OH Pike County: 8 in Rhoden Family Murdered Over Custody Issue 4 Members Wagner Family Arrested#47

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Cool Cats said:
Dana? A nursing home will not let you work there if a criminal record comes up in your background check. Her 3 Court Cases listed in the Pike County Common Pleas Court are not criminal cases. One is Civil, one is Dissolution of Marriage, and one is a Money Judgement.
Click to expand...
http://pikecountycourt.org/cgi-bin/search.cgi
Search results for rhoden, dana
6 Matches Displayed


1 Concerning: Rhoden, Dana L
D.B.A./A.K.A.:
Filed: 05/30/2000
Arr. Agency: SHF Case #: CRB0000480
Docket Entry: Click
Charge: DISORDERLY COND
Case Type: Criminal
2 Concerning: Rhoden, Dana L
D.B.A./A.K.A.:
Filed: 05/31/2000
Arr. Agency: SHF Case #: CRB0000489
Docket Entry: Click
Charge: RESIST ARREST
Case Type: Criminal
3 Concerning: Rhoden, Dana L
D.B.A./A.K.A.:
Filed: 10/24/2005
Arr. Agency: OSP Case #: TRD0502104
Docket Entry: Click
Charge: A. C. D.
Case Type: Traffic
4 Concerning: Rhoden, Dana L
D.B.A./A.K.A.:
Filed: 11/13/2006
Arr. Agency: SHF Case #: CRB0600774
Docket Entry: Click
Charge: DOMEST VIOLENCE
Case Type: Criminal
5 Concerning: Rhoden, Dana L
D.B.A./A.K.A.:
Filed: 07/23/1997
Arr. Agency: OSP Case #: TRD9702146
Docket Entry: Click
Charge: A. C. D.
Case Type: Traffic
6 Concerning: Rhoden, Dana L.
D.B.A./A.K.A.:
Filed: 10/21/2010
Arr. Agency: N/A Case #: CVF1000577
Docket Entry: Click
Charge: CONTRACT/NOTE
Case Type: Civil

Pike County Court

Docket entry on criminal case number CRB 0000489

Click for case information
Case Number: CRB 0000489
Defendant(s): Rhoden, Dana L

  • 05/31/2000
    • CASE WAS FILED WITH COURT
    • CASE SET FOR A ARRAIGNMENT ON 06/05/2000 AT 9:00 AM

  • 06/05/2000
    • CASE SET FOR A SENTENCING ON 06/15/2000 AT 8:30 AM

  • 06/15/2000
    • FINE AMOUNT $100.00
    • CRIMINAL MM COSTS $48.00
    • SHERIFF FEES $15.30
    • PAYMENT - RECEIPT NO. 2649 IN THE AMOUNT OF $ 50.00
    • DEF. PLED NC, FOUND GUILTY, FINE 100.00, SUSP .00
    • COSTS 63.30, SUSP .00
    • JAIL 90, SUSP 85
    • SPECIAL CONDITIONS:
    • 5YRS STAND PROB,

  • 07/05/2000
    • PAYMENT - RECEIPT NO. 2935 IN THE AMOUNT OF $ 25.00

  • 08/07/2000
    • PAYMENT - RECEIPT NO. 3519 IN THE AMOUNT OF $ 25.00

  • 09/05/2000
    • PAYMENT - RECEIPT NO. 3841 IN THE AMOUNT OF $ 25.00

  • 10/06/2000
    • PAYMENT - RECEIPT NO. 4551 IN THE AMOUNT OF $ 38.30

  • 01/23/2001
    • CASE SET FOR A PROBATION VIOL. ON 02/05/2001 AT 3:00 PM

  • 01/25/2001
    • VIOLATION OF PROBATION DISMISSED.
    Conviction Date: 06/15/2000
    Dft's Plea: Nc
    Dft. Found: G Fine Amt.: 100.00
    Susp.: .00
    Costs Amt.: 63.30
    Susp.: .00
    Jail Time: 90
    Susp.: 85
    O.L. Susp. From:
    O.L. Susp. To:
    Dispo.:     5YRS STAND PROB,DEFT TO REFRAIN FROM APRIL CRABTREE.DEFT TO
    REPORT TO JAIL FOR 5 DAYS ON 6/15/2000 AT 12:00NOON.

