OH - Pike Co - 8 in Rhoden Family Murdered Over Custody Issue - 4 Members Wagner Family Arrested #74

Status
Not open for further replies.

RAISINISBACK

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 6, 2016
Messages
4,613
Reaction score
21,479
Thanks for clarification that you think George is guilty as sin. I get what you are saying, you want more focus from the prosecution on George and less on Jake.

It does bother me that BOTH shoe experts can't say who was wearing the shoes but that is one of those questions the jury will discuss. The jury could come to the conclusion through Angela's interviews, Angela's testimony and shoe print experts, that it is beyond a reasonable doubt George wore the size shoe Angie says she bought for him. The shoe print found in blood at Chris Sr's and there was a shoe print found at Dana's.

The jury will hash out how much of Jake and Angela's testimony they agree on and if they believe the testimony that George was at the crime scenes - as Angie and Jake say. And if they believe George was at the crime scenes - beyond a reasonable doubt - then I believe the jury will convict George of murder. Probably even all 8 murders and that would put him in prison for life which would be the best justice for the victim's loved ones.

If the jury does not believe George went along on the murders that is where I see trouble. I think one of the most important parts of this case is that the jury believes that George went along with Jake and Billy to the murder scenes.

It is the witnesses who are criticizing Jake all the time but it is still early in the trial and the prosecution said they have the evidence to convict George without the proffers.

I agree, I want to see more evidence against George personally. I am trying to stay as positive as I can that the prosecution will present more evidence and witness testimony directly on George and not as much on Jake.

But I think the prosecution has a plan to put all the pieces together which will show the jury beyond a reasonable doubt that George is guilty of the murder conspiracy of 8 people.

So I had to have time to think about it and I think I get where your coming from. No one knows what a jury will feel is proven and what a jury will feel is not proven.

I personally feel there has been enough evidence presented so far that would show the jury that George is guilty of murder but I admit I am relying heavily on the proffers, proffers are testimony, what Jake and Angela have said and will say on the stand. For many reasons I believe them when they say George was at the crime scenes.

Yes I hope for more evidence against George personally and think the prosecution has their plans laid out for this.

Too early yet to tell what will come out on the stand but I hope to eventually be posting more evidence and testimony that points directly to George and not just to Jake. We all understand Jake was a terrible abusive tyrant with no empathy (I think he was born a pschopath) and thought he basically owned Hanna.

Quote:
"Those are MY thoughts and MY opinion. I am not asking anyone else to share them."

Yes, you have a right to your opinions even when other posters do not see eye to eye with you.
It does bother me that BOTH shoe experts can't say who was wearing the shoes but that is one of those questions the jury will discuss. The jury could come to the conclusion through Angela's interviews, Angela's testimony and shoe print experts, that it is beyond a reasonable doubt George wore the size shoe Angie says she bought for him. The shoe print found in blood at Chris Sr's and there was a shoe print found at Dana's.

BBM
I think the biggest problem I have is I went into this 100% believing George is guilty. I still do. We have lived and breathed this case for over 6 years and I think that is what we all think on here. If I had been called as a juror and asked can you be unbiased I would have said "Heck no, let's buy a new rope and take that booger out back and find a tall tree so we can string him up Clint Eastwood style. I don't think he deserves a trial." But that is not how the law works in the 21st century.

As far as the shoeprint evidence, I think this is where we are at.

You have two shoe experts who say they cannot place those shoes on George's feet.
You have one Walmart receipt for shoes and Angie on camera buying them. But they are a cheap shoe many people in the area has probably bought.

You have George when questioned in a room alone at the border of Canada saying he never saw the shoes.
You have Jake in a different room saying the same thing George did at the border.
Angie in a different room at the border says she bought the shoes, showed them to the boys, they didn't like them, so she threw them away.
This was all put on record when BCI questioned them at the border.

Then per AC Angie now comes back and says George wore those shoes to the crime scenes. Two stories. Which one is true?

Then per AC Jake says they left the house, went out in the barn and changed clothes and shoes. He then said they burned the clothes and shoes and put on clean ones before they returned home.

Nash is going to nail Angie on those two stories she put on record. Then he is going to nail her on George wearing them to the crime scene. Per AC Angie never left the house. Jake said she stayed home also. So how can she truthfully testify that George wore them if she didn't see them on his feet?

So there fore you have 2 shoe print experts who can't swear George ever wore the shoes, and George and Jake saying they never saw the shoes on one side and Angie with her ever changing stories on the other without any knowledge whether George ever put those shoes on since he left and came back in different shoes.

