Speaker 1: We know the end. We've got some idea what happened
Speaker 1: in the middle. I want to know about the beginning.
Speaker 1: When did the switch flip to where the only resolution
Speaker 1: was to go and kill them off? This is the
Speaker 1: Pike did Massacre returned to Pike County Season three, episode eleven.
Speaker 1: I'm Courtney Armstrong, a television producer at Katie Studios with
Speaker 1: Stephanie Lydecker and Jeff Shane. Recently, Stephanie Lydecker, forensic expert
Speaker 1: Joseph Morgan, and I were invited to speak at an
Speaker 1: event called crime Con in Las Vegas, Nevada. Crime Con
Speaker 1: is a large expo event where true crime fans can
Speaker 1: meet and discuss cases from their favorite crime shows and podcasts.
Speaker 1: We were honored to attend and were able to record
Speaker 1: a Q and A on their stage with fans from
Speaker 1: across the country. George and Billy Wagner have pleaded not
Speaker 1: guilty to charges of murdering the Rodent family. This discussion
Speaker 1: was meant to serve as a conversation of things we've
Speaker 1: covered in the podcast and heard from our sources. Because
Speaker 1: the trials are still upcoming, much of it remains speculation
Speaker 1: based on the criminal allegations against the accused and their actions.
Speaker 1: It's important to keep in mind that all parties are
Speaker 1: innocent until they are proven guilty or enter a guilty plea.
Speaker 1: Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to a live Q and a
Speaker 1: episode of The Piked and Masker. Now, please welcome to
Speaker 1: the stage Courtney Armstrong, Stephanie Lydecker, and Joseph Morgan. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and thank you the voice of Courtney Armstrong. It's a
Speaker 1: lot easier in my closet versus out with all of you.
Speaker 1: But you're such a welcoming audience and we again are
Speaker 1: just grateful you're here. And I yeah, we are grateful. Yeah,
Speaker 1: thank you for even being here. We're true crime fans
Speaker 1: in this particular case, I think has gotten into our
Speaker 1: personal DNA in a way I can't quite describe. We
Speaker 1: have a few questions that people have written in via
Speaker 1: social media or in various ways, so we were going
Speaker 1: to ask some of the most popular ones and then
Speaker 1: we're excited to hear any additional ones. So a lot
Speaker 1: of people asked before the arrests happened, what did you
Speaker 1: think had happened that night? To the eight members of
Speaker 1: the Road and Family who were murdered and is there
Speaker 1: a difference now after the neighboring family the Wagners have
Speaker 1: been arrested. So Stephanie for me personally, when we first
Speaker 1: got involved with the case, we thought it was the
Speaker 1: cartel or something nefarious unrelated to the Wagner family, or
Speaker 1: that there was no such thing as a killer mother,
Speaker 1: or that a family could do that to somebody who
Speaker 1: they knew so well. And they say truth is stranger
Speaker 1: than fiction, right, So, as it turns out, we might
Speaker 1: have been wrong. Although this season, I will say and Joseph,
Speaker 1: we all this is all we talk about. There are
Speaker 1: new theories and there's new information that we have access
Speaker 1: to now that kind of shakes a lot of those
Speaker 1: theories up. We're frankly more confused than ever. Yeah, and
Speaker 1: one thing that I think my opinion is evolving on
Speaker 1: stuff said. I also thought it had to be a
Speaker 1: professional who navigated for different locations in one night for
Speaker 1: eight people. But as bits and pieces have come out
Speaker 1: in trials and with different motions back and forth, I'm
Speaker 1: definitely inch by inch more convinced that the Wagners they
Speaker 1: indeed have the right people behind bars. Yeah, I gotta
Speaker 1: tell you y'all listen for a second. And just I've
Speaker 1: had several people ask me this question actually too since
Speaker 1: i've been here, relative to Piketon, and I think it's
Speaker 1: an interesting idea. If you're the Wagoners, what's that conversation
Speaker 1: like in a car if you're on the way to
Speaker 1: four separate locations. Yeah, they were allegedly having murder meetings,
Speaker 1: like a family of four was enjoying dinner and talking
Speaker 1: about murdering a family. The Yeah, and I got a
Speaker 1: few guests a year ago, two years ago, I went
Speaker 1: up to the crime scenes to take a look in
Speaker 1: the home that the Wagoners had previously occupied, this beautiful, green,
Speaker 1: lush area, and it's this, you know, this multi story
Speaker 1: old farmhouse with pastors beyond it. And you know, I
Speaker 1: sat there and I was outside the home, and I
Speaker 1: was thinking, So, it's in this home where you've celebrated
Speaker 1: Christmas and Thanksgiving and everything as a family, and maybe
Speaker 1: you're sitting around at table and maybe talking about completely
Speaker 1: and totally ending a familial line at that point in time.
