OH - Pike County: 8 people from one family dead as police hunt for killer(s) #20

[glf]

Not sure what vehicles are referenced, but in the AG interview, it is clear to many of us why autopsy and crime scene details are not being released to the media: if you're LE and you're pulling in potential witnesses and/or informants, you won't know the authenticity of their info if details have been leaked to the family or public.

Yes, we sleuths want info... But not at the expense of an arrest and conviction for the Rhoden and Gilley families.

Patience is more than a virtue: sometimes, it's a strategy, I think.

Prayers for this family, their babies, and those that loved them.

JMO...

I agree, even if we think we ready to pull our hair out over zilch new news, we don't want to throw a stumbling block into this investigation. BUT! I'm certain most people remember when the one incident report came out, some things were blacked out. I feel like they could make copies of the death certificates and black out sensitive info before making them available for viewing. There definitely could be sensitive info they don't want out; I understand. But the remainder of the findings could be published W/O damaging the case. I believe that the killers have lots of privileged info nobody but them will ever know. And, I still believe that all the kooks who called and confessed to this crime have already done that and got it out of their system. And it seems funny that LE hasn't ever mentioned they had 23 people, or whatever call in and confess! Watch out, everybody, my mind is in overdrive again!

 

[Ann99]

new article this am by Chris Graves

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/new...scoff-pike-county-sheriffs-comments/88507184/

 

[Dr. Know?]

The video I posted a couple days ago of DeWine has nothing to do with my comment about someone having a new vehicle. Two seperate things. hth

 

[Tillicum]

I missed a few days on the forum, but was surprised to come back to comments that make me feel some theories are being summarily dismissed with no evidence to back up the dismissal. Or, outright made fun of. SMH.

Even if we disagree we don't need to be laughing at each other. JMHO.

I have to say I'm totally lost and confused at this point. I still haven't figured out who owns the new red car yet. Or for that matter, how it relates to the murders.

 

[Tillicum]

new article this am by Chris Graves

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/new...scoff-pike-county-sheriffs-comments/88507184/

Thank you Ann99. I'm very curious as to what information Children's Services has. Charlie isn't the only one concerned about the safety of these kids IMO.

The Pike County Children’s Services Board asked Rosenberger to keep closed all court hearings and seal records related to the ongoing custody of Ruger, now nine months old, and Kylie, now three months old. The Enquirer objected, citing Ohio law that says the proceedings are presumed open.

 

[jk204]

Please don't let something like this discourage you from posting. In my opinion, this is a bizarre case with so many possibilities as to "who, what, and why" these people were killed.

I don't buy the pot growing, fighting, dog fighting, derby car, cartel theory even though one or more of those may very well be the reason for these murders. My theory falls more along the line of Cane and Abel and the old saying "the apple don't fall far from the tree". And I can't discuss my theories because of the TOS. So, I sit and wait for this to be solved.

I agree with your view "the apple doesn't fall far from the tree". I wish we could discuss more about the family issues. I also understand it would be difficult.

I've said what I had to say about this case, and like you I am now waiting for it to be solved. I hope it is soon, with multiple perps involved, I am a little more optmistic.

 

[Jax49]

I have to say I'm totally lost and confused at this point. I still haven't figured out who owns the new red car yet. Or for that matter, how it relates to the murders.

Did you reply to the wrong post? I'm lost too, lol.

 

[Tillicum]

Did you reply to the wrong post? I'm lost too, lol.

Sorry You mentioned theories being dismissed and the dismissals are what's confusing me. Well that's part of it anyway.

 

[CSIDreamer]

new article this am by Chris Graves

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/new...scoff-pike-county-sheriffs-comments/88507184/

Couple of items of note to me:

Reader was the only witness to testify in the hearing, but his comments about the safety of the children and their caregivers came after he asked to address the court after he left the witness chair and was no longer under oath.

I don't believe Charlie Reader so much as sneezes without doing it for a reason. He was no longer under oath when he said he felt like the children were in "grave" danger. I'm wondering if he's just trying to annoy someone to the point they slip up.

And the other:

The gag order means those family members seeking custody, who have had visitation, can not talk to anyone about the children -- including the babies great-grandmother, Geneva Rhoden.

Sounds to me like Geneva has seen the children? Or no one can tell her anything about them?

 

[Tillicum]

Couple of items of note to me:

Reader was the only witness to testify in the hearing, but his comments about the safety of the children and their caregivers came after he asked to address the court after he left the witness chair and was no longer under oath.

I don't believe Charlie Reader so much as sneezes without doing it for a reason. He was no longer under oath when he said he felt like the children were in "grave" danger. I'm wondering if he's just trying to annoy someone to the point they slip up.

And the other:

The gag order means those family members seeking custody, who have had visitation, can not talk to anyone about the children -- including the babies great-grandmother, Geneva Rhoden.