Now here is where I think AC is tanking her own case. She is relying heavily on Jake's proffer to get a conviction on George. The problem is she keeps calling all these emotionally distraught family members up there to testify that:

1. Jake groomed a 13 year old child and was abusing her (per Kendra) and having sex with her.
2. Jake got her pregnant at 15 and was abusing her, hitting, pushing and choking her (per April and Kendra)
3. Jake was locking her in a bedroom for many days and keeping her from seeing her parents. (per Corey)
4. Jake threatened to chop her legs off if she tried to leave. (per Chelsa.)
5. Jake murdered her and her entire family while most were asleep. (per jake)

Remember Jake is not on trial, and the problem with AC slinging this much mud at Jake, what do you think that jury's thoughts and feelings are about Jake right now. After hearing all that I am betting they are hostile to him at best, hating him at worst.

But AC needs the jury to believe his testimony to convict George.

And the more emotional family testimony, the more sobbing family members on that stand, the more heart rendering words from people who loved Hannah, the more that jury turns against Jake, the more they see him as an evil villain, the less that jury likes Jake. And the more they hate him, the less likely they are to believe him.

Then you got Nash who is going to get up there and say "haven't you already told several stories about that night? Then there is this interview with a reporter where you got caught in a lie. Then there is this BCI, sheriff's report where you lied about everything."

So for my part, if George walks, let's catch him and string him up Clint Eastwood style because whether he walks or not, in my mind he will always be guilty.

JMO
 
Last edited:

Cool Cats

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2018
Messages
9,162
Reaction score
64,919
What is the penalty for knowing after the fact about a murder and not reporting it?

Failure to Report Laws​

In most states failure to report isn't illegal, but a small minority of states have enacted laws punishing individuals who fail to report certain types of crimes to the authorities. Under Texas law, for example, you can be charged with a Class A misdemeanor for failing to report an offense that resulted in serious bodily injury or death.

In Ohio, on the other hand, it's illegal to knowingly fail to report a felony.

Take a look at your state's penal code or consult with an attorney to determine whether your state has a failure to report law.

Accessory After the Fact​

While merely failing to report a crime is one thing, helping to conceal a crime is another. A person can generally be charged with accessory after the fact, or aiding and abetting, if he or she wasn't actually present during the commission of a crime, but took actions to conceal the crime or help the perpetrators avoid capture.

For example, hiding a weapon that was used in a robbery will probably make you an accessory after the fact under the laws of most states, even if you took no part in the actual robbery. These incidents of failure to report a crime can have serious consequences. Depending on the severity of the underlying crime, aiding and abetting can be either a misdemeanor or a felony in most states.
 

Betty P

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2008
Messages
18,693
Reaction score
86,949

Failure to Report Laws​

In most states failure to report isn't illegal, but a small minority of states have enacted laws punishing individuals who fail to report certain types of crimes to the authorities. Under Texas law, for example, you can be charged with a Class A misdemeanor for failing to report an offense that resulted in serious bodily injury or death.

In Ohio, on the other hand, it's illegal to knowingly fail to report a felony.

Take a look at your state's penal code or consult with an attorney to determine whether your state has a failure to report law.

Accessory After the Fact​

While merely failing to report a crime is one thing, helping to conceal a crime is another. A person can generally be charged with accessory after the fact, or aiding and abetting, if he or she wasn't actually present during the commission of a crime, but took actions to conceal the crime or help the perpetrators avoid capture.

For example, hiding a weapon that was used in a robbery will probably make you an accessory after the fact under the laws of most states, even if you took no part in the actual robbery. These incidents of failure to report a crime can have serious consequences. Depending on the severity of the underlying crime, aiding and abetting can be either a misdemeanor or a felony in most states.