Speaker 1: Just let that sink in just for a second. And
Speaker 1: this is a conversation that you're having across the dinner
Speaker 1: table and then that that night you know that I
Speaker 1: know you got and I've talked about it's it's you know,
Speaker 1: for me as an investigator, it's it's the timing element.
Speaker 1: How do you get this down so that you go
Speaker 1: from point A to point D and you don't get caught?
Speaker 1: How is it that you do this? And that has
Speaker 1: as an investigator it left me scratching my head and
Speaker 1: I'm with staff. The first time I heard it, I'm thinking, yeah,
Speaker 1: this is some kind of organized crime head. They've come in,
Speaker 1: they they've they've angered the wrong person, and I think
Speaker 1: in this case, they it looks like they may have
Speaker 1: angered the wrong family. And not to mention, that's four people.
Speaker 1: We all follow true crime for a living, right. You
Speaker 1: guys are here because you have this brain to be
Speaker 1: able to solve things. Four people sticking to the same story.
Speaker 1: So grown adults, four of them allegedly decided to get
Speaker 1: into a car and go to one house, then go
Speaker 1: to another house, get back in the car, then go
Speaker 1: to another house, get back in the car. At what
Speaker 1: point does one of them not say no or enough,
Speaker 1: We've murdered too many to get through four locations in
Speaker 1: one night, and to know that it's just potentially people
Speaker 1: who many say are lovely and never would know it
Speaker 1: in a million years, you know, we want to be
Speaker 1: able to spot the boogeyman for ourselves. They don't fit
Speaker 1: the bill. And in one of our trips, and we've
Speaker 1: had the benefit of going several times over the years
Speaker 1: as we've been just can't let this case go, obviously,
Speaker 1: and we've driven several times from as Joseph said, from
Speaker 1: A to B to C two D. Not that we
Speaker 1: know the order, no one, no one knows what. No
Speaker 1: one knows the order yet and just yeah, the consciousness
Speaker 1: of Stephanie said, you start the car back up and
Speaker 1: sit back down, you know, and then to take a
Speaker 1: longer road because three of the houses are very close together.
Speaker 1: But then when you go to Kenneth Road and it's
Speaker 1: more than ten minutes. So the consciousness there's there's no
Speaker 1: spur of the moment. You are simmering in what you've done,
Speaker 1: not to mention waking up the next day. All four
Speaker 1: of them lived together and then woke up the next day,
Speaker 1: took showers and then pretended that they were desperate to
Speaker 1: find out who did it, had the nerve to talk
Speaker 1: to press and give interviews and say we missed these victims.
Speaker 1: And honestly, that's a hard thing to do. Also for
Speaker 1: people just zipping it and not flubbing their alibi, you know,
Speaker 1: to that point, this is one of the things that
Speaker 1: has chilled me to my bone. And that is when
Speaker 1: they got up the next morning, this family had essentially
Speaker 1: been eradicated. However, someone knew that there were two babies
Speaker 1: that were wallowing, yes, in blood, the mother's blood in
Speaker 1: that environment, left behind a five day old. Yeah, I mean,
Speaker 1: can you begin to fathom that. I've seen you know,
Speaker 1: I've seen my sheriff cases in Atlanta and yours, you know,
Speaker 1: working for the NME in the corner, but I'd never
Speaker 1: you know, when they told me this, you think you've
Speaker 1: seen a thing or two. But as as the team
Speaker 1: began to explain it to me, I began to try
Speaker 1: to put the pieces together forensically, and of course the
Speaker 1: dad and me, the grandpa and me. You know, I
Speaker 1: began to think about this and I'm thinking, who, who,
Speaker 1: who could do this? Who could be this callism? And Joseph,
Speaker 1: He's done a beautiful job. But you know, maybe as
Speaker 1: a death investigator you can talk a little bit about
Speaker 1: the types of shots or the amount of shots. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: we do have some solid information relative to the number
Speaker 1: of gunshot wounds that were involved. And there is a
Speaker 1: This is not an execution style classically, as Stephanie had
Speaker 1: pointed out, where you think about somebody kneeling before you
Speaker 1: and you shoot them in the back of the head.
