OH Pike Co., 8 in Rhoden Family Murdered Over Custody Issue, 4 Members Wagner Family Arrested #58

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have one question CC and to the other Sluthers, Why can’t Fredericka Wagner go see the other 4 Wagners????
Her trial was dismissed, so don’t that mean she got her Rights Back????

This is a good question. Maybe she doesn't want to visit for reasons we can not imagine.
Maybe she must be on her best behavior because of the reasons given in quotes in these links.

Charges dropped against Fredericka Wagner, at least for now - Times Gazette

"Both Junk and Canepa said the only time limit linked to refiling charges against Fredericka Wagner is the statute of limitations, or roughly six years from the time of the supposed incidents, presumably the 2018 grand jury testimony."

Charges against Fredericka Wagner dismissed without prejudice

"Appearing before Judge Randy Deering in the Pike County Court of Common Pleas, Special Prosecuting Attorney Angela Canepa and Pike County Prosecuting Attorney Rob Junk presented a motion to dismiss without prejudice. According to www.law.cornell.edu, “When a case is dismissed without prejudice, it leaves the plaintiff free to bring another suit based on the same grounds.”"
 
This is a good question. Maybe she doesn't want to visit for reasons we can not imagine.
Maybe she must be on her best behavior because of the reasons given in quotes in these links.

Charges dropped against Fredericka Wagner, at least for now - Times Gazette

"Both Junk and Canepa said the only time limit linked to refiling charges against Fredericka Wagner is the statute of limitations, or roughly six years from the time of the supposed incidents, presumably the 2018 grand jury testimony."

Charges against Fredericka Wagner dismissed without prejudice

"Appearing before Judge Randy Deering in the Pike County Court of Common Pleas, Special Prosecuting Attorney Angela Canepa and Pike County Prosecuting Attorney Rob Junk presented a motion to dismiss without prejudice. According to www.law.cornell.edu, “When a case is dismissed without prejudice, it leaves the plaintiff free to bring another suit based on the same grounds.”"

DBM
 
<modsnip: Quoted post was removed>I'm going to the grand jury tomorrow, let me look up perjury charges, just so I know. If you're about to testify about 8 murders you say you had no intimate knowledge of or participation after they were committed, why would you care what the penalties for lying about what you don't know are? You wouldn't...AJMO.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
More added, I can't make heads or tails of it. See last 2
What on earth is going on with Billy and his attorneys?


10/07/2020
MOTION FOR SPEEDY TRIAL FILED Attorney: PRO SE

10/13/2020
DEFENDANT'S REQUEST TO WITHDRAW PRO SE MOTION TO RE-ASSERT SPEEDY TRIAL RIGHTS FILED (FAX) Attorney: COLLINS, MARK C: Attorney: HAYES, THOMAS F

10/13/2020
ENTRY GRANTING DEFENDANT'S REQUEST TO WITHDRAW MOTION TO RE-ASSERT SPEEDY TRIAL RIGHTS FILED (FAX COPY)

10/14/2020
MOTION FOR SPEEDY TRIAL FILED Attorney: PRO SE (GEORGE W WAGNER III)

10/15/2020
DEFENDANT'S REQUEST TO WITHDRAW PRO SE MOTION TO RE-ASSERT SPEEDY TRIAL RIGHTS FILED Attorney: COLLINS, MARK C Attorney: HAYES, THOMAS F

10/15/2020
ENTRY GRANTING DEFENDANT'S REQUEST TO WITHDRAW MOTION TO RE-ASSERT SPEEDY TRIAL RIGHTS FILED (ORIGINAL)
 
Last edited:
More added, I can't make heads or tails of it. See last 2
What on earth is going on with Billy and his attorneys?


10/07/2020
MOTION FOR SPEEDY TRIAL FILED Attorney: PRO SE

10/13/2020
DEFENDANT'S REQUEST TO WITHDRAW PRO SE MOTION TO RE-ASSERT SPEEDY TRIAL RIGHTS FILED (FAX) Attorney: COLLINS, MARK C: Attorney: HAYES, THOMAS F

10/13/2020
ENTRY GRANTING DEFENDANT'S REQUEST TO WITHDRAW MOTION TO RE-ASSERT SPEEDY TRIAL RIGHTS FILED (FAX COPY)

10/14/2020
MOTION FOR SPEEDY TRIAL FILED Attorney: PRO SE (GEORGE W WAGNER III)

10/15/2020
DEFENDANT'S REQUEST TO WITHDRAW PRO SE MOTION TO RE-ASSERT SPEEDY TRIAL RIGHTS FILED Attorney: COLLINS, MARK C Attorney: HAYES, THOMAS F

10/15/2020
ENTRY GRANTING DEFENDANT'S REQUEST TO WITHDRAW MOTION TO RE-ASSERT SPEEDY TRIAL RIGHTS FILED (ORIGINAL)
I don't think it's in error as far as the court filling system is concerned. If it was an error, double listing, it would have been fixed and duly noted, IMO. This is just plain craziness. Defendant files a motion twice, attorneys rescind it twice, all in his name. What will tomorrow bring?
 