Fortunately, none of this is a concern in George's case. State has plenty of evidence (plus confessions of 2 accomplices) to convict him on enough charges to keep in prison for the rest of his life. It's also still possible for him to end up with the DP.
 

justtrish

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2017
Messages
2,237
Reaction score
27,972
Did you check the second page? On bottom right you can click on page 2. There are subpoenas on both page 1 and 2.
Thank you! I now see them on the second page, that I didn't see before. LOL

Do we know who any of these persons are and how they fit in for the defense?
09/30/2022SUBPOENAS ISSUED TO SAMANTHA STALEY; SKID MONTGOMERY; JEFF TACKETT; SHAWN FISHER; ANDREW CARSON; NATHAN WALLS; BERNARD BROWN; CAPT SETH HAGEMAN; SHAWN WALLS; OFFICER CANCER; ALEX STALEY; DANIEL VANCE WALLS ISSUED BY ATTORNEY NASH
 

Betty P

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2008
Messages
18,693
Reaction score
86,949
Thank you! I now see them on the second page, that I didn't see before. LOL

Do we know who any of these persons are and how they fit in for the defense?
09/30/2022SUBPOENAS ISSUED TO SAMANTHA STALEY; SKID MONTGOMERY; JEFF TACKETT; SHAWN FISHER; ANDREW CARSON; NATHAN WALLS; BERNARD BROWN; CAPT SETH HAGEMAN; SHAWN WALLS; OFFICER CANCER; ALEX STALEY; DANIEL VANCE WALLS ISSUED BY ATTORNEY NASH

So there really is a Skid Montgomery? I wasn't sure. I wonder what Nash's strategy is?

IIRC, Skid Montgomery is a friend of Billy Wagner and may have or does work for at Flying W Farms. Not sure who the LE officers are. Maybe the defense plans to say more bad things about the victims, who are no longer around to defend themselves.
 

Ann99

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Messages
1,856
Reaction score
10,069
Thank you! I now see them on the second page, that I didn't see before. LOL

Do we know who any of these persons are and how they fit in for the defense?
09/30/2022SUBPOENAS ISSUED TO SAMANTHA STALEY; SKID MONTGOMERY; JEFF TACKETT; SHAWN FISHER; ANDREW CARSON; NATHAN WALLS; BERNARD BROWN; CAPT SETH HAGEMAN; SHAWN WALLS; OFFICER CANCER; ALEX STALEY; DANIEL VANCE WALLS ISSUED BY ATTORNEY NASH
This will be an absolute must see must hear.
 

24Roses

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2012
Messages
1,941
Reaction score
7,692
Thank you! I now see them on the second page, that I didn't see before. LOL

Do we know who any of these persons are and how they fit in for the defense?
09/30/2022SUBPOENAS ISSUED TO SAMANTHA STALEY; SKID MONTGOMERY; JEFF TACKETT; SHAWN FISHER; ANDREW CARSON; NATHAN WALLS; BERNARD BROWN; CAPT SETH HAGEMAN; SHAWN WALLS; OFFICER CANCER; ALEX STALEY; DANIEL VANCE WALLS ISSUED BY ATTORNEY NASH
When you have time, can you please link me to where you found these subpoenas? I'm looking, but can't see to find his court docket. Thanks.
 

Ann99

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Messages
1,856
Reaction score
10,069
So there really is a Skid Montgomery? I wasn't sure. I wonder what Nash's strategy is?

IIRC, Skid Montgomery is a friend of Billy Wagner and may have or does work for at Flying W Farms. Not sure who the LE officers are. Maybe the defense plans to say more bad things about the victims, who are no longer around to defend themselves.
yep, Skid. I hope we get to see him.
I don’t know about most of these names, but a few are known.
Pure speculation. It could be about several things.
Basically, are these people ( Walls) friends or associates.
This could be about prior bad acts of the Wagner Family Crime Unit.
Or it could be about the Wagners recruiting some of these people for future work.
Or it could be something else related to the undercurrent.
MO
 

Myland

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2016
Messages
998
Reaction score
3,801
So there really is a Skid Montgomery? I wasn't sure. I wonder what Nash's strategy is?

IIRC, Skid Montgomery is a friend of Billy Wagner and may have or does work for at Flying W Farms. Not sure who the LE officers are. Maybe the defense plans to say more bad things about the victims, who are no longer around to defend themselves.
Jmo Skid Montgomery doesn’t work for the Wagner’s. And if you ask just about anyone in Pike County they know Skid or know of him. He is very known of. He is his own self made man.
 

Caylee Advocate

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2009
Messages
4,285
Reaction score
12,811
IMO, G4 didn't "need" to go along, G4 went along because he wanted to.

He was a very integral part of the W4's family plan to murder 8 people.

All for one and one for all.

Conspiracy...

JMO

Let me rephrase my original comment since I did not come across clearly.


IF what George4 said about going along to protect Jake from Billy were true, I wonder WHY he thought he needed to protect him, why did he think Billy would harm Jake?

I was not trying to imply I believed it. I think he agreed to be one of the Rat Pack... er, Three Musketeer's.





