WEBVTT - State of Ohio vs. George Wagner IV

0:00:02.240 --> 0:00:04.960
<v Speaker 1>This just in today. Attorneys for George Wagner, the fourth

0:00:05.040 --> 0:00:08.159
<v Speaker 1>sake there is proof he did not kill any of

0:00:08.200 --> 0:00:11.920
<v Speaker 1>the eight victims and therefore could avoid the death penalty.

0:00:12.360 --> 0:00:16.400
<v Speaker 1>Judge Randy Deering heard an impassioned plea from George Wagner's attorney,

0:00:16.440 --> 0:00:18.960
<v Speaker 1>who said his client never pulled a trigger on the

0:00:19.079 --> 0:00:22.720
<v Speaker 1>night eight members of the Rodent family were killed execution style.

0:00:23.840 --> 0:00:27.479
<v Speaker 1>The state made a deal with the devil. Basically, so far,

0:00:27.640 --> 0:00:31.040
<v Speaker 1>Edward Jake Wagner and his mother, Angela Wagner have confessed

0:00:31.040 --> 0:00:34.400
<v Speaker 1>to prosecutors and have agreed to testify against the rest

0:00:34.400 --> 0:00:37.720
<v Speaker 1>of the family. George and Billy Wagner are still going

0:00:37.760 --> 0:00:40.640
<v Speaker 1>through the court process. The trial has been sent for

0:00:40.800 --> 0:00:45.959
<v Speaker 1>April of next year. This is George Wagner's defense attorney

0:00:46.080 --> 0:00:49.480
<v Speaker 1>talking about Jake Wagner. He's the person that is most

0:00:49.560 --> 0:00:52.519
<v Speaker 1>responsible for this. He's the actual killer. He's the actual shooter.

0:00:52.760 --> 0:00:54.320
<v Speaker 1>He's the one that snuck into these homes in the

0:00:54.360 --> 0:00:56.280
<v Speaker 1>middle of the night and shot the victims in the head.

0:00:56.760 --> 0:01:01.920
<v Speaker 1>All right, Our client didn't shoot anybody made the double

0:01:03.920 --> 0:01:07.920
<v Speaker 1>in this case. Four of the individuals are charged in

0:01:08.000 --> 0:01:17.400
<v Speaker 1>This is the piked in massacre returned to Pike County

0:01:18.040 --> 0:01:23.320
<v Speaker 1>Season three, Episode four, State of Ohio Versus George Wagner

0:01:23.360 --> 0:01:29.279
<v Speaker 1>The Fourth. I'm Courtney Armstrong, a television producer at Katie

0:01:29.360 --> 0:01:33.679
<v Speaker 1>Studios with Stephanie Lydecker and Jeff Shane, with both Jake

0:01:33.760 --> 0:01:37.160
<v Speaker 1>and Angela taking plea deals. The possible outcome of George

0:01:37.160 --> 0:01:41.800
<v Speaker 1>Wagner's trial seems on the surface limited in scope. It

0:01:42.000 --> 0:01:45.720
<v Speaker 1>is anything but that the defense is trying to position

0:01:45.760 --> 0:01:49.240
<v Speaker 1>themselves to win the case by limiting what evidence will

0:01:49.280 --> 0:01:53.400
<v Speaker 1>be admissible through a series of motions. Each motion involves

0:01:53.400 --> 0:01:55.640
<v Speaker 1>a request to the court by the defense to make

0:01:55.640 --> 0:01:59.160
<v Speaker 1>a decision on a specific issue before the trial begins.

0:02:00.440 --> 0:02:06.400
<v Speaker 1>Here's retired prosecutor and Flanagan. If you look at any trial,

0:02:07.040 --> 0:02:09.600
<v Speaker 1>it is the state that has to put out everything.

0:02:09.760 --> 0:02:12.600
<v Speaker 1>It's like throwing a party and you're the host or

0:02:12.600 --> 0:02:15.720
<v Speaker 1>hostess and you have to have everything ready. Well, you

0:02:15.800 --> 0:02:17.920
<v Speaker 1>might have a guest on the other side who's going

0:02:17.960 --> 0:02:19.560
<v Speaker 1>to come and say, well, you didn't get yes, you

0:02:19.600 --> 0:02:22.200
<v Speaker 1>didn't do this, you didn't do that. So all they

0:02:22.240 --> 0:02:25.120
<v Speaker 1>have to do is whittle away at the state's witnesses

0:02:25.160 --> 0:02:30.560
<v Speaker 1>and evidence. It's up to the judge to make a

0:02:30.600 --> 0:02:34.040
<v Speaker 1>decision on each of these changes. In this episode, we're

0:02:34.040 --> 0:02:37.440
<v Speaker 1>taking a deep dive into George Wagner's pre trial and

0:02:37.560 --> 0:02:40.639
<v Speaker 1>how these motions could radically change the outcome of the trial.

0:02:41.520 --> 0:02:45.280
<v Speaker 1>Two motions eighty and eighty one have been introduced specifically

0:02:45.320 --> 0:02:48.720
<v Speaker 1>to keep evidence off the table for a capital murder

0:02:48.720 --> 0:02:51.640
<v Speaker 1>case like George's. It could mean the difference between life

0:02:51.680 --> 0:02:55.880
<v Speaker 1>and death, and as we'll find out, even with their

0:02:55.919 --> 0:02:58.680
<v Speaker 1>plea deals in place, it could affect whether Jake and

0:02:58.720 --> 0:03:03.080
<v Speaker 1>Angela reopen them selves to the death penalty. The first

0:03:03.160 --> 0:03:07.440
<v Speaker 1>motion will discuss is eighty one. Here's journalist Angeanette Levy,

0:03:07.520 --> 0:03:11.079
<v Speaker 1>followed by criminal attorney and legal analyst Mike Allen. They're

0:03:11.080 --> 0:03:15.320
<v Speaker 1>both speaking with producer Chris Graves. On January tenth of

0:03:15.360 --> 0:03:18.760
<v Speaker 1>twenty twenty two, the defense for George Wagner filed motion

0:03:18.880 --> 0:03:21.880
<v Speaker 1>number eighty one, and it was a motion to suppress

0:03:22.000 --> 0:03:25.640
<v Speaker 1>audio recordings. And the thing they're taking issue with in

0:03:25.639 --> 0:03:29.000
<v Speaker 1>this motion is the fact that apparently BCI agents and

0:03:29.160 --> 0:03:33.600
<v Speaker 1>other law enforcement involved in this case placed listening devices

0:03:33.880 --> 0:03:36.960
<v Speaker 1>in a truck that was driven by both George Wagner

0:03:37.040 --> 0:03:42.000
<v Speaker 1>and Jake Wagner before the Wagners were arrested in twenty eighteen.

0:03:42.360 --> 0:03:46.000
<v Speaker 1>Hundreds of hours of audio were recorded by Ohio BCI.

0:03:47.840 --> 0:03:50.160
<v Speaker 1>I'm looking at this and I'm thinking to myself, what

0:03:50.360 --> 0:03:54.000
<v Speaker 1>on earth could be so damning in these recordings. There

0:03:54.040 --> 0:03:56.760
<v Speaker 1>may be nothing, or there may be something. I don't know.

