canepa knew it too. So again another attempt to mislead and poison the jury's mind.

The wolf picture.
Absolutely no bearing on the case whatsoever. It was a mime posted on a FB page. Should never have been admitted into evidence in the first place. Just one more way she tried to mislead and poison the jury.

Phone calls and wiretaps.
We and the jury were promised these would be 5 times more damning than any other evidence presented. Instead we hear Jake and George scream at each other for hours shouting "No I didn't" "yes you did" "I didn't" "you did" "Didn't" "Did". She did that to make the jury dislike George and portray him as an out of control screaming manic. Why did we not hear the hundreds of hours of calls/taps where he and Jake spoke in normal tones about mundane things like buying food or where to stop for gas? This ended up being an ongoing argument between two siblings. Everyone on that jury has probably heard those kinds of arguments in their own homes if they have more than one child. especially if they ever took their kids on a long vacation in a car.

The only thing pertinent to come out of those call/taps was George threatening to go to BCI and rat Jake out.

Those are just a few things Canepa did throughout this trial to mislead and poison the juror's minds. I think it is unethical to say the least. I also think it is why Yost got rid of Canepa and dumped her on Pike County.

JMO

 

[altojack]

Just popped in to check updates. Won’t comment to posts just likes, my brain is in a fog. Internet reception is off an on here also at Cleveland Clinic hospital . Orthro dr thought my husband had a torn rotator cup that was healing. Was given news that he has 19 cancerous brain tumors, one cancerous tumor on his liver, pancreas, sternum, spinal cord and one pre cancerous tumor in each kidney.

im so sorry to hear this, you must be at your wits end. Hopefully hospital have given you and husband an action plan of treatment. Take care of yourself to keep your strength up sweetheart. Thinking of you x

 

[arielilane]

https://twitter.com/CFranciscoWCPO

Attorneys are going out for lunch now. overheard one of them saying we got about 4-5 hours of this

Everyone is back. They’re working while eating



https://twitter.com/jamespilcher

How much is the Pike Co. Massacre Trial costing - and how much to prosecute all 4 Wagners? I'll have the answers coming up at 6 on @local12 plus a better accounting with the online story later tonight.

 

[Cool Cats]

That is what I have been saying for weeks now. There is nothing there to convict George. I thought they would come out hard and fast with evidence against him. About the 10th day of nothing but Jake and Angie without even an honorable mention of George it began to dawn on me they have nothing. I finally understood Parkers puzzled face in a pre trial hearing when he asked the judge "Your Honor, what does any of this have to do with my client, George Wagner?"


But also what surprises me is that the "Clark Kent" prosecutor said they had enough evidence to convict George

If you will recall, he did not say they had enough evidence to convict George without Jake and Angie's testimony.
He said they have enough evidence to convict without Jake and Angie's testimony.
And they do. There is plenty of evidence to convict Jake and Angie without them opening their mouth to testify. So Superman didn't lie. He just left out some names.

Think about convicting George - beyond a reasonable doubt - without considering ANY of the testimony from Angie and Jake.
Exactly.

But what we all need to keep in mind is the defense can call any witnesses that have already testified back to the stand. The subpoena is still good until the verdict comes back. The judge has already ruled that the defense can play Jake's MT interview when they present their case and replay Angie's. That means they can call Jake and Angie back and grill them both on the stand after the MT interviews and point out to the jury every lie they told. What that means folks is, if the defense does this, the last words that jury will hear from Jake and Angie are lies. Wonder how much weight that will carry with them as they go into deliberations?

12 jurors need to believe Jake and Angie.
It only takes 1 juror to not believe them.

If it ends in a hung jury I do not believe, with as little evidence and as many embarrassing blunders BCI and Canepa has made in this trial, they will retry George. Then there is the cost. I think they will proceed right on to Billy.

JMO

I hate that your right
LMAO

I don't know where you live @Cool Cats but from being on here many years with various people stating they are from Pike County or surrounding areas, I have seen a very distinct aversion to LE, DA's, Judges and court in general. Maybe because the people in the area have been to court where the DA twists their words, or the judge rules against them. Or had a relative or friend that was done that way. Pike County is who the jury is made up of. That jury looks at George and they see someone who is from the area. Many of them may have the same lifestyle, hunting, fishing, riding ATV's, drinking, carousing around. Good ole boys. Then they look at the lack of evidence against him and think this is a DP case, we have to send one of our own to death. Can they do it on the lack of solid evidence that has been presented? I don't know. I know I could not. I would want more proof than the prosecution has presented.