RECAP: She plead no contest to a criminal charge, was adjudicated GUILTY and was SENTENCED TO FIVE DAYS IN JAIL AND FIVE YEARS PROBATION.
 
Last edited:
Cool Cats said:
........My 2 Cents Only...........

First off, I believe that any trusts that may or may not have been set up when Bob was alive are now under the complete control of Fred. Fred inherited everything is my opinon. I think Fred and Bob owned everything together and now Fred owns it all.

Jake MAY have been getting Social Security benefits for S, but not enough to commit murder for. I do not believe any of what happened on April 22nd 2016 had anything to do with getting S's money and inheritance.

A family member stated that the family did not even know (I would have to find the link but I did read this) if Chris Senior's property would be forfeited as a drug forfiture, or given back to the family.

The 4 Rhoden grandchildren of Dana and Chris are their sole heirs and any and all of Dana's and Chris's real property and assets go to all 4 grandkids, and Tony Rhoden petitioned the court to be the executor. I actually read an article that quoted LM saying that "everything goes to the grandkids." (Yes, again, I can look for link if interested.)

I do NOT think that the possibility of Jake getting Social Security for S and the possibility of S inheriting land/assets from her Rhoden grandparents, had anything what-so-ever to do with the Wagner's wanting the Rhodens out of the picture.

I DO think that the Wagner's did not want Hanna and any future boyfriend/husband/children (including Kylie) she might have, to benefit from S Wagner's inheritence.

The Wagner's did not need the Rhoden estates but they did have reason to NOT want Hanna, her husband or boyfriend, or her other children, or other relatives, etc... to benefit from Fred's extensive lucrative estate. with HR refusing to marry Jake, there is no way on earth that the Wagner's would want the Rhodens to benifit----through Sophia's inheritance---from Fred's large estate.

I hope I am making sense here. It can get complicated. It is often complicated. I know a LITTLE BIT from being the executor of 3 different estates. One had a Living Will, one was with a Traditional Will involving Trusts that are currently set up, and actually right now I am sorting out another family member's estate without any Will at all.

But I am no professional and rely on my attorney!

I am giving my humble opinion only....2 Cents.....:cool:
Click to expand...

BBM IMO, Unless SW was severely disabled (and I don’t believe this was the case) there was no legitimate reason for either parent to have received social security on SW’s behalf BEFORE the murders. She had 2 (I assume) working parents.
 
iridized said:
http://pikecountycourt.org/cgi-bin/search.cgi
Search results for rhoden, dana
6 Matches Displayed


1 Concerning: Rhoden, Dana L
D.B.A./A.K.A.:
Filed: 05/30/2000
Arr. Agency: SHF Case #: CRB0000480
Docket Entry: Click
Charge: DISORDERLY COND
Case Type: Criminal
2 Concerning: Rhoden, Dana L
D.B.A./A.K.A.:
Filed: 05/31/2000
Arr. Agency: SHF Case #: CRB0000489
Docket Entry: Click
Charge: RESIST ARREST
Case Type: Criminal
3 Concerning: Rhoden, Dana L
D.B.A./A.K.A.:
Filed: 10/24/2005
Arr. Agency: OSP Case #: TRD0502104
Docket Entry: Click
Charge: A. C. D.
Case Type: Traffic
4 Concerning: Rhoden, Dana L
D.B.A./A.K.A.:
Filed: 11/13/2006
Arr. Agency: SHF Case #: CRB0600774
Docket Entry: Click
Charge: DOMEST VIOLENCE
Case Type: Criminal
5 Concerning: Rhoden, Dana L
D.B.A./A.K.A.:
Filed: 07/23/1997
Arr. Agency: OSP Case #: TRD9702146
Docket Entry: Click
Charge: A. C. D.
Case Type: Traffic
6 Concerning: Rhoden, Dana L.
D.B.A./A.K.A.:
Filed: 10/21/2010
Arr. Agency: N/A Case #: CVF1000577
Docket Entry: Click
Charge: CONTRACT/NOTE
Case Type: Civil