Speaker 1: A new mother is essentially shot in the face five times.
Speaker 1: One of the rounds actually entered her eye, and so
Speaker 1: that gives you relative to orientation relative to the victim
Speaker 1: to the muzzle of the weapon. They are literally standing
Speaker 1: down the long axis of the barrel. If she was
Speaker 1: still alive at the point in time. And again we
Speaker 1: have not been able to go through the autopsy report
Speaker 1: in details, so we don't know where, like for what
Speaker 1: wound tracks still have in dwelling hemorrhage, which is one
Speaker 1: of the things that we look at to see if
Speaker 1: an individual has sustained a postmortem or an anti mortem
Speaker 1: insult at that point in time. But she was looking
Speaker 1: down the barrel of this She's in bed at this
Speaker 1: moment time and the picture that this creates is that
Speaker 1: an individual has gotten onto the bed or adjacent to
Speaker 1: the bed and fired directly into her face that there
Speaker 1: may have been an awareness they may have shown up
Speaker 1: also with flashlights to kind of blind or disorient at
Speaker 1: that point in time. You can imagine with your in
Speaker 1: total darkness for a moment, kind of imagine in your
Speaker 1: mind that you're in total deep sleep and suddenly a
Speaker 1: flashlight is in your face. There might be screaming involved,
Speaker 1: Your newborn baby is cradled in your arms immediately adjacent
Speaker 1: to you, and maybe for a second you see a
Speaker 1: flash and then your life ends. But it doesn't end
Speaker 1: simply there, because they continue to fire over and over
Speaker 1: and over again. We've heard terms like homemade silencers being created,
Speaker 1: and also an interesting little caveat is that we've also
Speaker 1: heard the term brass catcher. And for those of you
Speaker 1: that are not familiar with firearms, if you're using a
Speaker 1: semi automatic firearm, it's going to eject brass, spent brass.
Speaker 1: The ideas to catch the brass so that not only
Speaker 1: are you trying to muffle the sound, because there's not
Speaker 1: really any such thing as a silencer, it's a suppressor.
Speaker 1: You're trying to muffle the sound, and then you're trying
Speaker 1: to catch all of the brass so that you cannot
Speaker 1: leave anything that can be traced back forensically at that
Speaker 1: point in time. Because we can look at spent casings
Speaker 1: along the same line as we do ballistic examinations on
Speaker 1: spent rounds. It's not quite as accurate. You've got extraction
Speaker 1: marks soft brass, but you can tie them back in
Speaker 1: a general sort of matter to a particular manufacturer, so's
Speaker 1: they came prepared. That's what we're talking about. I have
Speaker 1: a question right here. So watching Jake Wagner plead guilty
Speaker 1: in court, did you guys see any kind of nonverbal
Speaker 1: signs that maybe he was ashamed, had regret, because I
Speaker 1: think I did, especially when they called a name. Okay,
Speaker 1: so you guys do think maybe he had to come
Speaker 1: to Jesus moment in prison. I couldn't. I literally couldn't
Speaker 1: believe it. And it's funny you're saying maybe he was
Speaker 1: showing remorse. Listen, it's it's a facial thing and you
Speaker 1: can read it different ways. I saw it as a
Speaker 1: smirk whatever that means. I don't know. Mild. Yeah, I
Speaker 1: found it revolting his reaction, I can tell you that. Yeah,
Speaker 1: And it's just about the heat up because les are
Speaker 1: starting and we now have new information from Angela and
Speaker 1: even Angela Wagner, we now it's very rare. Well, we
Speaker 1: all know, we all worked on the Nancy Gray series together.
Speaker 1: That's how we met Joseph, so we all were raised
Speaker 1: in the house of true crime, you know, by the best.