0:03:57.080 --> 0:03:59.880
<v Speaker 1>This is all speculation at this point, but there might

0:03:59.920 --> 0:04:03.880
<v Speaker 1>be something that George incriminated himself on that they're trying

0:04:03.880 --> 0:04:07.160
<v Speaker 1>to suppress. Right, there would have to be, or they

0:04:07.160 --> 0:04:09.840
<v Speaker 1>wouldn't go to the problem to file the motion, no

0:04:10.000 --> 0:04:13.480
<v Speaker 1>question about it. Defense counsel wants something with respect to

0:04:13.480 --> 0:04:16.960
<v Speaker 1>those statements thrown out. We just don't know what it is.

0:04:17.560 --> 0:04:20.599
<v Speaker 1>So in your mind, George or someone in his cab

0:04:20.839 --> 0:04:28.520
<v Speaker 1>or on some conversation possibly incriminated the family. Absolutely, absolutely,

0:04:28.560 --> 0:04:31.159
<v Speaker 1>they wouldn't be going through all this if that weren't

0:04:31.160 --> 0:04:36.800
<v Speaker 1>the case. To obtain the recordings, homicide detectives had to

0:04:36.839 --> 0:04:41.480
<v Speaker 1>gain physical access to George's truck. Here's Stephanie and Jeff.

0:04:43.440 --> 0:04:45.160
<v Speaker 1>I think there's a really big piece to the puzzle

0:04:45.240 --> 0:04:48.560
<v Speaker 1>here about wire tapping and bugging, and there seems to

0:04:48.560 --> 0:04:51.120
<v Speaker 1>be some sort of a difference between the two that

0:04:51.279 --> 0:04:55.640
<v Speaker 1>is now really a big piece of George's defense. Wire

0:04:55.680 --> 0:04:59.200
<v Speaker 1>tapping and bugging, I think often get confused, and you

0:04:59.279 --> 0:05:02.520
<v Speaker 1>see wire and bugging a lot in movies and TV shows,

0:05:02.560 --> 0:05:06.160
<v Speaker 1>but it's actually a little more nuanced than what you

0:05:06.200 --> 0:05:09.760
<v Speaker 1>see on the screen. So how wire tapping works specifically

0:05:09.920 --> 0:05:12.080
<v Speaker 1>is that you need to get permission from a phone

0:05:12.080 --> 0:05:16.360
<v Speaker 1>company to tap into the cell transmission tower. And back

0:05:16.360 --> 0:05:18.000
<v Speaker 1>in the old days, what you would see done in

0:05:18.040 --> 0:05:21.239
<v Speaker 1>the movies is cops literally clipping wires to the phone

0:05:21.240 --> 0:05:23.640
<v Speaker 1>line in the basement or something like that. But now

0:05:23.680 --> 0:05:26.720
<v Speaker 1>it's all done remotely electronically, so in conjunction with the

0:05:26.800 --> 0:05:29.560
<v Speaker 1>warrant served to the cell phone provider, officials are able

0:05:29.600 --> 0:05:33.760
<v Speaker 1>to do it from the comfort of their office. Bugging

0:05:33.839 --> 0:05:37.080
<v Speaker 1>literally is this transmitter with a microphone that needs to

0:05:37.120 --> 0:05:41.320
<v Speaker 1>be planted someplace physically in a space where authorities would

0:05:41.320 --> 0:05:44.040
<v Speaker 1>want to pick up conversations, which is, by the way,

0:05:44.160 --> 0:05:47.440
<v Speaker 1>very interesting because they have to go through a very

0:05:47.520 --> 0:05:50.560
<v Speaker 1>layered process to be able to get permission to bug

0:05:50.600 --> 0:05:57.960
<v Speaker 1>a vehicle. Bugging is much more invasive because you're actually

0:05:58.000 --> 0:06:02.120
<v Speaker 1>able to record private versations in someone's home or their car,

0:06:02.400 --> 0:06:04.560
<v Speaker 1>and in this case, they were able to get all

0:06:04.560 --> 0:06:08.080
<v Speaker 1>types of conversations that George Wagner was having, so law

0:06:08.240 --> 0:06:12.920
<v Speaker 1>enforcement was apparently able to listen to and remotely record

0:06:13.080 --> 0:06:17.200
<v Speaker 1>everything that was said in that truck twenty four to seven.

0:06:17.360 --> 0:06:23.200
<v Speaker 1>I mean in person conversations, phone conversations, and even mister

0:06:23.320 --> 0:06:30.279
<v Speaker 1>Wagner talking to himself. The defense is claiming that the

0:06:30.400 --> 0:06:34.719
<v Speaker 1>recordings are inadmissible for a number of reasons, many pertaining

0:06:34.760 --> 0:06:37.320
<v Speaker 1>to the fact that it was George's truck that was bugged.

0:06:38.400 --> 0:06:41.279
<v Speaker 1>The case of the bugging is slightly complicated as it

0:06:41.279 --> 0:06:45.080
<v Speaker 1>applies to the Wagner's because what the BCI bugged was

0:06:45.200 --> 0:06:48.559
<v Speaker 1>not George's vehicle. It was the truck that he used

0:06:48.560 --> 0:06:52.040
<v Speaker 1>for work, so he didn't own this big rigged truck.

0:06:52.240 --> 0:06:56.680
<v Speaker 1>It was his employer's truck, and so presumably the BCI

0:06:56.880 --> 0:06:59.479
<v Speaker 1>was given permission to access the vehicle from the employer

0:07:00.040 --> 0:07:03.520
<v Speaker 1>and planted the bug when George was not with the truck.

0:07:04.120 --> 0:07:07.039
<v Speaker 1>The type of truck George would drive is a typical

0:07:07.080 --> 0:07:10.080
<v Speaker 1>semi that you see all over the country on the highways,

0:07:10.120 --> 0:07:12.800
<v Speaker 1>and so the semi has a sleeper cab in the back,

0:07:12.840 --> 0:07:15.240
<v Speaker 1>which is where the drivers go to take a rest,

0:07:15.360 --> 0:07:19.320
<v Speaker 1>relax sleep for the night. So Ohio BCI agents put

0:07:19.360 --> 0:07:22.120
<v Speaker 1>the bug in the sleeper cab portion of the semi truck,

0:07:22.400 --> 0:07:25.000
<v Speaker 1>and this small detail is one of the four things

0:07:25.200 --> 0:07:28.680
<v Speaker 1>the defense is using to get the motion dismissed. There

0:07:28.680 --> 0:07:32.000
<v Speaker 1>could be an issue with that because that sleeper cabin

0:07:32.280 --> 0:07:36.119
<v Speaker 1>on the semi could be analogized to being someone's home,

0:07:36.800 --> 0:07:40.320
<v Speaker 1>and you know, for all intention purposes, it probably was

0:07:40.560 --> 0:07:44.840
<v Speaker 1>when mister Wagner was on the road, and the house

0:07:45.000 --> 0:07:48.920
<v Speaker 1>is the most constitutionally protected thing that there is, so

0:07:49.200 --> 0:07:53.800
<v Speaker 1>there might be a potential problem there with the authorization itself.