I don't think it's in error as far as the court filling system is concerned. If it was an error, double listing, it would have been fixed and duly noted, IMO. This is just plain craziness. Defendant files a motion twice, attorneys rescind it twice, all in his name. What will tomorrow bring?

Agree, I don't think its an error, not after these last 2 filings on the docket.

Glad I'm not the only one who thinks this is craziness. I also wonder what the heck will come next!

Something is going on.
 
There are 2 handwritten documents that were signed by BW and both were dated prior to his attorneys filing to withdraw the PRO SE documents. BW signed the attorneys statement to withdraw AFTER the PRO SE handwritten documents.

A female reporter (that recently left Channel 12) is still following this case. She spoke to BW's attorneys and comments directly about this on social media.
 
Last edited:
There are 2 handwritten documents that were signed by BW and both were dated prior to his attorneys filing to withdraw the PRO SE documents. BW signed the attorneys statement to withdraw AFTER the PRO SE handwritten documents.

A female reporter (that recently left Channel 12) is still following this case. She spoke to BW's attorneys and comments directly about this on social media.

Thanks very much! Now we know what's going on.

I have linked to her information on this case on several occasions, she has been reporting on it from day one and consistently reporting on the Wagner hearings and previous Wagner searches.

Angenette Levy leaving Local 12: 'I'm not leaving the news business'

Angenette Levy@
Verified √ Emmy-nominated reporter at WKRC Cincinnati

October 14th she said:

"For those of you following the Rhoden/Gilley murder cases: defendant George "Billy" Wagner filed a pro se motion last week seeking a speedy trial. But his lawyers filed a motion to withdraw that motion. Attorney Mark Collins told me today that Wagner has been and is frustrated by the pace of the case. The Wagners have been in jail since November 2018.

Collins said Wagner thought a speedy trial would help his case but they met earlier this week and discussed why a speedy trial was not a good idea. Hence, the motion."
 
Last edited:
There are 2 handwritten documents that were signed by BW and both were dated prior to his attorneys filing to withdraw the PRO SE documents. BW signed the attorneys statement to withdraw AFTER the PRO SE handwritten documents.

A female reporter (that recently left Channel 12) is still following this case. She spoke to BW's attorneys and comments directly about this on social media.
Thank you for the information
 
Thanks very much! Now we know what's going on.

I have linked to her information on this case on several occasions, she has been reporting on it from day one and consistently reporting on the Wagner hearings and previous Wagner searches.

Angenette Levy leaving Local 12: 'I'm not leaving the news business'

Angenette Levy@
Verified √ Emmy-nominated reporter at WKRC Cincinnati

October 14th she said:

"For those of you following the Rhoden/Gilley murder cases: defendant George "Billy" Wagner filed a pro se motion last week seeking a speedy trial. But his lawyers filed a motion to withdraw that motion. Attorney Mark Collins told me today that Wagner has been and is frustrated by the pace of the case. The Wagners have been in jail since November 2018.

Collins said Wagner thought a speedy trial would help his case but they met earlier this week and discussed why a speedy trial was not a good idea. Hence, the motion."
CC that still doesn't explain the double listings...wonder why the court would just fix that if in error and the Pro Se filing and the withdrawal just happened once? Still murky to me.
 
CC that still doesn't explain the double listings...wonder why the court would just fix that if in error and the Pro Se filing and the withdrawal just happened once? Still murky to me.

Note what is in red was not added until yesterday October 15.