Speaker 1: It is very rare to see that many women involved
Speaker 1: in a case this violence. It's very rare to see
Speaker 1: women allowing that level of violence against other women, let
Speaker 1: alone other mothers, let alone other mothers holding their children.
Speaker 1: It is a rare thing. And now to know that
Speaker 1: Angela Wagner was buying silencer equipments at Walmart looking like
Speaker 1: just one of us. She looks so normal. She's buying
Speaker 1: silencers for her kids to go murder people. It's unfathomable. Really, yeah,
Speaker 1: it is. And there's there was recently a hearing, Daubert
Speaker 1: hearing as it's referred to, and it's kind of the
Speaker 1: measure of the evidence and the veracity of the evidence
Speaker 1: or the validity of the evidence being put forward, and
Speaker 1: it had to do with shoe print evidence. And so
Speaker 1: what has come out is apparently that mom had gone
Speaker 1: to Walmart and bought a very specific type of shoe
Speaker 1: and again premeditation going to thinking about this, what can
Speaker 1: we buy that's new that is not going to be
Speaker 1: traced back specifically to us because there's no wear patterns.
Speaker 1: The shoes are new at this point in time. It's
Speaker 1: not like they're worn down and you can tell if
Speaker 1: somebody can pronate or supernate and all those things we
Speaker 1: look at and forensic footwear. These are brand new and
Speaker 1: maybe they had enough thought about this to go and
Speaker 1: purchase these shoes. And of course we've got trials coming up,
Speaker 1: and we'll see how this plays out as it goes forward.
Speaker 1: We're going to take a break. We'll be back in
Speaker 1: a moment bringing it back to those shoes that Angela bought.
Speaker 1: So just to set the stage and remind people who
Speaker 1: have listened or informed people who haven't. The accused family,
Speaker 1: the Wagoners is mother Angela late forties, I believe she's
Speaker 1: fifty now, father Billy, and their two sons in their twenties.
Speaker 1: So just to set the stage, and you know, Stephanie
Speaker 1: started talking about how Angela plan and she physically bought
Speaker 1: stuff for this murder. They have her own surveillance at
Speaker 1: Walmart buying it, and you know a lot of people
Speaker 1: have asked about all of the mothers involved in this
Speaker 1: case and what our thoughts are, Stephanie, if you want
Speaker 1: to speak to mothers and how they play into this.
Speaker 1: What kind of a screwy mother would allow allegedly her
Speaker 1: sons to murder a plan she puts in place then
Speaker 1: tells them all to zip it so they can all
Speaker 1: go about their lives. We never heard of a killer family. Again,
Speaker 1: we're all true crime people. Very rare for a family
Speaker 1: to kill together. Adults on top of it, who were
Speaker 1: functional members of the plan, like everybody liked them. We
Speaker 1: heard very nice things about them. And to know that
Speaker 1: Angela Wagner, by her own admission at this point, was
Speaker 1: actually the one that planned the whole thing. So if
Speaker 1: she wants custody of her granddaughter, her big plan is
Speaker 1: to make her own sons murder. I won't get Joseph
Speaker 1: started on this, but Joseph's my most We think he's
Speaker 1: the most interesting person alive. For the record, yep. The
Speaker 1: notion that the authorities, the sheriff specifically who's currently behind
Speaker 1: bars for taking bribes and unrelated cases, they moved all
Speaker 1: of the crime scenes so we all know if there
Speaker 1: was a crime happening right this second here, God forbid,
Speaker 1: the doors would shut, the police would be here, nothing
Speaker 1: would be touched, right, we would preserve this sacred crime scene.
Speaker 1: How about the fact that four locations they literally put
Speaker 1: the homes on a truck and moved it across town,
Speaker 1: pretty much guaranteeing that nothing is sacred from a forensic standpoint,
Speaker 1: which if they had gone to trial, had Jake not confessed,
Speaker 1: they might have gotten away with it simply because a
Speaker 1: good lawyer would have said they tampered with evidence. That's
Speaker 1: when Joseph got involved. When again Joseph through Nancy, we
Speaker 1: were like Joseph, this makes no sense and just another
Speaker 1: thing on the evidentiary handling of these time scenes. Not
Speaker 1: only were they moved, disrupting everything everything they were then
Speaker 1: and this is fact, they then were unguarded. They were
Speaker 1: completely unguarded. We've spoken to attorneys and journalists who went there,
Speaker 1: and one of the attorneys he said, you know, I'm
Speaker 1: practicing fifty years. Do the math on how old I am.