0:07:55.120 --> 0:07:57.920
<v Speaker 1>Because the truck was both not owned by George and

0:07:58.160 --> 0:08:01.440
<v Speaker 1>served as a sleeping quarters, the defense may argue it

0:08:01.520 --> 0:08:04.640
<v Speaker 1>is similar to bugging a hotel room. We also know

0:08:04.720 --> 0:08:08.480
<v Speaker 1>that Jake was in the truck as well. At some

0:08:08.560 --> 0:08:10.760
<v Speaker 1>point the two brothers were alone for hours or even

0:08:10.880 --> 0:08:13.440
<v Speaker 1>days on the road and what they assumed was a

0:08:13.440 --> 0:08:17.280
<v Speaker 1>completely private setting. That really does speak to the question

0:08:17.320 --> 0:08:22.520
<v Speaker 1>of assumed privacy and conversations that may have happened between

0:08:22.600 --> 0:08:26.800
<v Speaker 1>Jake and George. Allegedly, those conversations are probably very relevant

0:08:27.000 --> 0:08:29.400
<v Speaker 1>for this trial. So the fact that the defense wants

0:08:29.440 --> 0:08:33.080
<v Speaker 1>to question that speaks more to what they're potentially hiding.

0:08:34.080 --> 0:08:38.320
<v Speaker 1>Here's Judge Pat dink a locker. This is interesting because

0:08:38.480 --> 0:08:42.400
<v Speaker 1>we don't get bugging cases wire tapping cases much. When

0:08:42.400 --> 0:08:45.120
<v Speaker 1>I looked through this, I thought to myself, if they

0:08:45.160 --> 0:08:48.479
<v Speaker 1>had an expectation of privacy, the two of them, okay

0:08:48.760 --> 0:08:53.200
<v Speaker 1>in the state illegally vied it that, then this is

0:08:53.559 --> 0:08:56.520
<v Speaker 1>the proper motion that the judge could grant, say that

0:08:56.559 --> 0:08:59.400
<v Speaker 1>they're not allowed to bring those audio recordings into evidence.

0:09:03.040 --> 0:09:06.040
<v Speaker 1>Here's Judge Sylvia Hendon, who works as a visiting judge

0:09:06.080 --> 0:09:09.960
<v Speaker 1>out of the Ohio Supreme Court. It's a violation sixth Amendment.

0:09:10.240 --> 0:09:12.800
<v Speaker 1>We see that all the time. You have an expectation

0:09:12.840 --> 0:09:18.560
<v Speaker 1>of privacy. Does your expectation of privacy increase if you're

0:09:18.600 --> 0:09:22.120
<v Speaker 1>in a sleeper cab truck versus a regular cab truck.

0:09:22.320 --> 0:09:25.600
<v Speaker 1>I don't know the answer to that. But again, speaking

0:09:25.600 --> 0:09:29.199
<v Speaker 1>from an appellate perspective, I can tell you that whichever

0:09:29.320 --> 0:09:32.480
<v Speaker 1>way Judge during goes on this, it's going to be

0:09:32.559 --> 0:09:36.320
<v Speaker 1>an issue. I believe in an event of an appeal,

0:09:37.000 --> 0:09:39.640
<v Speaker 1>I would have to believe that that motion to suppress

0:09:40.120 --> 0:09:43.240
<v Speaker 1>is going to loom large in the Court of Appeals.

0:09:43.440 --> 0:09:45.640
<v Speaker 1>In the event of a guilty finding, I will be

0:09:45.760 --> 0:09:50.600
<v Speaker 1>very interested to see his ruling. If I'm employed by somebody,

0:09:50.720 --> 0:09:54.040
<v Speaker 1>even if I'm sleeping there, I wouldn't think that I

0:09:54.120 --> 0:09:56.880
<v Speaker 1>walk into a building or an entity owned by somebody

0:09:56.920 --> 0:09:59.440
<v Speaker 1>else that's employing me. I wouldn't think that I would

0:09:59.440 --> 0:10:04.160
<v Speaker 1>have an expect of privacy. Here's former BCI homicide investigator

0:10:04.240 --> 0:10:08.240
<v Speaker 1>Seth Hageman testifying in court he oversaw the creation of

0:10:08.240 --> 0:10:13.920
<v Speaker 1>the warrants for the Wagner case. So when you're installing devices,

0:10:14.160 --> 0:10:17.440
<v Speaker 1>you need a search warrant in the county where you're

0:10:17.440 --> 0:10:20.760
<v Speaker 1>going to install the device Correctly and specifically, you're talking

0:10:20.800 --> 0:10:25.240
<v Speaker 1>about the search warrant that was installed in the RNL truck,

0:10:25.520 --> 0:10:29.000
<v Speaker 1>correct that both the defendant, George Wagner and his brother

0:10:29.120 --> 0:10:34.439
<v Speaker 1>Jake Wagner drove in tandem. Correct. To get approval to

0:10:34.520 --> 0:10:37.600
<v Speaker 1>bug or wire tap, investigators must adhere to an even

0:10:37.640 --> 0:10:41.520
<v Speaker 1>stricter protocol than a standard search warrant. They must also

0:10:41.600 --> 0:10:46.880
<v Speaker 1>produce what's called an interception warrant. Interception warrants are inherently

0:10:47.120 --> 0:10:51.040
<v Speaker 1>scrutinized to a greater degree because of the privacy issues

0:10:51.040 --> 0:10:54.680
<v Speaker 1>that they raise, and there's very specific statutory requirements of

0:10:54.720 --> 0:10:57.160
<v Speaker 1>other things. In addition to just the normal problem cause

0:10:57.240 --> 0:10:59.800
<v Speaker 1>of the search warrant that needs to be addressed among

0:10:59.800 --> 0:11:01.680
<v Speaker 1>the is not only do I have to show there's

0:11:01.679 --> 0:11:04.000
<v Speaker 1>probable cause that a crime was committed, you have to

0:11:04.000 --> 0:11:06.480
<v Speaker 1>show that there is probable cause that a specific person

0:11:06.559 --> 0:11:09.640
<v Speaker 1>or person's committed that crime. You actually have to show

0:11:09.679 --> 0:11:12.720
<v Speaker 1>that you've exhausted other methods of investigation that were less

0:11:12.720 --> 0:11:15.560
<v Speaker 1>intrusive prior to applying for that, and so those are

0:11:15.559 --> 0:11:18.200
<v Speaker 1>the different steps that make it more complicated in a

0:11:18.280 --> 0:11:23.720
<v Speaker 1>much more difficult process to obtain. Hageman and ohio Bci

0:11:23.880 --> 0:11:26.680
<v Speaker 1>felt that after months of the investigation, they had grounds

0:11:26.720 --> 0:11:31.240
<v Speaker 1>to successfully lobby for an interception warrant. During the investigation,

0:11:31.400 --> 0:11:34.920
<v Speaker 1>Inspector Hageman put together a lengthy report and submitted it

0:11:34.960 --> 0:11:38.400
<v Speaker 1>for approval of an interception warrant to bug the Wagner's truck.

0:11:39.160 --> 0:11:42.160
<v Speaker 1>The warrant was approved, giving homicide a period of thirty

0:11:42.240 --> 0:11:44.960
<v Speaker 1>days to monitor the truck once the bug was installed.