Pike County Court

Docket entry on criminal case number CRB 0000489

Click for case information
Case Number: CRB 0000489
Defendant(s): Rhoden, Dana L

  • 05/31/2000
    • CASE WAS FILED WITH COURT
    • CASE SET FOR A ARRAIGNMENT ON 06/05/2000 AT 9:00 AM

  • 06/05/2000
    • CASE SET FOR A SENTENCING ON 06/15/2000 AT 8:30 AM

  • 06/15/2000
    • FINE AMOUNT $100.00
    • CRIMINAL MM COSTS $48.00
    • SHERIFF FEES $15.30
    • PAYMENT - RECEIPT NO. 2649 IN THE AMOUNT OF $ 50.00
    • DEF. PLED NC, FOUND GUILTY, FINE 100.00, SUSP .00
    • COSTS 63.30, SUSP .00
    • JAIL 90, SUSP 85
    • SPECIAL CONDITIONS:
    • 5YRS STAND PROB,

  • 07/05/2000
    • PAYMENT - RECEIPT NO. 2935 IN THE AMOUNT OF $ 25.00

  • 08/07/2000
    • PAYMENT - RECEIPT NO. 3519 IN THE AMOUNT OF $ 25.00

  • 09/05/2000
    • PAYMENT - RECEIPT NO. 3841 IN THE AMOUNT OF $ 25.00

  • 10/06/2000
    • PAYMENT - RECEIPT NO. 4551 IN THE AMOUNT OF $ 38.30

  • 01/23/2001
    • CASE SET FOR A PROBATION VIOL. ON 02/05/2001 AT 3:00 PM

  • 01/25/2001
    • VIOLATION OF PROBATION DISMISSED.
Click to expand...

2 of those are traffic, 2 of those were dismissed, one of those is a civil case. One conviction of resisting arrest in the year 2000. So yes, one misdemeanor charge.
 
Merrygirl said:
BBM IMO, Unless SW was severely disabled (and I don’t believe this was the case) there was no legitimate reason for either parent to have received social security on SW’s behalf BEFORE the murders. She had 2 (I assume) working parents.
Click to expand...

That's what I meant, he might have gotten SS after Hanna's death, when a parent dies sometimes the minor receives SS. But it would not be a motivation to murder her, just for the possibility of getting SS.
 
Johnny B Bad said:
I’ve got another question to ask all fellow Sletruthers does anyone think that the paper bags tied around the victims hands where did by the Killers to throw off LE, because all of them didn’t have bags on their hands, this makes me think they ran out of time. I think they did, this crew of killers had a big bunch of tricks. JMO
Click to expand...

IMO, this is standard police practice to preserve any dna evidence that might be obtained under the nails.
 
rsd1200 said:
Raisin, I have pondered that. He wanted K bad enough to make that very odd statement about wanting mandatory visits... He did end up with custody though, didn't he? Wouldn't he have to do a dna if it had not been done before?

Edit: He got full, legal, court approved custody, not just temp, before they arrested him, is what I mean.
Click to expand...

Could he be on the birth certificate as the father and not be the biological father? Did he need to do a DNA test to get custody?
 
rsd1200 said:
Agree. I think the day they hit, may have been chosen specifically, as it was one month to the day, that CR1 bought the trailer for them.
Click to expand...

I have thought for a long time that the home purchase was a trigger point some how. It may have been for multiple reasons. Even if it was just part of the reason the murders happened.
 
sunshineray said:
You really don't think the courts did a DNA test on JW? I can't believe that is possible. It such an easy test to do and in child custody cases isn't it mandated, in this day and age, for just the reason your theory is based on?
Click to expand...
Would they if JW is on the birth certificate?
 
sunshineray said:
If he had DNA testing ordered because she asked for support, wouldnt it be on record, whether a judge or an agency ordered it?
Click to expand...
It would and may very well be part of the evidence against the W4's.