I would like to be clear why you think the jury, well some of the jury, won't believe Angela and Jake's testimony?

Because they sat there and watched Jake laugh, smirk and smile all through his testimony. I think they would be thinking this is all a joke to him. He can't stop laughing because he is lying. He is smirking because he thinks we are stupid and will just believe anything he says.

Then you have evidence that proves both Jake and Angie lied on the stand. So much of the evidence does not match up to what little we know they testified to. That is only a small portion that was published in tweets from reporters. Just think about how much their entire testimony does not match the evidence.

that would be illegal.

It is not illegal.

Jake went to Canepa, not the other way around. She did not persuade or force him to come to her. She did not bribe him to come to her. He did that of his own free will. She tells him okay, tell us your story. When he gave the first story, which the defense has, he said George was not in the planning, did not participate, and did not cover up. Canepa says no deal, I know George was there, so if you want a plea deal then give me the real story where George was there. If you do that I will throw in a plea deal for your mother of 30 years. And take the DP off the table. That is not illegal for her to do that. After all if she doesn't buy his story then it is her right as prosecutor to say no deal.

So Jake tells a different story. This time George was there but did not shoot anyone. That is the proffer Canepa has.

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.

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.

Why do you think there is two vastly different stories? One for the prosecution and one for the defense.

Then you have that pre trial hearing in Canepa's own words where she said Jake told several different stories and they had to keep making him go over his story until they got one that was halfway consistent with the evidence.

As far as Angie. Jake told her or Rita or granny or whoever if she wanted that 30 year deal, she had to sacrifice George and throw him under the bus. So Angie, being a fan of herself, saved her own azz and sacrificed her son, George.

JMO

Just wanted to say thanks for your 2 information packed responses to my posts.

You gave me so much information I am not sure what to think anymore.

I didn't realize about all this proffer stuff with Jake changing his story so much and smirking and laughing so much etc...

Alot of information for me to think about.

I think you are the only one on the thread who wouldn't convict George, well there might be a couple others, but the problem is I think you said you do think he is guilty but that the prosecution didn't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

That would be tough. To believe someone is guilty but then not believe it is beyond a reasonable doubt.

So I am not sure what to say at this point. I thought it was in the bag, that the jury will for sure convict him. You raise some doubt and make valid points. I want him convicted so I am worried he will walk.

Anyway, thanks for being honest about your feelings on the prosecution proving or not proving their Case.

I still think that if the jury believes George was at any murder scene, that they will vote him guilty of murder.

I think the main thing is the jury believing George went with Jake and Billy that night. I believe just George going along to the murder scenes means he is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

I believe he went with Jake and Billy that night and would have to vote him guilty as charged.

Just my take on it.

 

[RAISINISBACK]

When was it said she was reluctant to file for custody when pushed by BCI? I thought she automatically got custody when GW went to jail.

No she didn't BCI told her to file for custody, that was a while after the arrests that she did so.

JMO

 

[Cool Cats]

No she didn't BCI told her to file for custody, that was a while after the arrests that she did so.

JMO

Your right, also, Chris Newcomb filed for custody, it is all listed in the docket on a court site. Then Tabby filed to have CN removed from trying to get custody. As far as I know she has custody, is happily married, and has at least one other child.

https://www.sciotocountycpcourt.org/eservices/home.page.2

 

[arielilane]

Section 2901.05 - Ohio Revised Code | Ohio Laws


Section 2901.05 | Burden of proof - reasonable doubt - self-defense.

Effective:
April 6, 2021
Latest Legislation:
Senate Bill 175 - 133rd General Assembly


(A) Every person accused of an offense is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and the burden of proof for all elements of the offense is upon the prosecution. The burden of going forward with the evidence of an affirmative defense, and the burden of proof, by a preponderance of the evidence, for an affirmative defense other than self-defense, defense of another, or defense of the accused's residence presented as described in division (B)(1) of this section, is upon the accused.

(B)(1) A person is allowed to act in self-defense, defense of another, or defense of that person's residence. If, at the trial of a person who is accused of an offense that involved the person's use of force against another, there is evidence presented that tends to support that the accused person used the force in self-defense, defense of another, or defense of that person's residence, the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused person did not use the force in self-defense, defense of another, or defense of that person's residence, as the case may be.