0:11:46.320 --> 0:11:48.679
<v Speaker 1>The state played it one hundred percent by the book,

0:11:49.280 --> 0:11:52.240
<v Speaker 1>but the prosecution's case is complicated by the fact that

0:11:52.320 --> 0:11:56.199
<v Speaker 1>ohio Bci coordinated the bugging of George's truck with his employer,

0:11:56.880 --> 0:11:59.280
<v Speaker 1>and the defense has raised this as a second point

0:11:59.280 --> 0:12:04.920
<v Speaker 1>of contention in their motion. Here again reporter Angrenette Levy,

0:12:05.080 --> 0:12:09.040
<v Speaker 1>followed by attorney and legal analyst Mike Ellen. The defense

0:12:09.120 --> 0:12:13.920
<v Speaker 1>is saying this basically violated George's rights because the owner

0:12:13.960 --> 0:12:17.520
<v Speaker 1>of the truck allowed it to happen and he had

0:12:17.520 --> 0:12:19.760
<v Speaker 1>an expectation of privacy. But I'm not really sure you

0:12:19.760 --> 0:12:24.400
<v Speaker 1>have an expectation of privacy in a truck that your

0:12:24.840 --> 0:12:29.440
<v Speaker 1>employer owns. Apparently the owner consented to the bug, but

0:12:29.760 --> 0:12:33.600
<v Speaker 1>it's a case of where the owner is actually acting

0:12:33.760 --> 0:12:37.800
<v Speaker 1>as the government's agent and authorizing that, and there could

0:12:37.880 --> 0:12:44.160
<v Speaker 1>be problems with that. It probably would be upheld. You know.

0:12:44.240 --> 0:12:47.920
<v Speaker 1>It all depends on what the cops probable cause for

0:12:48.160 --> 0:12:51.000
<v Speaker 1>the search warrant to do that would be, And I

0:12:51.080 --> 0:12:53.680
<v Speaker 1>think that's one of the sticking points on this one.

0:12:56.040 --> 0:13:00.319
<v Speaker 1>There is a third complicating issue for the prosecution. Much

0:13:00.360 --> 0:13:04.679
<v Speaker 1>of the audio was recorded across state lines. Would any

0:13:04.800 --> 0:13:08.760
<v Speaker 1>statement that is given outside of the state of Ohio

0:13:09.640 --> 0:13:13.200
<v Speaker 1>be valid under that warrant. I don't have the warrant,

0:13:13.360 --> 0:13:15.800
<v Speaker 1>so I don't know for sure, but I think that's

0:13:15.800 --> 0:13:19.280
<v Speaker 1>going to be questioned as well. Usually warrants are just

0:13:19.440 --> 0:13:23.560
<v Speaker 1>limited to the geographical jurisdiction, and in this case, it'd

0:13:23.559 --> 0:13:26.000
<v Speaker 1>be Pike County and or the state of Ohio. But

0:13:26.080 --> 0:13:30.080
<v Speaker 1>let's just say he said something incriminating in Tennessee. I

0:13:30.160 --> 0:13:32.600
<v Speaker 1>don't know. I mean, there may be problems with that too.

0:13:35.480 --> 0:13:38.520
<v Speaker 1>If it was a federal warrant, then they'd be okay,

0:13:38.600 --> 0:13:41.920
<v Speaker 1>But a state warrant, they might have some issues with that.

0:13:42.280 --> 0:13:46.360
<v Speaker 1>I've not researched it. I've never encountered it ever as

0:13:46.360 --> 0:13:50.480
<v Speaker 1>an attorney, law student, whatever, But it's an issue that

0:13:50.600 --> 0:13:56.520
<v Speaker 1>if I were defense counsel, I'd be pursuing it. The

0:13:56.600 --> 0:13:59.680
<v Speaker 1>defense also claims that the investigators on the case tried

0:13:59.720 --> 0:14:03.800
<v Speaker 1>to eat the Wagner brothers into incriminating themselves. They talk

0:14:03.840 --> 0:14:06.880
<v Speaker 1>about in the motion that they were trying to stimulate

0:14:07.080 --> 0:14:12.120
<v Speaker 1>incriminating conversation by initiating the contact, and that could be

0:14:12.160 --> 0:14:16.319
<v Speaker 1>problematic for the government too. I mean, if a statement

0:14:16.480 --> 0:14:21.360
<v Speaker 1>is freely and voluntarily given, then there's no problem with it.

0:14:21.400 --> 0:14:25.440
<v Speaker 1>But if the government induces someone to make a statement,

0:14:25.720 --> 0:14:30.040
<v Speaker 1>that could be problematic. What I also thought was very

0:14:30.080 --> 0:14:33.120
<v Speaker 1>interesting about this was the fact that police would actually

0:14:33.120 --> 0:14:37.040
<v Speaker 1>put things out on social media in hopes that one

0:14:37.080 --> 0:14:41.480
<v Speaker 1>of the Wagners, or specifically Angela Wagner accused killer Mom

0:14:42.040 --> 0:14:45.400
<v Speaker 1>that she would see these posts and that would maybe

0:14:45.440 --> 0:14:48.760
<v Speaker 1>stir up conversation that they would then have with each other,

0:14:49.360 --> 0:14:52.680
<v Speaker 1>and then those conversations would be bugged. This is actually

0:14:52.680 --> 0:14:55.720
<v Speaker 1>called tickling the wire, and tickling the wire means that

0:14:55.800 --> 0:14:58.320
<v Speaker 1>the Feds have wire taps in place and are placing

0:14:58.400 --> 0:15:03.320
<v Speaker 1>stories and then waiting for revealing conversations to happen because

0:15:03.440 --> 0:15:09.280
<v Speaker 1>of said stories. And that's the question, specifically, is that

0:15:09.400 --> 0:15:14.920
<v Speaker 1>baiting or is that just good process. Angela Wagner's mother,

0:15:15.000 --> 0:15:17.800
<v Speaker 1>Rita Joe Newcombe, was sent a court order to have

0:15:17.920 --> 0:15:20.520
<v Speaker 1>these conversations where she would go with the boys into

0:15:20.520 --> 0:15:24.040
<v Speaker 1>having further conversations with her mother and father about the crimes.

0:15:24.400 --> 0:15:27.800
<v Speaker 1>Remember when she got arrested, her mother also got arrested.

0:15:27.880 --> 0:15:31.520
<v Speaker 1>That's Rita Newcome. So here is Rita trying to get

0:15:31.560 --> 0:15:34.600
<v Speaker 1>herself also out of this mess that she was dragged

0:15:34.600 --> 0:15:37.400
<v Speaker 1>into because she was accused of all this forgery with

0:15:37.440 --> 0:15:42.120
<v Speaker 1>the original custody documents. Now she's basically working with BCI

0:15:42.240 --> 0:15:45.960
<v Speaker 1>to start conversations with the Wagner boys to hopefully get

0:15:46.000 --> 0:15:52.920
<v Speaker 1>them to say something incriminating and that just shows the

0:15:52.960 --> 0:15:57.480
<v Speaker 1>dissension between mother daughter, that's her grandsons and that's her

0:15:57.560 --> 0:16:00.800
<v Speaker 1>daughter and her son in law. Rida Nucombe was charged

0:16:00.840 --> 0:16:06.120
<v Speaker 1>with forgery, perjury, and obstructing justice. In twenty nineteen, Nwcombe

0:16:06.120 --> 0:16:09.680
<v Speaker 1>reached a plea deal and those charges were dropped. She

0:16:09.880 --> 0:16:13.760
<v Speaker 1>ultimately pleaded guilty to a reduced misdemeanor charge of obstructing

0:16:13.800 --> 0:16:17.640
<v Speaker 1>official business. It must have been probably a hard celt

0:16:17.640 --> 0:16:19.520
<v Speaker 1>to swallow. We know she didn't have much choice because

0:16:19.520 --> 0:16:22.840
<v Speaker 1>it was a court order, but at this point we

0:16:22.920 --> 0:16:24.640
<v Speaker 1>do know a little bit of her frame of mind.