At this point we don't know. But we do know that DeWine said custody and control of the children was the motive and that this is the most bizarre case he has ever seen.

We have all been here for months racking our brains for a reason why he wouldn't just take Hannah to court and try for custody or at least joint custody. Even if they planned a move to Alaska, if Jake had joint custody he could have tried for six months in AK with him and six months in OH with Hannah. There is a reason why he didn't do that.

Hannah wasn't growing MJ, her dad was. Her dad wasn't the one asking for custody.

Jake wasn't stealing boots or waving guns at people, his dad was. His dad wasn't the one asking for custody.

So this custody thing had to be something between Jake and Hannah.

These days joint custody is almost automatic. So there has to be a very good reason Jake thought he would not even get joint custody, so resorted to murder. Don't forget, the entire W family thought murder was the only solution. Not just the murder of Hannah. The murder of her entire family. Every single person who might be able to come back and get custody of SW if Hannah was dead even right down to a 16 year old boy who was the child's uncle.

Someone on here pointed out people disappear in those mountains all the time. We have all seen evidence of that with all the dead bodies turning up.

So why not just make Hannah disappear? Why would getting rid of just Hannah not solve the custody problem? Why did Jake drag baby pics and other evidence to a custody hearing to prove he was SW's father? I have never heard of any bio father dragging baby pics to court to prove he was the child's father. Why would he think he had to prove he was SW's father? After all her last name was Wagner and we assume his name was on her birth certificate as her father. So why would he have to prove he was with baby pics ect?

Unless a DNA test was done after they split in 2015 and it came back that Jake was not SW's bio father. At that point Jake could not have even gotten legal visitation rights let alone custody. At that point the only solution would have been if Hannah and every single one of her close relatives was dead. Even Hazel if she had married Frankie would have had a better chance to get full custody of SW than Jake who was not even related to the child.

It's just a theory, but it fits.

JMO
 
iridized said:
http://pikecountycourt.org/cgi-bin/search.cgi
Search results for rhoden, dana
6 Matches Displayed


1 Concerning: Rhoden, Dana L
D.B.A./A.K.A.:
Filed: 05/30/2000
Arr. Agency: SHF Case #: CRB0000480
Docket Entry: Click
Charge: DISORDERLY COND
Case Type: Criminal
2 Concerning: Rhoden, Dana L
D.B.A./A.K.A.:
Filed: 05/31/2000
Arr. Agency: SHF Case #: CRB0000489
Docket Entry: Click
Charge: RESIST ARREST
Case Type: Criminal
3 Concerning: Rhoden, Dana L
D.B.A./A.K.A.:
Filed: 10/24/2005
Arr. Agency: OSP Case #: TRD0502104
Docket Entry: Click
Charge: A. C. D.
Case Type: Traffic
4 Concerning: Rhoden, Dana L
D.B.A./A.K.A.:
Filed: 11/13/2006
Arr. Agency: SHF Case #: CRB0600774
Docket Entry: Click
Charge: DOMEST VIOLENCE
Case Type: Criminal
5 Concerning: Rhoden, Dana L
D.B.A./A.K.A.:
Filed: 07/23/1997
Arr. Agency: OSP Case #: TRD9702146
Docket Entry: Click
Charge: A. C. D.
Case Type: Traffic
6 Concerning: Rhoden, Dana L.
D.B.A./A.K.A.:
Filed: 10/21/2010
Arr. Agency: N/A Case #: CVF1000577
Docket Entry: Click
Charge: CONTRACT/NOTE
Case Type: Civil