10/07/2020
MOTION FOR SPEEDY TRIAL FILED Attorney: PRO SE

10/13/2020
DEFENDANT'S REQUEST TO WITHDRAW PRO SE MOTION TO RE-ASSERT SPEEDY TRIAL RIGHTS FILED (FAX) Attorney: COLLINS, MARK C: Attorney: HAYES, THOMAS F


10/13/2020
ENTRY GRANTING DEFENDANT'S REQUEST TO WITHDRAW MOTION TO RE-ASSERT SPEEDY TRIAL RIGHTS FILED (FAX COPY)


10/14/2020
MOTION FOR SPEEDY TRIAL FILED Attorney: PRO SE (GEORGE W WAGNER III)

10/15/2020
DEFENDANT'S REQUEST TO WITHDRAW PRO SE MOTION TO RE-ASSERT SPEEDY TRIAL RIGHTS FILED Attorney: COLLINS, MARK C Attorney: HAYES, THOMAS F

10/15/2020
ENTRY GRANTING DEFENDANT'S REQUEST TO WITHDRAW MOTION TO RE-ASSERT SPEEDY TRIAL RIGHTS FILED (ORIGINAL)

This makes me think that Billy's attorneys were the ones who requested his speedy trial motion be removed the first time without his consent and so Billy refiled his speedy trial motion a second time. Then they talked him out of it so he then went back and filed requests to withdraw both of his speedy trial motions.

Seems to me that the attorneys are back-tracking, desperate to drop the speedy trial stuff. They really really, for some reason, want Jake to be tried first is my best guess.
 
Last edited:
Note what is in red was not added until yesterday October 15.

10/07/2020
MOTION FOR SPEEDY TRIAL FILED Attorney: PRO SE

(
snip)
This makes me think that Billy's attorneys were the ones who requested his speedy trial motion be removed the first time without his consent and so Billy refiled his speedy trial motion a second time. Then they talked him out of it so he then went back and filed requests to withdraw both of his speedy trial motions.

Seems to me that the attorneys are back-tracking, desperate to drop the speedy trial stuff. They really really, for some reason, want Jake to be tried first is my best guess.
I agree. All attorneys want Jake to go first.
Each attorney is staking his own reputation on the verdict or outcome of "their specific Wagner".
My opinion, the massive amount of evidence that will come out in Jakes trial will give the other Wagner attorneys a better road map for the defense of "their specific Wagner".
During his trial, Jake (thru attorney's strategy) will point the finger of guilt elsewhere within the Wagners.
Look for all Wagners to turn on each other after Jake Wagner verdict.
Fingers of guilt will point in every direction.
Mostly at Jake, ( if found guilty) but at remaining other W's as well.
Seems as thought anytime there are multiple defendants (even when tried separately/individually) in a large, complicated and long planned crime, each defendant eventually points the finger at 'the other guy'.
It is a strategy.
We may never know the absolute and full truth of the entire crime.
JMO
 
I agree. All attorneys want Jake to go first.
Each attorney is staking his own reputation on the verdict or outcome of "their specific Wagner".
My opinion, the massive amount of evidence that will come out in Jakes trial will give the other Wagner attorneys a better road map for the defense of "their specific Wagner".
During his trial, Jake (thru attorney's strategy) will point the finger of guilt elsewhere within the Wagners.
Look for all Wagners to turn on each other after Jake Wagner verdict.
Fingers of guilt will point in every direction.
Mostly at Jake, ( if found guilty) but at remaining other W's as well.
Seems as thought anytime there are multiple defendants (even when tried separately/individually) in a large, complicated and long planned crime, each defendant eventually points the finger at 'the other guy'.
It is a strategy.
We may never know the absolute and full truth of the entire crime.
JMO

Thanks for your post @Ann99 because what you are saying is already starting to happen:

Here is what George IV's attorney, Richard Nash, said at the closing of GW4's Bond Hearing:

Attorney Richard Nash:

First off I want to apologize ah, an hour and a half ago I felt like stopping this to remind the court that this isn't about Jake Wagner this isn't about Angela Wagner, this isn't about George Wagner the 4th.

But I figured it would be best to just say nothing to see what this is really all about. And so this is why we heard so much testimony regarding order history, regarding who bought what, who did what, who had motive, whose child was in question.

There's been a lot of testimony regarding whose account was used or whose rewards was used, nothing pointing in the direction of George Wagner.

Ah, there is some testimony regarding a palm print on a gun, there's no testimony that that was George Wagner's hand.

Not only that but there was a list soposedly that was retrieved from a phone but more importantly not George Wagner's phone.

Ah, there was evidence regarding a solvent catcher or suppressor or again a 22 caliber. Testimony we heard here today had nothing to do with George.

Really your honor, this whole case, if there is a case, and I'm not saying it is, but it's about Edward Jake Wagner and Angela Wagner.

The only testimony we heard, and we can boil it down to one minute, and that's that they did everything together. And therefore based on that, they want the court to believe that the presumption is great that GeorgecWagner was involved in a homicide.

Your honor we would ask the court to remind the court that the presumption must be great of that person's involvement to deny bond.