0:16:24.680 --> 0:16:27.320
<v Speaker 1>According to her son, Chris Newcomb, that she felt really

0:16:27.320 --> 0:16:30.640
<v Speaker 1>betrayed by Angela. She has her son and other grandchildren

0:16:30.680 --> 0:16:32.400
<v Speaker 1>to look out for and so if Angela and her

0:16:32.440 --> 0:16:34.600
<v Speaker 1>sect of the family are not going to look out

0:16:34.600 --> 0:16:36.080
<v Speaker 1>for her, why is she going to look out for them?

0:16:38.160 --> 0:16:41.000
<v Speaker 1>I mean, that must have been the most brutal decision

0:16:41.040 --> 0:16:44.080
<v Speaker 1>to have to make. Do you actually turn against your

0:16:44.080 --> 0:16:47.360
<v Speaker 1>own daughter and your grandsons and your son in law.

0:16:48.640 --> 0:16:50.960
<v Speaker 1>And by the way, it must have worked and got

0:16:50.960 --> 0:16:54.040
<v Speaker 1>them talking, because the defense is adamant that they do

0:16:54.120 --> 0:16:57.080
<v Speaker 1>not want these conversations to be a part of any

0:16:57.120 --> 0:17:00.360
<v Speaker 1>of this moving forward. So you could imagine those conversations

0:17:00.480 --> 0:17:05.720
<v Speaker 1>must be very telling. During testimony, Seth Hagman confirmed the

0:17:05.720 --> 0:17:10.840
<v Speaker 1>success of this approach in the past. How many other

0:17:11.000 --> 0:17:13.679
<v Speaker 1>interception warrants would you say that you've been a part of.

0:17:13.920 --> 0:17:16.879
<v Speaker 1>We already has been related to a cool case homicide

0:17:17.520 --> 0:17:20.680
<v Speaker 1>four or five. And in those situations, did you use

0:17:20.680 --> 0:17:23.280
<v Speaker 1>this same method as far as tickling the wire or

0:17:23.600 --> 0:17:28.080
<v Speaker 1>provoket of acts or whatever your terminology is for that. Yes,

0:17:28.160 --> 0:17:30.680
<v Speaker 1>in every single one, even the ones that had some

0:17:31.280 --> 0:17:33.720
<v Speaker 1>level of correct crime happening, we would use some level

0:17:33.760 --> 0:17:36.600
<v Speaker 1>of tickling the wire just to try to get conversation

0:17:36.640 --> 0:17:40.480
<v Speaker 1>about those past events. Okay, And have you been met

0:17:40.520 --> 0:17:43.439
<v Speaker 1>with success in those efforts? There were success in all

0:17:43.440 --> 0:17:46.280
<v Speaker 1>of them. In most cases we've developed information that's led

0:17:46.320 --> 0:17:49.760
<v Speaker 1>to either ongoing prosecutions or guilty pleas or verdicts. And

0:17:49.840 --> 0:17:53.200
<v Speaker 1>in another case I've actually exonerated someone using that method.

0:17:56.160 --> 0:17:59.840
<v Speaker 1>Here again, as attorney my Gallen, it's just a real

0:18:00.280 --> 0:18:05.199
<v Speaker 1>fine line as far as inducement. The government has some flexibility,

0:18:05.400 --> 0:18:08.960
<v Speaker 1>but still, I mean, they can't elicitly for an illicit

0:18:09.080 --> 0:18:13.359
<v Speaker 1>purpose to goad them into making a comment. Every case

0:18:13.760 --> 0:18:17.199
<v Speaker 1>rises and falls on its own set of facts. And

0:18:17.280 --> 0:18:20.440
<v Speaker 1>I know that's not really a helpful answer, but it's

0:18:20.440 --> 0:18:27.480
<v Speaker 1>an accurate answer. Besides investigators and the Wagners themselves, no

0:18:27.560 --> 0:18:30.159
<v Speaker 1>one but the prosecution and defense know what is on

0:18:30.200 --> 0:18:34.720
<v Speaker 1>those tapes. If the guy makes some incriminating statements and

0:18:35.080 --> 0:18:38.640
<v Speaker 1>they are validly taken, that's a problem. I mean, it's

0:18:38.640 --> 0:18:41.440
<v Speaker 1>a problem for the defense because they are stuck with them.

0:18:41.480 --> 0:18:44.920
<v Speaker 1>If you were in the prosecution's seat and you saw

0:18:44.960 --> 0:18:49.640
<v Speaker 1>this come down, what are you thinking? Well as the prosecution,

0:18:49.760 --> 0:18:51.800
<v Speaker 1>I mean, I would fight as hard as I could,

0:18:51.800 --> 0:18:55.159
<v Speaker 1>obviously to make sure the judge keeps it in. But again,

0:18:55.440 --> 0:18:58.080
<v Speaker 1>I'm just assuming that they've got a lot of other

0:18:58.160 --> 0:19:02.000
<v Speaker 1>evidence as well. But the defense attorney's doing his job here.

0:19:02.040 --> 0:19:06.360
<v Speaker 1>I mean, he wants to whittle away at Stage's evidence

0:19:06.400 --> 0:19:08.800
<v Speaker 1>as much as he can. And you know, this is

0:19:08.800 --> 0:19:10.920
<v Speaker 1>all a part of it. She's so hard to say

0:19:11.640 --> 0:19:14.800
<v Speaker 1>how much it would damage the stage case when we

0:19:14.840 --> 0:19:19.600
<v Speaker 1>don't know what other cards they're holding. We're going to

0:19:19.640 --> 0:19:29.600
<v Speaker 1>take a break. We'll be back in a moment. Another motion,

0:19:30.119 --> 0:19:32.800
<v Speaker 1>Motion eighty has been put forth by the defense to

0:19:32.840 --> 0:19:37.280
<v Speaker 1>block Jake and Angelis testimony. It's another possible game changer

0:19:38.200 --> 0:19:40.880
<v Speaker 1>as part of his plea deal, Jake makes many claims

0:19:40.920 --> 0:19:44.360
<v Speaker 1>that seemingly exonerate George of the worst aspects of this

0:19:44.440 --> 0:19:51.760
<v Speaker 1>grizzly massacre. Here again Chris Graves speaking with retired prosecutor

0:19:51.840 --> 0:19:55.520
<v Speaker 1>and Flanagan. This is from Jake's profferty. Jake has stated

0:19:55.560 --> 0:19:58.480
<v Speaker 1>clearly that George did not shoot new One, did not

0:19:58.600 --> 0:20:01.200
<v Speaker 1>fire a shot, was not supposed to go with Jake

0:20:01.280 --> 0:20:04.080
<v Speaker 1>and Billy on the murder spree, and only when it's

0:20:04.119 --> 0:20:07.040
<v Speaker 1>a last second to protect Jake from Billy, who was

0:20:07.080 --> 0:20:10.679
<v Speaker 1>thought he might kill Jake at the end of the

0:20:10.720 --> 0:20:14.919
<v Speaker 1>series of accurgated murders, presumably to get rid of a witness.