Pike County Court

Docket entry on criminal case number CRB 0000489

Click for case information
Case Number: CRB 0000489
Defendant(s): Rhoden, Dana L

  • 05/31/2000
    • CASE WAS FILED WITH COURT
    • CASE SET FOR A ARRAIGNMENT ON 06/05/2000 AT 9:00 AM

  • 06/05/2000
    • CASE SET FOR A SENTENCING ON 06/15/2000 AT 8:30 AM

  • 06/15/2000
    • FINE AMOUNT $100.00
    • CRIMINAL MM COSTS $48.00
    • SHERIFF FEES $15.30
    • PAYMENT - RECEIPT NO. 2649 IN THE AMOUNT OF $ 50.00
    • DEF. PLED NC, FOUND GUILTY, FINE 100.00, SUSP .00
    • COSTS 63.30, SUSP .00
    • JAIL 90, SUSP 85
    • SPECIAL CONDITIONS:
    • 5YRS STAND PROB,

  • 07/05/2000
    • PAYMENT - RECEIPT NO. 2935 IN THE AMOUNT OF $ 25.00

  • 08/07/2000
    • PAYMENT - RECEIPT NO. 3519 IN THE AMOUNT OF $ 25.00

  • 09/05/2000
    • PAYMENT - RECEIPT NO. 3841 IN THE AMOUNT OF $ 25.00

  • 10/06/2000
    • PAYMENT - RECEIPT NO. 4551 IN THE AMOUNT OF $ 38.30

  • 01/23/2001
    • CASE SET FOR A PROBATION VIOL. ON 02/05/2001 AT 3:00 PM

  • 01/25/2001
    • VIOLATION OF PROBATION DISMISSED.
    Conviction Date: 06/15/2000
    Dft's Plea: Nc
    Dft. Found: G Fine Amt.: 100.00
    Susp.: .00
    Costs Amt.: 63.30
    Susp.: .00
    Jail Time: 90
    Susp.: 85
    O.L. Susp. From:
    O.L. Susp. To:
    Dispo.:     5YRS STAND PROB,DEFT TO REFRAIN FROM APRIL CRABTREE.DEFT TO
    REPORT TO JAIL FOR 5 DAYS ON 6/15/2000 AT 12:00NOON.
RECAP: She plead no contest to a criminal charge, was adjudicated GUILTY and was SENTENCED TO FIVE DAYS IN JAIL AND FIVE YEARS PROBATION.
Click to expand...

Were these charges due to a situation with her sister or sister in law?
 
Satchie said:
HR wasn't going to marry him, she'd left him. Besides, you can't retroactively marry someone, back to the date when the child was born.

I personally doubt that possible legal repurcussions about age of consent was really an issue for the W's or the R's. I would guess most teens in their world are violating that law, and no one bats an eye or even remembers that it's technically illegal.

It's been used in the indictment as part of the process of throwing the book at JW, but I seriously doubt a) police would have found out or been interested in it if it was revealed in court documents in a civil lawsuit over custody or b) the public prosecutor would agree to charge JW with it on behalf of one side in a child custody dispute. No one wants to jeopardize the future good relationships and happiness of a small child, for the sake of fulfilling the letter of the law, several years after the fact.

I think the W's problem was that HR had full custody, the best they could do was go to court to try to get 50% custody through a court order. Perhaps there was some reason they thought they might lose even the shared arrangement they currently had. Perhaps they didn't want HR to sue for child support. But, IMO, they were damned if they were going to go before a judge to ask, pretty please, for only 50% of the 100% they wanted.
Click to expand...

My 2 cents only: My son and his gf lived together for 7 yrs and had a child. They both claimed he was the father due to an exclusive relationship. They weren’t married due to finances (school loans) at the time. He talked with a family law practice who stated even though his name was on the birth certificate as father he would have to pay for DNA proof before he could be awarded custodial rights. I’m surprised JW didn’t have to go through that to obtain his rights after HMR died. Courts don’t usually just take the word of the interested party regarding paternity. I think the judge awarded the custody to JW on the merits of a prior long-term relationship & support of the child, the horror of the child’s immediate loss and the possibility that no one was else stepped forward. I think if he went to court with that same petition revealing the hammertoe trait while HMR was alive he would have been laughed out of court.
 
sunshineray said:
You really don't think the courts did a DNA test on JW? I can't believe that is possible. It such an easy test to do and in child custody cases isn't it mandated, in this day and age, for just the reason your theory is based on?
Click to expand...
No, I think a DNA test was done. I think it was done back in 2015 when Jake and Hannah split. I think it was done when Hannah tried for child support. I think it came back that Jake was not the father. I think that is when the entire W family got the shock of their life and started scheming to get custody of SW whom there is no doubt they love very much. I think that is when the entire W family came to the conclusion that the only way to get that child they all loved so much was to kill Hannah and her entire family.

