GUILTY OH Pike Co., 8 in Rhoden Family Murdered Over Custody Issue, 4 Members Wagner Family Arrested #60

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ann99

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Messages
1,489
Reaction score
7,303
They thought they had information on JM/truck but may have found out they were incorrect as far as what the warrant stated. That was what I was saying.

The warrant, signed by Pike County Common Pleas Judge Timothy S. Hogan, indicated authorities believe the truck was “used as a means of the commission of the crime’’ of aggravated murder. Or it was in the possession of another person with the intent to use the vehicle as a means of committing the crime, the warrant stated.

MO. Theory. Supposition.

I see what you are saying. And you may be absolutely right.
But, possibly, the warrant was correct.
Judges do not issue warrants (even in Pike County) without a reasonable basis.
I am not being argumentative, just following another personal theory, and I may be wrong. I will say, I believe the vehicle was seen on UHR prior to 4/22.
I do not mean the day of 4/22 . I believe it had been on UHR in days prior to the murders. What I mean is it was a familiar vehicle to the area. On UHR frequently.
 

Covert Operative

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2021
Messages
1,233
Reaction score
7,001
MO.
I've been researching tattoos and court cases, appeals based upon tattos or tattoo revelations, presentations in court, or "suppositions" of meaning of tattoo in court.
Prosecution has to be very very careful here.
Appeals have been won by defendant for what we would think are minor, or common sense ideas.
Billy's Attorney may have asked to have the tattoo covered, or provided a cover, just as Defense attorneys usually provide street clothing. His defense will not make it easy for Prosecution or potential jury pool watching, to see tattoo or have cameras display it in court. It is my bet this cover was a result of Defense Attorney action. idk.
Or, Billy has some affliction, mark on face, and has had his hand covered in relation to that. Doubt it, but possible.
MO.

The tattoos may or may not be allowed as evidence by the judge. There are other court cases where tattoos that depict the murder or seem related to the murder are introduced as evidence. There are some they have not. Whether it gets admitted or not he will probably cover it during trial anyway. It seems that the bandage covers his wrist and some fingers but it is hard to tell. Could be an injury. He has never had a bracelet type/bandage covering on it in pretrial pictures I can find during other court appearances.
 

Covert Operative

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2021
Messages
1,233
Reaction score
7,001
MO. Theory. Supposition.

I see what you are saying. And you may be absolutely right.
But, possibly, the warrant was correct.
Judges do not issue warrants (even in Pike County) without a reasonable basis.
I am not being argumentative, just following another personal theory, and I may be wrong. I will say, I believe the vehicle was seen on UHR prior to 4/22.
I do not mean the day of 4/22 . I believe it had been on UHR in days prior to the murders. What I mean is it was a familiar vehicle to the area. On UHR frequently.

Yes he could have owned it but not on paper before it was ever titled to him. He could have even drove it around some at times before he purchased it. As I had said, I think they had some information to get that warrant but found out they were incorrect on their information at a later time. Judges normally do not issue warrants that easily anywhere. I am not saying the warrant was incorrect based on the information they presented to get it, I am saying they found out later that their information was incorrect about if/how the truck was used.
 
Last edited:

Ann99

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Messages
1,489
Reaction score
7,303
They thought they had information on JM/truck but may have found out they were incorrect as far as what the warrant stated. That was what I was saying.

The warrant, signed by Pike County Common Pleas Judge Timothy S. Hogan, indicated authorities believe the truck was “used as a means of the commission of the crime’’ of aggravated murder. Or it was in the possession of another person with the intent to use the vehicle as a means of committing the crime, the warrant stated.

MO. Theory. Supposition.

I see what you are saying. And you may be absolutely right.
But, possibly, the warrant was correct.
Judges do not issue warrants (even in Pike County) without a reasonable basis.
I am not being argumentative, just following another personal theory, and I may be wrong. I will say, I believe the vehicle was seen on UHR prior to 4/22.
I do not mean the day of 4/22 . I believe it had been on UHR in days prior to the murders. What I mean is it was a familiar vehicle to the area. On UHR frequently.
Yes he could have owned it on paper before it was ever titled to him. He could have even drove it around some at times before he purchased it. As I had said, I think they had some information to get that warrant but found out they were incorrect on their information at a later time. Judges normally do not issue warrants that easily anywhere. I am not saying the warrant was incorrect based on the information they presented to get it, I am saying they found out later that their information was incorrect about if/how the truck was used.

Just to clarify,
I'm not implying JM did anything wrong.
I'm not implying that previously when the vehicle was on UHR that JM owned it at the time.
Although vehicle did come into JM possession ( temporary or purchase) at some point.
I'm thinking the warrants wording may have been correct as to how the truck was used.
I don't want to imply anything about JM other than I think he had to be forced to reveal all he knew about previous history of the truck.

Edit to include:
Do we actually know if he "purchased" the truck?
 