0:20:16.640 --> 0:20:20.359
<v Speaker 1>Do you never really emotions to suppress the testimony of

0:20:20.440 --> 0:20:24.159
<v Speaker 1>someone else, So he has still the capability of trying

0:20:24.200 --> 0:20:27.639
<v Speaker 1>to show some kind of dishonesty on Jake's part, or

0:20:27.680 --> 0:20:30.560
<v Speaker 1>that he's not testifying truthfully. But what they're a thing

0:20:30.680 --> 0:20:33.480
<v Speaker 1>the court to do is to take this away to

0:20:33.480 --> 0:20:36.679
<v Speaker 1>suppress their statements before the jury ever gets to hear it.

0:20:39.280 --> 0:20:43.880
<v Speaker 1>Grounds to suppress are usually based on misconduct of officers.

0:20:44.119 --> 0:20:47.120
<v Speaker 1>Was their coercive activity on the part of officers and

0:20:47.160 --> 0:20:51.280
<v Speaker 1>they weren't coerce clearly Angela and Jake. For one thing,

0:20:51.640 --> 0:20:54.720
<v Speaker 1>the defense attorneys here don't represent the Angela or Jake,

0:20:54.800 --> 0:21:00.000
<v Speaker 1>so they don't have standing to suppress their statements. Because

0:21:00.160 --> 0:21:04.480
<v Speaker 1>they're representing George, they can move to suppress his statements,

0:21:04.520 --> 0:21:07.600
<v Speaker 1>but not Jake's and Angela. So this is somewhat novel.

0:21:07.640 --> 0:21:10.719
<v Speaker 1>They're trying to suppress it, not because of any course

0:21:10.800 --> 0:21:14.639
<v Speaker 1>of activity, but because he might be motivated to lie

0:21:14.920 --> 0:21:18.480
<v Speaker 1>under oath because he wants to get his agreement enforced.

0:21:20.640 --> 0:21:24.000
<v Speaker 1>So our proffers done under oath they can be. They

0:21:24.080 --> 0:21:26.960
<v Speaker 1>don't have to be. I don't know how they did

0:21:27.000 --> 0:21:29.600
<v Speaker 1>it here. I know I have done that on occasion

0:21:29.600 --> 0:21:31.720
<v Speaker 1>when I have a co defendant or someone that's going

0:21:31.800 --> 0:21:35.600
<v Speaker 1>to cooperate, I have tried to get it under oath.

0:21:35.760 --> 0:21:39.439
<v Speaker 1>In case they don't testify in accordance with it, I

0:21:39.480 --> 0:21:42.919
<v Speaker 1>can bring that up and cross examine them. Look, you

0:21:43.040 --> 0:21:46.920
<v Speaker 1>gave a sworn statement before you under oath. You said

0:21:46.920 --> 0:21:49.400
<v Speaker 1>it was the truth, and you're now you're saying this,

0:21:49.600 --> 0:21:53.200
<v Speaker 1>So I'm assuming they may have done that, but it's

0:21:53.240 --> 0:21:58.200
<v Speaker 1>not required. It's possible Jake could have lied to get

0:21:58.200 --> 0:22:01.280
<v Speaker 1>out of the death penalty or said what he had

0:22:01.320 --> 0:22:06.000
<v Speaker 1>to say to save his brother. You're obviously putting some trust,

0:22:06.040 --> 0:22:09.280
<v Speaker 1>in some faith in his statement. You're putting somebody up

0:22:09.320 --> 0:22:11.719
<v Speaker 1>there to testify to this when you may not be

0:22:12.200 --> 0:22:17.040
<v Speaker 1>exactly sure that he's telling the whole truth. And that

0:22:17.119 --> 0:22:20.560
<v Speaker 1>happens sometimes in cases where somebody they're telling you the truth,

0:22:20.560 --> 0:22:22.679
<v Speaker 1>but maybe not the whole truth. Like you're not getting

0:22:22.800 --> 0:22:26.080
<v Speaker 1>the whole story, the entire story, but you're basically getting

0:22:26.160 --> 0:22:29.800
<v Speaker 1>what happened, but not every little detail. Because maybe Jake

0:22:29.920 --> 0:22:32.199
<v Speaker 1>was trying to protect his brother at some point too.

0:22:32.480 --> 0:22:34.520
<v Speaker 1>You know, maybe he's thinking, God, I can't take my

0:22:34.560 --> 0:22:41.280
<v Speaker 1>brother down with me. I'm not sure why father would

0:22:41.359 --> 0:22:44.320
<v Speaker 1>kill his son or why another son would be fearful

0:22:44.400 --> 0:22:53.600
<v Speaker 1>of That affects even the motivation. Potentially is Billy the mastermind? Yeah, mastermind?

0:22:53.640 --> 0:22:57.399
<v Speaker 1>And also to his motive if he's trying to eliminate witnesses.

0:22:57.680 --> 0:23:02.280
<v Speaker 1>And certainly she think this is not the most functional family.

0:23:04.119 --> 0:23:06.840
<v Speaker 1>The presumption has been that it was Angela who kind

0:23:06.840 --> 0:23:09.840
<v Speaker 1>of masterminded everything. And I'm not saying she's not deserving.

0:23:09.880 --> 0:23:13.400
<v Speaker 1>I don't know here, but we're hard on matriarchs sometimes

0:23:13.480 --> 0:23:20.120
<v Speaker 1>or mothers, And did we do that legitimately It does

0:23:20.240 --> 0:23:22.439
<v Speaker 1>really kind of make you think who was calling your

0:23:22.440 --> 0:23:25.959
<v Speaker 1>shops in this operation? If that's indeed true, that George

0:23:26.000 --> 0:23:28.680
<v Speaker 1>only went along at the last minute to protect his

0:23:28.800 --> 0:23:31.760
<v Speaker 1>brother from their father, what was going on there? What

0:23:31.960 --> 0:23:36.800
<v Speaker 1>is Billy capable of? I mean, I guess George in

0:23:36.880 --> 0:23:40.680
<v Speaker 1>this scenario was ready to die for his brother protecting him.

0:23:41.119 --> 0:23:44.280
<v Speaker 1>That would be one hell of a car ride, wouldn't it. Yeah,

0:23:44.920 --> 0:23:47.720
<v Speaker 1>I don't know much about Billy. Nobody's spoken about Billy

0:23:47.880 --> 0:23:51.280
<v Speaker 1>very much. Is that the kind of defense they're fashioning,

0:23:51.440 --> 0:23:54.920
<v Speaker 1>That he's here to protect Jake from big Dad Billy

0:23:55.080 --> 0:23:57.879
<v Speaker 1>and that they're both afraid of him? And how is

0:23:57.920 --> 0:24:00.960
<v Speaker 1>he going to protect him from bad Billy unless he

0:24:01.080 --> 0:24:04.600
<v Speaker 1>hits a firearm? Maybe? Do you know what kind of

0:24:04.640 --> 0:24:06.639
<v Speaker 1>dad he was? I was here with Jake and George.

0:24:06.680 --> 0:24:10.879
<v Speaker 1>He's an asshole. Chris knwcom, who we've heard from before,

0:24:11.200 --> 0:24:14.840
<v Speaker 1>is Angela Agner's half brother. Now, Karen Billy get into

0:24:14.840 --> 0:24:18.200
<v Speaker 1>some screaming matches. Billy's about a useless sustance on a borehole.

0:24:19.280 --> 0:24:21.119
<v Speaker 1>That's the guy who run the truth up. How do

0:24:21.119 --> 0:24:23.200
<v Speaker 1>you mean? I mean that man is one hundred percent

0:24:23.359 --> 0:24:27.920
<v Speaker 1>just lazy and hale useless, always conniving on something, trying

0:24:27.920 --> 0:24:30.160
<v Speaker 1>to think how to do something, to make a quick book.