(2) Subject to division (B)(3) of this section, a person is presumed to have acted in self-defense or defense of another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if the person against whom the defensive force is used is in the process of unlawfully and without privilege to do so entering, or has unlawfully and without privilege to do so entered, the residence or vehicle occupied by the person using the defensive force.

(3) The presumption set forth in division (B)(2) of this section does not apply if either of the following is true:

(a) The person against whom the defensive force is used has a right to be in, or is a lawful resident of, the residence or vehicle.

(b) The person who uses the defensive force uses it while in a residence or vehicle and the person is unlawfully, and without privilege to be, in that residence or vehicle.

(4) The presumption set forth in division (B)(2) of this section is a rebuttable presumption and may be rebutted by a preponderance of the evidence, provided that the prosecution's burden of proof remains proof beyond a reasonable doubt as described in divisions (A) and (B)(1) of this section.

(C) As part of its charge to the jury in a criminal case, the court shall read the definitions of "reasonable doubt" and "proof beyond a reasonable doubt," contained in division (E) of this section.

(D) As used in this section:

(1) An "affirmative defense" is either of the following:

(a) A defense expressly designated as affirmative;

(b) A defense involving an excuse or justification peculiarly within the knowledge of the accused, on which the accused can fairly be required to adduce supporting evidence.

(2) "Dwelling" means a building or conveyance of any kind that has a roof over it and that is designed to be occupied by people lodging in the building or conveyance at night, regardless of whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent or is mobile or immobile. As used in this division, a building or conveyance includes, but is not limited to, an attached porch, and a building or conveyance with a roof over it includes, but is not limited to, a tent.

(3) "Residence" means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as a guest.

(4) "Vehicle" means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, that is designed to transport people or property.

(E) "Reasonable doubt" is present when the jurors, after they have carefully considered and compared all the evidence, cannot say they are firmly convinced of the truth of the charge. It is a doubt based on reason and common sense. Reasonable doubt is not mere possible doubt, because everything relating to human affairs or depending on moral evidence is open to some possible or imaginary doubt. "Proof beyond a reasonable doubt" is proof of such character that an ordinary person would be willing to rely and act upon it in the most important of the person's own affairs.

 

[RAISINISBACK]

Just wanted to say thanks for your 2 information packed responses to my posts.

You gave me so much information I am not sure what to think anymore.

I didn't realize about all this proffer stuff with Jake changing his story so much and smirking and laughing so much etc...

Alot of information for me to think about.

I think you are the only one on the thread who wouldn't convict George, well there might be a couple others, but the problem is I think you said you do think he is guilty but that the prosecution didn't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

That would be tough. To believe someone is guilty but then not believe it is beyond a reasonable doubt.

So I am not sure what to say at this point. I thought it was in the bag, that the jury will for sure convict him. You raise some doubt and make valid points. I want him convicted so I am worried he will walk.

Anyway, thanks for being honest about your feelings on the prosecution proving or not proving their Case.

I still think that if the jury believes George was at any murder scene, that they will vote him guilty of murder.

I think the main thing is the jury believing George went with Jake and Billy that night. I believe just George going along to the murder scenes means he is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

I believe he went with Jake and Billy that night and would have to vote him guilty as charged.

Just my take on it.

I didn't realize about all this proffer stuff with Jake changing his story so much and smirking and laughing so much etc...

That about all the proffers is a pre trial hearing where Canepa told the judge that they made jake go over his story repeatedly.

The defense brought out that Jake laughed, smiled and smirked through all of his testimony. Parker asked Ryan S, "you were here and saw Jake laugh, smile and smirk all through his testimony weren't you?" Ryan" Yes".

reporters also tweeted about it.

I think George found out what they did later and didn't tell on them. I think BCI told him in MT. I think BCI later sent him a text asking him to meet them alone somewhere in hopes he had found out more and would make a deal for immunity in exchange for telling them. But they underestimated George's love and loyalty for his mother and brother.

I truly believe that BCI did not think George was involved. The fact that they never called him back for a second interview is very important I think. At any rate we will find out when the defense calls the BCI agent to the stand and has him testify to that interview. I also think the defense will play George's MT interview.

If George is found to be a bystander he will be acquitted even though he was there.

JMO

 

[RAISINISBACK]

In opening statement the defense stated that JW major witness for the prosecution will tell the court that GW4 neither helped plan nor pulled a trigger throughout any of the crimes committed on the night of 4/21.