Sounds to me like Geneva has seen the children? Or no one can tell her anything about them?

I took it to mean that she hasn't seen the grandchildren.

"There is already such burden out there on the family with such tragedy and they just placed more because we can’t talk about those children,'' Tony Rhoden said. "By putting a gag order on the case, you put a burden on the family for the fact is if, let's say for instance, my mom goes to my sister and says how are those children doing? How would you like to be that person to tell your mom: I can’t talk to you,'' he said.

 

[rsd1200]

Couple of items of note to me:

Reader was the only witness to testify in the hearing, but his comments about the safety of the children and their caregivers came after he asked to address the court after he left the witness chair and was no longer under oath.

I don't believe Charlie Reader so much as sneezes without doing it for a reason. He was no longer under oath when he said he felt like the children were in "grave" danger. I'm wondering if he's just trying to annoy someone to the point they slip up.

And the other:

The gag order means those family members seeking custody, who have had visitation, can not talk to anyone about the children -- including the babies great-grandmother, Geneva Rhoden.

Sounds to me like Geneva has seen the children? Or no one can tell her anything about them?

BBM
I don't think, that just because one leaves the witness stand, it relieves them of their sworn oath to tell the truth, in the courtroom. The judge/clerk will remind a person, who later addresses the court, or is recalled to the stand, that they are still under oath, though. I wasn't there, so I don't know if they reminded Reader, or not, but I'd think that he'd still be under oath either way. IANAL but, I've sat in on quite a lot of court hearings. :facepalm: Maybe the oath is handled differently in each state/courtroom. I was quite surprised that Ohio's family court/juvenile hearings are public. They are not public here and I feel that is the way it should be. Either way, I'd prefer to err on the side of caution where the children are concerned.

As far as asking about the children, I would think the gag order would be about the details of the family court proceedings, and not general questions about the children's health or happiness. Tony has become rather vocal lately.

 

[Traveller]

Red truck

 

[Tillicum]

Red truck

Will you please explain?

 

[CSIDreamer]

Red truck

Link, please.

 

[CSIDreamer]

BBM
I don't think, that just because one leaves the witness stand, it relieves them of their sworn oath to tell the truth, in the courtroom. The judge/clerk will remind a person, who later addresses the court, or is recalled to the stand, that they are still under oath, though. I wasn't there, so I don't know if they reminded Reader, or not, but I'd think that he'd still be under oath either way. IANAL but, I've sat in on quite a lot of court hearings. :facepalm: Maybe the oath is handled differently in each state/courtroom. I was quite surprised that Ohio's family court/juvenile hearings are public. They are not public here and I feel that is the way it should be. Either way, I'd prefer to err on the side of caution where the children are concerned.

As far as asking about the children, I would think the gag order would be about the details of the family court proceedings, and not general questions about the children's health or happiness. Tony has become rather vocal lately.

He (Tony) sure has.

I don't know about the legality of being under oath or not. Just the fact it was pointed out, and he said it "off the stand". I dunno. Almost like a taunt or push if you know what I mean.

 

[Obiwankenobi]

Thank you Ann99. I'm very curious as to what information Children's Services has. Charlie isn't the only one concerned about the safety of these kids IMO.

I wish I could figure out how to copy and paste from my phone. I'm more interested in the paragraph where it says "most of the family has not been allowed visitation" and "they have been told the Rhodens remain under suspicion!"

Does that mean some family members have had visitation? Does that mean they think a family member orchestrated this?

 

[CSIDreamer]

I wish I could figure out how to copy and paste from my phone. I'm more interested in the paragraph where it says "most of the family has not been allowed visitation" and "they have been told the Rhodens remain under suspicion!"

Does that mean some family members have had visitation? Does that mean they think a family member orchestrated this?

The children remain in the care of foster parents. Most family members have not been allowed visitation -- including supervised visitation -- with the children since they were placed in state care on April 22. They say they have been told that Rhoden family members remain under suspicion.

Is this what you're talking about?

 

[kbpirate]

Thank you, Ray, for all of your insight. I greatly enjoy reading your posts and appreciate your time. I now know how several things that truly puzzled me (and I even live with a couple of large dogs - one male, one female - but didn't figure out how the killer got around the dogs until you pointed it out). God bless.

What was the throrey of how they got around the dogs?

 

[Tillicum]

What was the throrey of how they got around the dogs?

IMO the dogs knew the killers.

 

[Obiwankenobi]

The children remain in the care of foster parents. Most family members have not been allowed visitation -- including supervised visitation -- with the children since they were placed in state care on April 22. They say they have been told that Rhoden family members remain under suspicion.

Is this what you're talking about?

Yep! That's it. I hadn't heard of any family getting to see the children until now.