0:24:30.720 --> 0:24:32.680
<v Speaker 1>I think the most horseless human being I think I've

0:24:32.680 --> 0:24:36.879
<v Speaker 1>ever met in my life. Despite Billy's nature, angelisted by

0:24:36.920 --> 0:24:40.919
<v Speaker 1>his side. Some see a parallel with Angela's dad, Eddie

0:24:41.080 --> 0:24:45.240
<v Speaker 1>pug Carter. I knew him, his hug Carter. He always

0:24:45.240 --> 0:24:47.399
<v Speaker 1>wore this slight metal brace and he walked with a limp.

0:24:47.600 --> 0:24:49.280
<v Speaker 1>What I heard from my dad was that he would

0:24:49.359 --> 0:24:52.600
<v Speaker 1>five electric holes and still copper or something off the holes,

0:24:53.160 --> 0:24:56.560
<v Speaker 1>and he's got electric huted and it affected his walking.

0:24:57.640 --> 0:24:59.960
<v Speaker 1>It could be that Angela was fiercely loyal to Bill

0:25:00.280 --> 0:25:03.359
<v Speaker 1>because he reminded her of her father. At the end

0:25:03.400 --> 0:25:06.080
<v Speaker 1>of the day, the prosecution in this particular case is

0:25:06.080 --> 0:25:10.800
<v Speaker 1>focused on one job, putting George Wagner behind bars, or

0:25:10.840 --> 0:25:14.480
<v Speaker 1>possibly even sending him to death row. It will be

0:25:14.600 --> 0:25:17.000
<v Speaker 1>up to the jury to navigate the muddy waters of

0:25:17.000 --> 0:25:22.800
<v Speaker 1>the Wagner family dynamic. If you are a group of

0:25:22.880 --> 0:25:27.080
<v Speaker 1>people and you are going to go do something, if

0:25:27.119 --> 0:25:29.520
<v Speaker 1>one person holds back and says, now, I'm not going

0:25:29.600 --> 0:25:32.960
<v Speaker 1>to do this, it may not happen. If two do,

0:25:33.119 --> 0:25:35.720
<v Speaker 1>certainly it may not happen. But when you hear these

0:25:35.720 --> 0:25:40.199
<v Speaker 1>people bolstering each other and actually sharing ideas and dynamics,

0:25:40.480 --> 0:25:43.920
<v Speaker 1>they're just as much a part of all that ended

0:25:44.000 --> 0:25:48.760
<v Speaker 1>up happening as the person who actually pulled the trigger.

0:25:49.320 --> 0:25:52.080
<v Speaker 1>And I know that, and I think jurors know that,

0:25:52.119 --> 0:25:55.360
<v Speaker 1>and people know that, But will they really hold them accountable?

0:25:56.440 --> 0:25:59.640
<v Speaker 1>It's a little harder to understand how the police are

0:25:59.680 --> 0:26:03.000
<v Speaker 1>going to work into the trial. Actually presiding over four

0:26:03.160 --> 0:26:06.400
<v Speaker 1>separate cases is a lot easier than presiding over four

0:26:06.440 --> 0:26:09.959
<v Speaker 1>people together, because in a separate case, you're focused on

0:26:10.000 --> 0:26:12.639
<v Speaker 1>that particular defendant. Now you're still going to have to

0:26:12.720 --> 0:26:15.240
<v Speaker 1>keep things straight. You're going to have to know when

0:26:15.240 --> 0:26:18.719
<v Speaker 1>to exclude evidence. There's a lot of rules about confessions

0:26:18.720 --> 0:26:20.720
<v Speaker 1>of co defendants that you're going to have to follow.

0:26:21.040 --> 0:26:24.200
<v Speaker 1>But to try to balance a case with four defendants,

0:26:24.240 --> 0:26:27.359
<v Speaker 1>because right away you've got eight lawyers. If you're talking

0:26:27.400 --> 0:26:30.720
<v Speaker 1>about a capital murder case, so you've got a minimum

0:26:30.840 --> 0:26:34.720
<v Speaker 1>of eight lawyers, four defendants, and lordliners how many witnesses.

0:26:35.440 --> 0:26:44.800
<v Speaker 1>Let's stop here for another break. Without the audio from

0:26:44.800 --> 0:26:47.280
<v Speaker 1>George's truck, the jury will not get to hear what

0:26:47.359 --> 0:26:52.600
<v Speaker 1>the detectives heard in private conversations between the brothers, and

0:26:52.680 --> 0:26:56.600
<v Speaker 1>if the defense's motions are successful, Jake and Angeli's testimony

0:26:56.640 --> 0:26:59.560
<v Speaker 1>will be off the table as well. Would you be

0:26:59.680 --> 0:27:03.760
<v Speaker 1>concerned if it's a live witness and Angela steps on

0:27:03.880 --> 0:27:08.280
<v Speaker 1>the stand and she's facing her oldest son testifying against them,

0:27:08.520 --> 0:27:11.760
<v Speaker 1>is there a word that might cause her not to Yeah,

0:27:11.920 --> 0:27:15.040
<v Speaker 1>ny witness who's somewhat involved with the defense. Even though

0:27:15.040 --> 0:27:18.160
<v Speaker 1>they've said they're testifying and they've given good information to pass,

0:27:18.760 --> 0:27:22.200
<v Speaker 1>you have to wonder what's the physical, visceral effects, emotional

0:27:22.200 --> 0:27:26.320
<v Speaker 1>effect of sitting in front of that person. Will they freeze?

0:27:26.320 --> 0:27:28.520
<v Speaker 1>Will they talk? Will they tell us what they've told

0:27:28.600 --> 0:27:32.480
<v Speaker 1>us before? This brings us to the final issue. The

0:27:32.520 --> 0:27:36.760
<v Speaker 1>defense and prosecution must navigate how Jake and Angela's plea

0:27:36.840 --> 0:27:40.040
<v Speaker 1>deal relates to these motions and what that means for

0:27:40.080 --> 0:27:44.240
<v Speaker 1>the future of all four Wagners. As of now, the

0:27:44.320 --> 0:27:46.880
<v Speaker 1>death penalty is still on the table for George Wagner,

0:27:48.119 --> 0:27:50.919
<v Speaker 1>and Jake and Angela's deal to avoid death row is

0:27:50.960 --> 0:27:55.159
<v Speaker 1>not guaranteed. It's contingent upon their testimony being what the

0:27:55.200 --> 0:28:01.720
<v Speaker 1>court calls to the satisfaction of the prosecution. We look

0:28:01.720 --> 0:28:05.520
<v Speaker 1>at this family and their story keeps changing, and I

0:28:05.560 --> 0:28:08.760
<v Speaker 1>am curious to know what the air quote satisfaction of

0:28:08.800 --> 0:28:13.359
<v Speaker 1>the prosecution even means. Does that mean that if Jake

0:28:13.440 --> 0:28:16.680
<v Speaker 1>and Angela, who we know have taken plea agreements, if

0:28:16.720 --> 0:28:20.960
<v Speaker 1>they don't deliver the goods, then what is their death

0:28:20.960 --> 0:28:23.440
<v Speaker 1>sentence put back on the table or all of their