Speaker 1: He said, I could hop that fence and do what
Speaker 1: you will with the evidence. So I think all of
Speaker 1: us are on particularly so curious how that will play
Speaker 1: out in the there's actually floating around out there. A
Speaker 1: photo that's kind of iconic to me, where these trailers,
Speaker 1: these mobile homes. And when I say mobile home, I'm
Speaker 1: not talking about like a trailer like an RV. I'm
Speaker 1: talking about a mobile home. I was at this site.
Speaker 1: I could see where the thing that it was hooked
Speaker 1: up to the septic and you know, the water pipe.
Speaker 1: The stubs are still in the ground, and I'll get
Speaker 1: back to that in just a second. But the place
Speaker 1: where these things were deposited, it looks like an old
Speaker 1: hangar almost. It's vast area and there's kind of this
Speaker 1: iconic photo now where these things are in there and
Speaker 1: there's a main entrance gate and the gate is cracked
Speaker 1: open and someone is on the outside. Now, this violates
Speaker 1: from a forensic standpoint, this violates every principle that you
Speaker 1: guys hear about us talk about here where it comes
Speaker 1: to security, crime scene security, and holding onto the evidence,
Speaker 1: because you have to be able to preserve the chain. Well,
Speaker 1: I don't know about you guys, but if I've got
Speaker 1: four crime scenes which are being housed in a warehouse,
Speaker 1: I think it's pretty important to be able to at
Speaker 1: least at a rudimentary level, to demonstrate that we give
Speaker 1: a damn about it and we're gonna lock the gate,
Speaker 1: you know what I'm saying. And so that that's just
Speaker 1: one of the issues. And when do you remember what
Speaker 1: we talked about just a few moments ago where we're
Speaker 1: talking about gunfire. Right, So let's say, for instance, and
Speaker 1: we've got I can't do the math off the top
Speaker 1: of my head, mass hard, but anyway, we've got the
Speaker 1: math that gives us a huge number of rounds have
Speaker 1: been popped off in this in this house thirty two.
Speaker 1: And what do we talk about all the time? You
Speaker 1: hear us talk about pontificate about things and crime scenes.
Speaker 1: One of the things we talked about is bullet trajectories. Right, Okay, Well,
Speaker 1: if you're in a mobile home, or if a mobile
Speaker 1: home is being transported, you've got multiple gunshots have been
Speaker 1: fired in this in this environment that's now rolling down
Speaker 1: the road, bumping up and down the road, and not
Speaker 1: just that it's swaying back and forth. Can you tell me?
Speaker 1: And if I was a defense attorney, I would ask
Speaker 1: this question. It needs to be asking answer. Can you
Speaker 1: guarantee that these walls are still plumb. Can you give
Speaker 1: us an idea that when because you're putting them there
Speaker 1: not just to secure them, you're putting them there to
Speaker 1: examine them in real time, not just to preserve the evidence.
Speaker 1: But remember what we do as forensic scientists, we're kind
Speaker 1: of historians in the sense we want to preserve that
Speaker 1: environment so that it can be documented and presented in court. Well,
Speaker 1: is this a real and true and accurate representation of
Speaker 1: what was actually there before they removed it off of
Speaker 1: the foundations and travel down these roads? And I got
Speaker 1: to tell you, and I know they can testify to it.
Speaker 1: When I say roads, This road is like as why
Speaker 1: we had to pull over on the side of the
Speaker 1: road to get let other parts pass this wide? And
Speaker 1: you're talking about these narrow little lanes that they're dragging
Speaker 1: these things down. Look, don't believe me. On the internet
Speaker 1: there's the pictures of the mobile homes going down the
Speaker 1: road and being told but that's when they got out
Speaker 1: to the main road. These twist and turns that they're
Speaker 1: having to take. Not to mention, how do you secure
Speaker 1: anything that was nailed to the wall or this hung
Speaker 1: on the wall that's us going to fall off? How
Speaker 1: do you know that nothing was broken in there? And
Speaker 1: can you prove it? Can you demonstrate it? And at
Speaker 1: the end of the day, that's what the prosecutors are
Speaker 1: going to have to do. I think this is a
Speaker 1: big uphill climb for them from an evidentiary standpoint. Let's
Speaker 1: stop here for another break. We'd love to hear any questions.