Ann99

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Messages
1,489
Reaction score
7,303
Agree, but different states use Grand Juries to varying extents.

IMO, arresting JM was some type of LE tactic to keep him off the map for a while, so they could focus on the W4. It appears it was a good one, as LE started the massive searches just weeks later. Those searches were not planned spur of the moment, they were the result of a long and thorough investigation.

JMO, MOO, etc.

ETA - A long and thorough investigation the W4 had thrown MANY red herrings into. By arresting JM, LE was able to eliminate one of those red herrings.

I agree . These is a bigger picture here.
 

Covert Operative

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2021
Messages
1,233
Reaction score
7,001
MO. Theory. Supposition.

I see what you are saying. And you may be absolutely right.
But, possibly, the warrant was correct.
Judges do not issue warrants (even in Pike County) without a reasonable basis.
I am not being argumentative, just following another personal theory, and I may be wrong. I will say, I believe the vehicle was seen on UHR prior to 4/22.
I do not mean the day of 4/22 . I believe it had been on UHR in days prior to the murders. What I mean is it was a familiar vehicle to the area. On UHR frequently.


Just to clarify,
I'm not implying JM did anything wrong.
I'm not implying that previously when the vehicle was on UHR that JM owned it at the time.
Although vehicle did come into JM possession ( temporary or purchase) at some point.
I'm thinking the warrants wording may have been correct as to how the truck was used.
I don't want to imply anything about JM other than I think he had to be forced to reveal all he knew about previous history of the truck.

Edit to include:
Do we actually know if he "purchased" the truck?

If the warrant was correct and it was used in a murder/the murders by anyone, it seems it would have been taken from him and he would not have still be driving it around. We do not know if he purchased it, it could have been given to him.
 

Ann99

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Messages
1,489
Reaction score
7,303
I strongly disagree. There were other ways to accomplish whatever it was they were attempting. JMO it was a Keystone Cops moment.

Betty, i'm not arguing. Just pointing out your bolded statement -
what if there were not alternate ways to quickly get to the facts they were seeking?
Again, we are restricted in our thinking because we have no facts of "underlying current" the business the W' may my have been in . The association with Others on UHR.
 
Last edited:

Ann99

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Messages
1,489
Reaction score
7,303
If the warrant was correct and it was used in a murder/the murders by anyone, it seems it would have been taken from him and he would not have still be driving it around. We do not know if he purchased it, it could have been given to him.
That is a good point. I'll think about that.
 

Ann99

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Messages
1,489
Reaction score
7,303
From what I was told he bought the truck for very little because it needed a huge amount of work. I do not know who he actually bought it from. There is the name of the person on the title that owned it before him, however sometimes people sell a vehicle they bought to someone else and never even title it into their name before they sell it. There could have been one or more other owners before AM/JM got it and titled it into her name.

TY. Yes, I agree, there could have been may people who were in possession of the truck prior.
I didnt know AM got it titled into her name. Do you happen to know when she did that? Just curious, cause I missed that.
 

Betty P

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2008
Messages
16,083
Reaction score
67,800
Betty, i'm not arguing. Just pointing out your bolded statement - what if there were not alternate ways to quickly get to the facts they were seeking.
Again, we are restricted in our thinking because we have no facts of "underlying current" the buinese the W' may my have been in . The association with Others on UHR.

I understand what you're saying. For now, I'm going to wait until the facts come out at the trials.

If the goal was to obtain grounds for probable cause in order to search the Peterson Rd and Flying W farms, they already had enough evidence to obtain those warrants.JMO

Leonard Manley was very upset when his son was arrested. Leonard and JM were still upset a year later.

The GPS device was planted on the 1 yr anniversary of the murders, while the family was attending a memorial service. They refused to attend the memorial for the 2 yr anniversary because they were afraid LE would use that opportunity again to search their private property.

Rhoden family massacre: On second anniversary, 'I still got a lot of hate'

'Still got a lot of hate'

Leonard Manley didn't attend the balloon release. Instead, he sat at his home on Union Hill Road with the intent of confronting any BCI agents that came to his property.

A year ago, Manley was already skeptical of law enforcement's progress in investigating the death of his family members, but that skepticism turned to anger when police obtained a warrant and then placed a GPS tracking device on his son's truck the day of the first anniversary.

"Fool me once," Manley said.

Leonard Manley isn't shy about talking about what happened and what's followed in the two years since. He remains angry about the police's examination of his family, which also included two lie-detector tests of Bobby Jo that she says she passed.

He's also not ready to let go of the pain and vengeance he feels, though he's had help.

"Phil (Fulton) has really helped me. I still got a lot of hate, but he took a lot of that hate out of me," Leonard Manley said.
ETA: I have no doubt the Wagners are guilty of the murders and the state has built a strong case against them. But, in some instances, they could have conducted the investigation differently.

 
Last edited:

Ann99

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Messages
1,489
Reaction score
7,303
I understand what you're saying. For now, I'm going to wait until the facts come out at the trials.