0:28:23.440 --> 0:28:26.359
<v Speaker 1>death sentences put back on the table? Who decides the

0:28:26.400 --> 0:28:30.000
<v Speaker 1>satisfaction piece? It would be the prosecution. And so basically,

0:28:30.040 --> 0:28:33.120
<v Speaker 1>under the terms of their deal, they probably agreed to

0:28:33.480 --> 0:28:36.600
<v Speaker 1>the version of events of that night and the months

0:28:36.640 --> 0:28:38.400
<v Speaker 1>they let up to the crime. And so if once

0:28:38.400 --> 0:28:41.920
<v Speaker 1>they're on the stand under oath and they don't stick

0:28:41.960 --> 0:28:45.040
<v Speaker 1>to the script for lack of a better term, than

0:28:45.480 --> 0:28:47.840
<v Speaker 1>the whole deal would be off and death penalty would

0:28:47.840 --> 0:28:51.640
<v Speaker 1>be back on the table for the entire family. Georgia's

0:28:51.640 --> 0:28:53.960
<v Speaker 1>sticking to his not guilty plea, which would imply that

0:28:54.000 --> 0:28:56.520
<v Speaker 1>he's not involved in this at all, And so Jake

0:28:56.600 --> 0:28:58.680
<v Speaker 1>and Angela's testimony, which we can assume is going to

0:28:58.680 --> 0:29:01.040
<v Speaker 1>say something along the lines of will. While George might

0:29:01.040 --> 0:29:04.160
<v Speaker 1>not have pulled the trigger, he certainly knew about the

0:29:04.200 --> 0:29:06.160
<v Speaker 1>murders and might have been there the night of the

0:29:06.240 --> 0:29:09.560
<v Speaker 1>murders and helped cover the murders up, and so that

0:29:09.680 --> 0:29:12.920
<v Speaker 1>testimony is going to be pretty damning for his not

0:29:13.080 --> 0:29:17.959
<v Speaker 1>guilty plea. It does also speak to the fact that

0:29:18.000 --> 0:29:21.520
<v Speaker 1>there are so many endings that could still be you know,

0:29:21.560 --> 0:29:23.680
<v Speaker 1>we see plea deals and you think that's the end

0:29:23.720 --> 0:29:26.600
<v Speaker 1>of the road for Jake Wagner, but now that's not so.

0:29:27.040 --> 0:29:31.080
<v Speaker 1>There's a big performance ahead and he and now his mother,

0:29:31.160 --> 0:29:34.720
<v Speaker 1>who he's essentially working with and against at the same time.

0:29:35.600 --> 0:29:38.200
<v Speaker 1>How this plays out in court with George and then

0:29:38.320 --> 0:29:42.680
<v Speaker 1>later Billy Dad, every piece of it affects the other person.

0:29:42.840 --> 0:29:48.360
<v Speaker 1>So the totality of it is massive, and this whole

0:29:48.400 --> 0:29:51.920
<v Speaker 1>case from the beginning has been utterly unpredictable. And so

0:29:52.000 --> 0:29:55.239
<v Speaker 1>to assume when Billy and George's trials start that we

0:29:55.320 --> 0:29:57.720
<v Speaker 1>know what's going to happen and we know what Jake

0:29:57.760 --> 0:29:59.800
<v Speaker 1>and Angela are going to say when they're on the stand,

0:30:00.200 --> 0:30:02.280
<v Speaker 1>I think would be naive. I think what we can

0:30:02.320 --> 0:30:04.560
<v Speaker 1>assume is that we don't really know the ending yet.

0:30:09.360 --> 0:30:12.360
<v Speaker 1>We've been told several theories even just this season alone,

0:30:12.560 --> 0:30:16.880
<v Speaker 1>that speak to a larger plot happening behind the scenes,

0:30:17.320 --> 0:30:21.760
<v Speaker 1>and that it's possible that the Wagoners are lying, Jake

0:30:21.840 --> 0:30:24.160
<v Speaker 1>may have a hand in deciding whether he and his

0:30:24.240 --> 0:30:28.040
<v Speaker 1>brother live or die. It's also possible the defense and

0:30:28.120 --> 0:30:31.320
<v Speaker 1>prosecution don't know the whole story that Angela and Jake

0:30:31.360 --> 0:30:36.280
<v Speaker 1>have to tell. There's a tenseness about it that isn't

0:30:36.320 --> 0:30:39.840
<v Speaker 1>there with other cases. We don't know what other evidence exists,

0:30:39.880 --> 0:30:42.160
<v Speaker 1>you know, we just don't know, to be honest with you, though,

0:30:43.240 --> 0:30:45.479
<v Speaker 1>it all depends on what their story is on that

0:30:45.560 --> 0:30:48.960
<v Speaker 1>day in a courtroom, face to face with the son,

0:30:49.320 --> 0:30:53.440
<v Speaker 1>with a brother and a jury of their peers, I mean,

0:30:53.440 --> 0:30:56.920
<v Speaker 1>with whisperings of Carton involvement and other rumors still lingering

0:30:56.960 --> 0:31:00.160
<v Speaker 1>in Pike County. If given the opportunity to test, if

0:31:00.240 --> 0:31:03.800
<v Speaker 1>I could Jake and Angela Wagner choose to blow this

0:31:03.840 --> 0:31:08.280
<v Speaker 1>whole thing up? Or are they being put up to

0:31:08.360 --> 0:31:13.400
<v Speaker 1>it behind bars? We have heard many rumors regarding the

0:31:13.480 --> 0:31:17.240
<v Speaker 1>Cartel and that there's a larger story happening here, and

0:31:17.760 --> 0:31:21.720
<v Speaker 1>that the Rodents murder was not just merely over custody,

0:31:21.760 --> 0:31:25.520
<v Speaker 1>but that there's larger issues at play with some different

0:31:25.520 --> 0:31:30.280
<v Speaker 1>dealings between the families, and that's dangerous stuff. And maybe

0:31:30.280 --> 0:31:35.960
<v Speaker 1>it's possible that the Wagoners are safest behind Bars. More

0:31:36.000 --> 0:31:40.520
<v Speaker 1>on that next time. If you're enjoying The Pikes and Massacre,

0:31:40.760 --> 0:31:44.520
<v Speaker 1>listen to our other hit series, Crazy and Love. New

0:31:44.520 --> 0:31:49.000
<v Speaker 1>episodes there every Tuesday wherever you get your podcasts. For

0:31:49.160 --> 0:31:53.280
<v Speaker 1>more information and case photos, follow us on Instagram at

0:31:53.360 --> 0:31:59.080
<v Speaker 1>Katie Underscore Studios. The Pikes and massacres produced by Stephanie Lydecker,

0:31:59.240 --> 0:32:03.760
<v Speaker 1>Jeff Shane, Chris Graves and me Courtney Armstrong. Editing and

0:32:03.840 --> 0:32:08.080
<v Speaker 1>sound designed by Jeff Tis, music by Jared Aston, audio

0:32:08.160 --> 0:32:11.800
<v Speaker 1>mixing by Ken Novak. The Piked and Massacre is a

0:32:11.840 --> 0:32:17.080
<v Speaker 1>production of Katie Studios and iHeartRadio. For more podcasts from iHeartRadio,

0:32:17.280 --> 0:32:21.320
<v Speaker 1>visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen

0:32:21.520 --> 0:32:22.640
<v Speaker 1>to your favorite shows.