Speaker 1: We have a couple of more, but you guys are here.
Speaker 1: It was all about his little girl, So mamma could
Speaker 1: grandma could finally have her baby girl? Why on earth
Speaker 1: did he throw everybody else under the bris? Sob Horton
Speaker 1: and I have worked together for decades. We cried because
Speaker 1: it was such a stain on humanity that hearing him
Speaker 1: say I'm guilty. He also apparently has found God in
Speaker 1: prison and has been reformed, and his brother has requested
Speaker 1: solitary confinement. Religion plays an interesting role also. We also
Speaker 1: have heard that they're getting threats behind bars, and that
Speaker 1: that might be part of the reason why he's confessing,
Speaker 1: and not to mention. Apparently nobody knew when Jake confessed.
Speaker 1: We're told that his mother, his father, and his other
Speaker 1: brother had no idea he was going to plead, which
Speaker 1: really screws them and leaves them with a bag. So
Speaker 1: he although it was taking the death sentence part off
Speaker 1: the table, he was also sealing their fate because had
Speaker 1: they all gone to trial and kept quiet all of this,
Speaker 1: forensics probably would have been up for conversation and they
Speaker 1: might have gotten off. And interestingly, and this is something
Speaker 1: that's new since so a Stephanie said it was maybe
Speaker 1: he found religion. Everyone says God is in a lot
Speaker 1: of prisons because a lot of people seem to find
Speaker 1: religion there. But you know, and maybe he wanted to
Speaker 1: save the lives and that's why he testified. But it's
Speaker 1: become clear in different court motions and different stuff. The
Speaker 1: prosecutor has gone on record that if Jake does not
Speaker 1: testify to the prosecution's liking and to the extent of
Speaker 1: what he has agreed to, guess what, the death penalty
Speaker 1: is right back on the table for everybody. So we
Speaker 1: had never heard of that before. Imagine, you take a
Speaker 1: plea agreement, you get your family off of death sentences. However,
Speaker 1: when you go to trial to testify against them in
Speaker 1: front of them, which will be the first time they
Speaker 1: all see each other eye to eye, will be when
Speaker 1: Jake is testifying against them. Bring it up. Hold on,
Speaker 1: someone is going to yes, you got it, very kindly,
Speaker 1: come and while that's coming, just thank you for listening.
Speaker 1: I think we all are just very like minded and
Speaker 1: just being justice junkies. We really genuinely it's not grizzly
Speaker 1: stuff that we enjoy. It's trying to figure out the
Speaker 1: why and the who and the truth. Yeah, I have
Speaker 1: a question. Um, Hannah Rodin is the one that had
Speaker 1: the baby, correct, and she's the one that had the
Speaker 1: child with Jake. Great, okay, why thank god they did,
Speaker 1: But why do you think that they left the baby alive? Like,
Speaker 1: wasn't that a point of contention in that family? Yes?
Speaker 1: It was, and this, Yeah, it's a great question. It's
Speaker 1: a great question. So part of let me phrase this simply.
Speaker 1: It's such a layered question. Actually, you know, as Stephanie mentioned,
Speaker 1: custody is a piece of this. Whether it was the
Speaker 1: full thing will come out in the wash. Angela Jake's mother.
Speaker 1: So this grandmother who ps had her grandchildren call her
Speaker 1: mama and told told the mothers that you are not
Speaker 1: their mother. You gave birth, but I am their mother.