He (Nash) pointed out that credibility for Angela and Jake as prosecution witnesses should be viewed with skepticism, because they took a deal.

However, JW testified that GW4 was present for the murders and GW4 helped build the false pick-up bed under which the brothers hid that night, that GW4 wore a ski mask and a pair of Walmart shoes and he possessed the SKS rifle that night.



AW testified that the entire family planned, prepared for, carried out and attempted to cover up the murders. AW testified that BW3 and both sons left the house together that night and returned the next morning. She stayed home with two (S&B) of her grandchildren, she said.

AW spoke with GW4 about the bloody footprints left at one of the crime scenes, because GW4 had told her he’d attempted to smudge them, but BW3 hurried him out of the room too quickly, telling him not to worry about it, come on.

Canepa (AC) asked AW whether she knew who was responsible for the footprints; she initially responded that she didn’t. AC asked her to read a transcript of the testimony she gave the prosecution during her plea deal, which AW stated sparked her memory. AW replied that GW4 told her the bloody footprints at the home were Chris Sr. and Gary were murdered were his.

AW testified: Billy doled out instructions on what to do leading up to the homicides, she said, including telling her to send texts from George and Jake's phones to make it look like they were home during the homicides.


Common sense tells you GW4 would be a participate, in action. Visualize it. I can see GW4 standing around not doing anything (makes no sense). No, he wasn't standing watch either. Adrenaline... fight or flight response. His make up shows he would fight for his family. "One for all, and all for one." Is JW lying about GW4 not shooting anybody in order to make sure he is a free man? Probable. Ws need a man out to keep control of the kids. Both GW4 & JW were willing to take the blame for all 8 murders.

Defense hasn’t placed reasonable doubt, thus far. We will see...

IMO, there were many times during the trial what seemed like more than GW4 was on trial. However, in a sense maybe they all (Ws) were because with this crime family it’s always been “one for all, and all for one”... Right? However, make no mistake, GW4 is on trial and him alone.

Even if there is no evidence of GW4 shooting there is enough evidence to put him away LWOP.

This narrative is all in my opinion only and subject to change.

I think we all need to answer to ourselves why Angie only bought TWO pairs of shoes.

My answer? Because only two people were going to the crime scenes.

JMO

 

[arielilane]

That's up to the jury to decide.
Personally, I'm opposed to the death penalty, so I probably wouldn't be chosen for a jury like this.
As GW4 is a violent, angry, controlling and abusive man who I believe participated in the murders of these 8 people, I think he should get life, probably even LWOP.

He's not remorseful. He's a definite risk to any community outside of prison. JMO

He shot, helped shoot or stood by while someone else shot 8 innocent people. Mothers laying in bed, nursing infants, leaving the babies screaming, drenched in their parent's blood. What kind of person does that?

I concur with everything you stated here, IMO. I too oppose the death penalty. I would never be called for a death penalty case. In addition, I've often wondered why there wasn't any added charges since there were babies at the murder scenes. Why no charges of an attempt to injure or endanger a minor child? MOO

 

[Betty P]

https://twitter.com/CFranciscoWCPO

Attorneys are going out for lunch now. overheard one of them saying we got about 4-5 hours of this

Everyone is back. They’re working while eating



https://twitter.com/jamespilcher

How much is the Pike Co. Massacre Trial costing - and how much to prosecute all 4 Wagners? I'll have the answers coming up at 6 on @local12 plus a better accounting with the online story later tonight.

Does that mean this will continue for the rest of the day? Most likely.

Defense doesn't have much to offer in the way of exonerating Gw4, but they're going to stretch it out as long as possible to make it appear they have more than they do. Probably working social media again.

 

[Betty P]

I think we all need to answer to ourselves why Angie only bought TWO pairs of shoes.

My answer? Because only two people were going to the crime scenes.

JMO

Two adult males? Why would 2 adult males need 2 separate vehicles (the "murder truck" and Chris Sr's. truck) as they drove to each crime scene to murder the people sleeping there? As for the shoes, the answer was already provided. Billy had very big feet (IIRC Size 14). There were likely no "murder shoes" in stock at Walmart in his size. He wore his boots instead.

ETA: I wonder if the defense will call any witnesses for GW4?

 

[arielilane]

I think we all need to answer to ourselves why Angie only bought TWO pairs of shoes.

My answer? Because only two people were going to the crime scenes.

JMO

She was the dictator for the sons and BW3 took care of himself. More than two people went to the murder scenes. IMO