All For One GIF - All For One All For One And One For All Knight GIFs
 

Puzzles8

Exonerated Mountain Lion
Joined
Nov 28, 2018
Messages
2,871
Reaction score
26,396
If we look at George's size and Jake's size, we can also conclude that maybe George was there to protect Jake from more than just Billy. I think the possibility of multiple men being at each location some locations maybe 3 men, it makes sense to me that 3 men needed to go along for this plan. At the very least 1 lookout at each location and 2 are then able to commit whatever murders, robbery, etc they are going to do.
I so agree. There would have had to be at least 3 people at each location to try to control the possible situations.

IMO, if CH had stayed over at HMR's that would have been 4 victims to try to control that night. And I do believe if CH had been at HMR's that night, he would have been murdered as well.

Charge # 22 - Conspiracy..

JMO
 
Last edited:

Caylee Advocate

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2009
Messages
4,285
Reaction score
12,811
IMHO-if anyone is really planning on going to view the trial on the day(s) that AW and JW are testifying, you may want to call this week to find out if that is even possible. I've been watching the Scioto Valley Guardian Facebook live feed and locals are commenting that only very close relatives are getting in to the trial. It IMO sounds like not even local people are getting in. I'm reading the same from locals on the Law and Crime YouTube feed chat. I wouldn't want someone to travel a long ways and be disappointed. Again just MO and trying to be helpful.

I haven't had any problem getting in and I am a local. I have been there 5 different days, and I plan on a day or 2 this week then hopefully when JW and AW give testimony.
 

Puzzles8

Exonerated Mountain Lion
Joined
Nov 28, 2018
Messages
2,871
Reaction score
26,396
So there really is a Skid Montgomery? I wasn't sure. I wonder what Nash's strategy is?

IIRC, Skid Montgomery is a friend of Billy Wagner and may have or does work for at Flying W Farms. Not sure who the LE officers are. Maybe the defense plans to say more bad things about the victims, who are no longer around to defend themselves.
I'm not sure who he is either, but the name sounds familiar.

Might he have been associated with BBL?
Might he have been involved with a real estate deal with Rita N.(AW's mom)?

Just asking. JMO
 

Betty P

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2008
Messages
18,693
Reaction score
86,949
I'm not sure who he is either, but the name sounds familiar.

Might he have been associated with BBL?
Might he have been involved with a real estate deal with Rita N.(AW's mom)?

Just asking. JMO
All good guesses, JMO. Since it’s Nash calling them, it will probably be the defense team’s usual argle -bargle about how someone else killed the Rhodens, even though 2 members of their client’s family already confessed.
 

Caylee Advocate

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2009
Messages
4,285
Reaction score
12,811
I'm not sure who he is either, but the name sounds familiar.

Might he have been associated with BBL?
Might he have been involved with a real estate deal with Rita N.(AW's mom)?

Just asking. JMO

He owns the Southbound Flea Market south of Piketon, owns lots of properties that are mostly rundown trailers, or at least they always were. His son is a Pike County Commissioner. More but I'm done for now. :eek:
 

Dudly

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 8, 2016
Messages
3,398
Reaction score
15,101
So JW lied when he said DR was awake on her phone

BBM
So are you saying that Jake lied when he said he killed Dana? Even if she was awake on her phone, she was lying in bed. What defense did she have against him? He sneaked into her bedroom at 3:32 AM and shot her in the head before she could react to anything. Think about it. It's 3:32 AM, dark in your house, you are not expecting someone to come sneaking in your bedroom with a gun. Then suddenly BAM! you are shot in the head twice before you know what hit you. Then he went back and fired 3 more shots into her head when he heard her making sounds. So yes Jake could have killed them all himself. In fact he plead guilty and admitted he killed Dana and Hannah and Chris JR and Frankie and Hazel. By himself.

that HR looked at him?

Yes, I am saying that was a bold face lie. You know why? Because the coroner said she was shot twice in the BACK of the head while she was lying on her side. So what do you think happened? Jake walked in and Hannah looked at him and Jake gently whispered to her "Please, turn your head away so I don't have to look you in the eyes while I kill you."? I don't know of any world where that would happen or that she would have just obediently turned her head so Jake could put two bullets in the back of her head.

Unlike Jake, evidence in an autopsy, given by a coroner does not lie. Two bullet holes, back of the head. You figure out how that could happen if she was lying in bed, looking at him?