If the goal was to obtain grounds for probable cause in order to search the Peterson Rd and Flying W farms, they already had enough evidence to obtain those warrants.JMO

Leonard Manley was very upset when his son was arrested. Leonard and JM were still upset a year later.

The GPS device was planted on the 1 yr anniversary of the murders, while the family was attending a memorial service. They refused to attend the memorial for the 2 yr anniversary because they were afraid LE would use that opportunity again to search their private property.

Rhoden family massacre: On second anniversary, 'I still got a lot of hate'

'Still got a lot of hate'

Leonard Manley didn't attend the balloon release. Instead, he sat at his home on Union Hill Road with the intent of confronting any BCI agents that came to his property.

A year ago, Manley was already skeptical of law enforcement's progress in investigating the death of his family members, but that skepticism turned to anger when police obtained a warrant and then placed a GPS tracking device on his son's truck the day of the first anniversary.

"Fool me once," Manley said.

Leonard Manley isn't shy about talking about what happened and what's followed in the two years since. He remains angry about the police's examination of his family, which also included two lie-detector tests of Bobby Jo that she says she passed.

He's also not ready to let go of the pain and vengeance he feels, though he's had help.

"Phil (Fulton) has really helped me. I still got a lot of hate, but he took a lot of that hate out of me," Leonard Manley said.


I agree. The results of the warrant - placement of the gps, ( timing) and end visuals of gps, reveal, destruction, the basic warrant, were very bad. Made an impression not favorable to many, including BCI.
LM had every right to be so upset.
 

Covert Operative

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2021
Messages
1,233
Reaction score
7,001
TY. Yes, I agree, there could have been may people who were in possession of the truck prior.
I didnt know AM got it titled into her name. Do you happen to know when she did that? Just curious, cause I missed that.




A woman by the same name of the one that tried to kill her dentist husband in Peebles, OH was the first owner of the truck and then a male. They were the 2 previous owners on paper. I cannot list their names here. AM titled it in March 2017 according to OH BMV records.
 
Last edited:

Ann99

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Messages
1,489
Reaction score
7,303
A woman by the same name of the one that tried to kill her dentist husband in Peebles, OH was the first owner of the truck an then a male. They were the 2 previous owners on paper. I cannot list their names here. AM titled it in March 2017 according to OH BMV records.

Ty. appreciate the info. very interesting.
 

Betty P

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2008
Messages
16,083
Reaction score
67,800
A woman by the same name of the one that tried to kill her dentist husband in Peebles, OH was the first owner of the truck and then a male. They were the 2 previous owners on paper. I cannot list their names here. AM titled it in March 2017 according to OH BMV records.

Yes, the information is back in the threads here from the time of JM's arrest. It was odd. The car was eventually bought by someone else who lived in the Peebles area. It had some unusual fluctuations in reported mileage, with a large amount of mileage reported once in a short period of time. This was a year or so before it was sold to JM. Lots of speculation here about how those extra miles were accumulated.

IIRC, there was also a long period of time when it wasn't driven, which led to speculation that it was impounded.
 

Ann99

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Messages
1,489
Reaction score
7,303
Yes, the information is back in the threads here from the time of JM's arrest. It was odd. The car was eventually bought by someone else who lived in the Peebles area. It had some unusual fluctuations in reported mileage, with a large amount of mileage reported once in a short period of time. This was a year or so before it was sold to JM. Lots of speculation here about how those extra miles were accumulated.

IIRC, there was also a long period of time when it wasn't driven, which led to speculation that it was impounded.

Thank you for the reminder. I had forgotten about the speculation it was impounded. And the milage issue too.
 

Nanasteele

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2019
Messages
77
Reaction score
494
According to the discussion in Billy's hearing the other day, it sounds like the prosecution and defense have completed the process of discovery. Since most of the evidence is linked to all the defendants, it opens things up to scheduling final motion hearings and trial dates.

Changes won by defendants during motions hearings will probably apply to AW's case, where applicable.

Now trials are scheduled, a decision made by the judge and state. It doesn't appear these trials will run concurrently, so Jake's is the first. Angela's attorney doesn't seem to be jockeying for position with the other defense attorneys, so maybe they think its better for her trial to be held later. Maybe she's thinking of making a plea deal.

JMO, it's so hard to speculate about what will happen with all the cases until Jake's trial takes place.
I really think that AW's mother and JW's new wife is going to shed major light on things!
 

Ann99

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Messages
1,489
Reaction score
7,303
Has anyone seen where the Defense has filed any Discovery documents? Specifically, have they filed who their expert witnesses are and the subject of their testimony? Why does the Defense not have to file anything?


Yes, where are the defense documents?
A disadvantaged defense, as defense is between 4 rocks and 4 hard places.
They have no defense. Let alone 4 defenses.
None of the Defense Teams have confidence in committing anything to writing. They may have a few expert witnesses but really...
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top