We're not asking for that bond amount here today, but we're just asking to look into what the evidence is.

What the testimony that implicated George, you'll find that it's nothing, very
( ? ) highly circumstantial. Based on that lack of evidence your honor we're asking that we move to another hearing to actually determine what the bond amount should be on George. Thank you.
 
Last edited:
Note what is in red was not added until yesterday October 15.

10/07/2020
MOTION FOR SPEEDY TRIAL FILED Attorney: PRO SE

10/13/2020
DEFENDANT'S REQUEST TO WITHDRAW PRO SE MOTION TO RE-ASSERT SPEEDY TRIAL RIGHTS FILED (FAX) Attorney: COLLINS, MARK C: Attorney: HAYES, THOMAS F


10/13/2020
ENTRY GRANTING DEFENDANT'S REQUEST TO WITHDRAW MOTION TO RE-ASSERT SPEEDY TRIAL RIGHTS FILED (FAX COPY)


10/14/2020
MOTION FOR SPEEDY TRIAL FILED Attorney: PRO SE (GEORGE W WAGNER III)

10/15/2020
DEFENDANT'S REQUEST TO WITHDRAW PRO SE MOTION TO RE-ASSERT SPEEDY TRIAL RIGHTS FILED Attorney: COLLINS, MARK C Attorney: HAYES, THOMAS F

10/15/2020
ENTRY GRANTING DEFENDANT'S REQUEST TO WITHDRAW MOTION TO RE-ASSERT SPEEDY TRIAL RIGHTS FILED (ORIGINAL)

This makes me think that Billy's attorneys were the ones who requested his speedy trial motion be removed the first time without his consent and so Billy refiled his speedy trial motion a second time. Then they talked him out of it so he then went back and filed requests to withdraw both of his speedy trial motions.

Seems to me that the attorneys are back-tracking, desperate to drop the speedy trial stuff. They really really, for some reason, want Jake to be tried first is my best guess.
I agree that is what it seems. What a rigmarole.
 
This is just my general opinion about the W4. I don't know what is happening with them.

It would be very sad if a parent sells out their child to save themselves. JMO.

I agree OB, I would take full blame if it meant my life or theirs.. I love them that much. Maybe that's wrong but oh well, hopefully I would never be in that predicament.

It's just so hard to imagine parents going along with a plan like this. Wow, did no one even try to stop it?... Dumb question, hell no they didn't!
 
Note what is in red was not added until yesterday October 15.

10/07/2020
MOTION FOR SPEEDY TRIAL FILED Attorney: PRO SE

10/13/2020
DEFENDANT'S REQUEST TO WITHDRAW PRO SE MOTION TO RE-ASSERT SPEEDY TRIAL RIGHTS FILED (FAX) Attorney: COLLINS, MARK C: Attorney: HAYES, THOMAS F


10/13/2020
ENTRY GRANTING DEFENDANT'S REQUEST TO WITHDRAW MOTION TO RE-ASSERT SPEEDY TRIAL RIGHTS FILED (FAX COPY)


10/14/2020
MOTION FOR SPEEDY TRIAL FILED Attorney: PRO SE (GEORGE W WAGNER III)

10/15/2020
DEFENDANT'S REQUEST TO WITHDRAW PRO SE MOTION TO RE-ASSERT SPEEDY TRIAL RIGHTS FILED Attorney: COLLINS, MARK C Attorney: HAYES, THOMAS F

10/15/2020
ENTRY GRANTING DEFENDANT'S REQUEST TO WITHDRAW MOTION TO RE-ASSERT SPEEDY TRIAL RIGHTS FILED (ORIGINAL)

This makes me think that Billy's attorneys were the ones who requested his speedy trial motion be removed the first time without his consent and so Billy refiled his speedy trial motion a second time. Then they talked him out of it so he then went back and filed requests to withdraw both of his speedy trial motions.

Seems to me that the attorneys are back-tracking, desperate to drop the speedy trial stuff. They really really, for some reason, want Jake to be tried first is my best guess.
So that if end result is Jake is found guilty the others would just plead?
 
I agree OB, I would take full blame if it meant my life or theirs.. I love them that much. Maybe that's wrong but oh well, hopefully I would never be in that predicament.

It's just so hard to imagine parents going along with a plan like this. Wow, did no one even try to stop it?... Dumb question, hell no they didn't!
Once arrested I'd always thought GWIV would be the one to flip. I STILL believe that at the moment.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
207
Guests online
1,162
Total visitors
1,369

Forum statistics

Threads
596,792
Messages
18,053,924
Members
230,097
Latest member
Raycrochet
Back
Top