That is a crock of BS about him repositioning her body so the baby could nurse also. She was already on her side. He didn't give a FHF about that infant whether it starved to death or not. If he had, he wouldn't have been shooting a .22 bullet in the bed with that baby where it could have easily ricocheted and hit the baby killing her or the bullet could have passed through Hannah's body and killed the baby. So someone please tell me why they think he cared one tiny bit about a baby he knew was not his. If he cared he would not have killed that baby's mother depriving little KR from ever breastfeeding again.

JMO
So it isn’t possible that she looked at him and then looked down at her baby before he shot her?
If he didn’t care if the baby starved to death, why was he at the hospital hours later trying to take her home with him?
 

Niner

Long time Websleuther
Joined
Aug 18, 2003
Messages
72,143
Reaction score
225,605
Monday, October 3rd:
*Trial continues (Day 15) (@ 9am ET) - OH - Pike County 8 people dead: Christopher Rhoden, Sr. (40), his ex-wife, Dana Manley Rhoden (37), their three children, Clarence "Frankie" Rhoden (20), Christopher Jr. (16), Hanna Mae (19); Frankie's fiancée, Hannah Hazel Gilley (20), Christopher Rhoden Sr.'s brother, Kenneth Rhoden (44), & a cousin, Gary Rhoden (37). Hanna Rhoden's baby girl (5 days old), another baby (6 mos.) & a young child (3) were unharmed. (April 21-22, 2016, Pebbles) – for *George Washington Wagner IV (27/now 30) (Jakes’ bro) indicted (11/12/18), arrested (11/13/18), charged (11/15/18) & arraigned (11/28/18) with 8 counts aggravated murder, (plus gun specifications on each), 1 count of 1st degree conspiracy, 4 counts of 1st degree aggravated burglary, 1 count of 5th degree unlawful possession of dangerous ordnance, 3 counts of 3rd degree evidence tampering, 1 count of 5th degree forgery, 1 count of 5th degree unauthorized use of computer or telecommunications, 1 count of 4th degree interception of wire, oral or electronic communication, 1 count of 5th degree obstructing justice, & 1 count of 1st degree engaging in a pattern of corrupt activity. Plead not guilty. Held without bond. DA will seek the DP. Per Jake’s plea agreement, DP is off the table if his testimony is truthful.
Trial began on 8/29/22 with final jury selection & the jury was seated on 8/30/22. 12 Jurors & 6 alternates. Jury: (9 women & 3 men) & 6 alternates: (5 women & 1 man). 9/30/22: Ill juror replaced with alternate. 12 jurors & 5 alternates. Jury: (9 women & 3 women) & 5 alternates (4 women & 1 man).
Trial began with opening statements began on Monday, 9/12/22. (Trial is scheduled for 30 days).

Crime info & court hearings from 11/28/18 thru 9/6/22 & Trial Day 1-13 (9/12 to 9/28/22), no hearing on 9/29/22 post #761 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...bers-wagner-family-arrested-73.637705/page-39

9/30/22 Friday, Trial Day 14: The ill juror has been replaced with an alternate.There were two phone conferences held on the 28th and 29th without the defendant present.
State witness: April Manley, married to James, bro of Dana Rhoden.
for more info see posts #775 & 779 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...bers-wagner-family-arrested-73.637705/page-39
for more info see posts #785, 786, 792 to 794 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...bers-wagner-family-arrested-73.637705/page-40
for more info see post #827 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...bers-wagner-family-arrested-73.637705/page-42
State witness: James “Cody” Manley, April’s son.
for more info see posts #829, 835 & 840 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...bers-wagner-family-arrested-73.637705/page-42
for more info see posts #842 & 853 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...bers-wagner-family-arrested-73.637705/page-43
State witness: Kendra Rhoden, Hanna Rhoden's cousin & best friend.
for more info see posts #843 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...bers-wagner-family-arrested-73.637705/page-43
for more info see posts #870, 874, 876, 879 & 880 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...bers-wagner-family-arrested-73.637705/page-44
for more info see posts #882 & 883 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...bers-wagner-family-arrested-73.637705/page-45
for more info see post #1023 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...bers-wagner-family-arrested-73.637705/page-52
State witness: Cory Holdren. Hanna Mae’s friend.
for more info see post #896 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...bers-wagner-family-arrested-73.637705/page-45
for more info see post #901, 903 & 909 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...bers-wagner-family-arrested-73.637705/page-46
for more info see post #1024 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...bers-wagner-family-arrested-73.637705/page-52
State witness: Chelsea Robinson. Girl friend of Frankie’s. Had Frankie’s baby. Will be back on stand on Monday.
for more info see post #915 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...bers-wagner-family-arrested-73.637705/page-46
for more info see post #981 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...bers-wagner-family-arrested-73.637705/page-50
for more info see post #1025 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...bers-wagner-family-arrested-73.637705/page-52
fpr more info see post #11 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...e-4-members-wagner-family-arrested-74.638537/
Trial continues on Monday, 10/3/22.