We have all wondered why the entire W family got involved in a custody case between Jake and Hannah. The threat of none of them ever being able to see SW again would have been a very good reason.

After Hannah and her entire family was dead, even with a DNA test on record that he was not the father, a biased judge, or any judge really, would have deemed it better for the child to give custody to a man who she had known as her father her entire life, a man who's last name she carried, a man who was willing and able to take care of her, rather than throw her into the foster care system.

JMO
 
OhioBlues said:
Do we know if she filed in court and asked for support? It would be on record.

I have some knowledge of how this works in Ohio. When the baby is born and the father's name is placed on the birth certificate then that father has to sign a paternity type of form at the hospital. I do not believe that they do a DNA test tho. The mother has full legal custody even tho that name is on the BC. However, the mother can file for child support and the state has not requested a DNA test but neither has the mother or the father either.

Also, there have been men that have thought they were the father of a child that have had to pay support for years after they found out the child was not their biological child. I wish that we had an Ohio family law expert here.
Click to expand...

But if Hannah and Jake knew the child was not his bio? That would have been a huge threat to hold over Jake's head. Especially in view of the new "daddy" coming on the scene with pics of SW and that new "daddy" being posted on SM. Jake and crew would have viewed those SM pics of SW with the new "daddy" as a major threat.

JMO
 
molly1255 said:
Agree that marriage would have solved his problems, but HR broke up with him, had two other boyfriends and then had a child with one of those boyfriends. I think she was totally done with JW from a romantic standpoint and he knew she wasn't coming back. I don't think it has been stated anywhere "why" HR broke up with JW, but I bet she had good reasons and her parents knew the reasons.

I agree that it would have been risky for him to go to court. First, he had no argument to make about why he should get full custody. HR was very fair in visitations for him, so she wasn't withholding his child from him. From everything I've read, SW was well taken care of and was very loved by her mother and her mother's family. No arguments for abuse or neglect that I can see.

JMO, he faced potential trouble going to court because of statutory rape and my guess is the Rhodens probably had other information about his character that would have been alarming to a judge. It's not a far stretch for me to believe that a man who commits statutory rape and who stands accused of multiple murders might also be emotionally and/or physically abusive. That's JMO.
Click to expand...

IMOO.. My understanding from reading earlier articles (no I am sorry I don't have a link) is DR,HMR,CRjr all lived in the trailer with FR & HHG with the three kids. That is a lot in one home. I think the Wagoner's threatened to report HMR to CPS for living conditions if she did not sign over custody of SW, this resulted in CRsr buying DR the new home and the fight between CRsr and BW. It was the final straw they knew they would loose and the HMR would file for statutory rape. I honestly think there were a lot of blow-ups between the family and it just kept escalating. We may be surprised to learn in the court hearings what all was actually done and how the HMR and her family really felt about JW and the terror he put her through.
 
OhioBlues said:
That's a good point. Thanks.
Click to expand...

My 2 cents: At the time of HMR’s death she was living in Scioto County (Dana’s house was located in Scioto). JW was living @ Peterson Rd which was Adams Co. So unless JW claimed he was living @Fred’s or GW3’s address then the custody could still be contested as illegal. Friendships with judges can be powerful tools! JMO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 166 more.
Total: 4,596 (members: 167, guests: 4,429)

Online statistics

Members online
167
Guests online
4,429
Total visitors
4,596
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
593,737
Messages
17,991,772
Members
229,223
Latest member
Ctrls
Back
Top