9/30/22: Subpoenas issued to: Samantha Staley, Skid Montgomery, Jeff Tackett, Shawn Fisher, Andrew Carson, Nathan Walls, Bernard Brown, Capt. Seth Hagerman, Shawn Walls, Officer Cancer, Alex Staley & Daniel Vance Walls issued by attorney Nash.
 

Dudly

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 8, 2016
Messages
3,398
Reaction score
15,101
It does bother me that BOTH shoe experts can't say who was wearing the shoes but that is one of those questions the jury will discuss. The jury could come to the conclusion through Angela's interviews, Angela's testimony and shoe print experts, that it is beyond a reasonable doubt George wore the size shoe Angie says she bought for him. The shoe print found in blood at Chris Sr's and there was a shoe print found at Dana's.

BBM
I think the biggest problem I have is I went into this 100% believing George is guilty. I still do. We have lived and breathed this case for over 6 years and I think that is what we all think on here. If I had been called as a juror and asked can you be unbiased I would have said "Heck no, let's buy a new rope and take that booger out back and find a tall tree so we can string him up Clint Eastwood style. I don't think he deserves a trial." But that is not how the law works in the 21st century.

As far as the shoeprint evidence, I think this is where we are at.

You have two shoe experts who say they cannot place those shoes on George's feet.
You have one Walmart receipt for shoes and Angie on camera buying them. But they are a cheap shoe many people in the area has probably bought.

You have George when questioned in a room alone at the border of Canada saying he never saw the shoes.
You have Jake in a different room saying the same thing George did at the border.
Angie in a different room at the border says she bought the shoes, showed them to the boys, they didn't like them, so she threw them away.
This was all put on record when BCI questioned them at the border.

Then per AC Angie now comes back and says George wore those shoes to the crime scenes. Two stories. Which one is true?

Then per AC Jake says they left the house, went out in the barn and changed clothes and shoes. He then said they burned the clothes and shoes and put on clean ones before they returned home.

Nash is going to nail Angie on those two stories she put on record. Then he is going to nail her on George wearing them to the crime scene. Per AC Angie never left the house. Jake said she stayed home also. So how can she truthfully testify that George wore them if she didn't see them on his feet?

So there fore you have 2 shoe print experts who can't swear George ever wore the shoes, and George and Jake saying they never saw the shoes on one side and Angie with her ever changing stories on the other without any knowledge whether George ever put those shoes on since he left and came back in different shoes.

Now here is where I think AC is tanking her own case. She is relying heavily on Jake's proffer to get a conviction on George. The problem is she keeps calling all these emotionally distraught family members up there to testify that:

1. Jake groomed a 13 year old child and was abusing her (per Kendra) and having sex with her.
2. Jake got her pregnant at 15 and was abusing her, hitting, pushing and choking her (per April and Kendra)
3. Jake was locking her in a bedroom for many days and keeping her from seeing her parents. (per Corey)
4. Jake threatened to chop her legs off if she tried to leave. (per Chelsa.)
5. Jake murdered her and her entire family while most were asleep. (per jake)

Remember Jake is not on trial, and the problem with AC slinging this much mud at Jake, what do you think that jury's thoughts and feelings are about Jake right now. After hearing all that I am betting they are hostile to him at best, hating him at worst.

But AC needs the jury to believe his testimony to convict George.

And the more emotional family testimony, the more sobbing family members on that stand, the more heart rendering words from people who loved Hannah, the more that jury turns against Jake, the more they see him as an evil villain, the less that jury likes Jake. And the more they hate him, the less likely they are to believe him.

Then you got Nash who is going to get up there and say "haven't you already told several stories about that night? Then there is this interview with a reporter where you got caught in a lie. Then there is this BCI, sheriff's report where you lied about everything."

So for my part, if George walks, let's catch him and string him up Clint Eastwood style because whether he walks or not, in my mind he will always be guilty.

JMO
Whom do you think Defense will say left the shoe prints if it wasn’t GWIV? They were two sizes of a left shoe That AW is on video purchasing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top