Speaker 1: Just a little hint into her mindset, But why did
Speaker 1: they leave that baby alive? So they had the three
Speaker 1: year old that they shared, and the Wagners filed for
Speaker 1: custody of this five day old baby, saying that will
Speaker 1: need her sister with her, So it was a to
Speaker 1: keep them together. And then one other interesting thing on
Speaker 1: that is, in the event that Hannah May died, which
Speaker 1: of course this poor girl was murdered nineteen years old,
Speaker 1: then because she would go to Jake. If Jake the
Speaker 1: father died, customy would not go back to his mother
Speaker 1: Hannah May, it would go to Angela, the grandmother. And
Speaker 1: that was with forged documents, and it was a summer
Speaker 1: of life. Hannah was a young girl, right, she meant
Speaker 1: somebody else. She had a new boyfriend, Charlie Gilly. Interestingly,
Speaker 1: I've always thought Frankie rode In the eldest victim's son
Speaker 1: was sleeping beside his fiance and the three year old
Speaker 1: is the one that got under the bed. The zombie story,
Speaker 1: Hannah Gilly was shot five times in the face, which
Speaker 1: was the second most of any of them. And I
Speaker 1: never understood why the connection might be not proven. But
Speaker 1: this is my theory personal is that Hannah Gilly's brother
Speaker 1: was Charlie Gilly, who was the boy that Hannah May
Speaker 1: was dating and not with Jake anymore. So there is
Speaker 1: like a legit little love triangle happening here. But at
Speaker 1: the time of the murders, Jake, Jake and Hannah were
Speaker 1: still seeing each other. From what we now know, she
Speaker 1: was keeping things nice. She was doing a lot of
Speaker 1: social media posting asking for help. She obviously felt bullied
Speaker 1: by the Wagner family and by Jake. She probably just
Speaker 1: wanted to get rid of him. But at the time
Speaker 1: of the murders, Jake Willy did believe that five day
Speaker 1: old was his so much so in the days right
Speaker 1: after the murders he filed for custody and they did
Speaker 1: paternity tests. So why would he kill her if he
Speaker 1: thought maybe they could get back together because that baby
Speaker 1: was his. What is your theory why they gave the
Speaker 1: mother such a great plea deal of thirty years and
Speaker 1: took away the aggravated murder Angela her. Yeah, it's being
Speaker 1: speculated that Angela was not there that night, and that
Speaker 1: she sent everybody out that night, and that she was
Speaker 1: looking after the grandkids. Because we've been obsessed with that.
Speaker 1: If like the jake picked up his daughter outside of
Speaker 1: their custody plan the day of the murders by coincidence.
Speaker 1: Then that night they all go out and murder everybody
Speaker 1: who was watching the kids. Anybody who was watching the
Speaker 1: kids would know that they weren't with the kids the
Speaker 1: night of the murder, and then therefore they should be
Speaker 1: held accountable. My two cents, it's like been keeping us
Speaker 1: up at night. They found a box, like a Xerox
Speaker 1: paper box that said important stuff on it and in
Speaker 1: it it's like all the evidence, like literally truth. Yeah,
Speaker 1: why would you not given to the evidence. And that
Speaker 1: they were clever enough to do surveillance. They had cameras,
Speaker 1: they were watching every they were in every Instagram account,
Speaker 1: every coming and going. That's kind of when we got involved.
Speaker 1: To the idea that the killer dogs that were trained attack,
Speaker 1: so that was not uncommon, but the idea that they
Speaker 1: did an attack kind of uncommon. Right, So they must
Speaker 1: have known the assailants and there wasn't any noticeable forced entry.
Speaker 1: Joseph can speak more to this. So somebody probably, we think,
Speaker 1: either had a key or went through a window. They
Speaker 1: knew the family very well, so the dogs knew them.
Speaker 1: So that wouldn't be unusual. And if it was the cartel,
Speaker 1: which was the initial idea, the cartel would have not
Speaker 1: left anything breathing, including the dogs. They would have killed
Speaker 1: the dogs, killed the babies. They would have been an
Speaker 1: assassination in and out, as opposed to what we now
Speaker 1: know to be this enormous over kill. Have you thought
Speaker 1: of this theory? There is no way in the world
Speaker 1: Angela is gonna let these three men go take care
Speaker 1: of her. Plot. Who's taking care of the grandkids, Frederica, Yes,
Speaker 1: that is the question. That's what I believe too. I'm
Speaker 1: with you on that. Can you share with us anything
Speaker 1: new about the grand matriarch Frederica. Yes, she answered the
Speaker 1: phone recently when we called. Yeah, she wouldn't speak with us.
Speaker 1: Courtney and I debate this all the time. I'll tell
Speaker 1: you my side of it. Oh, Frederica is the grandmother
Speaker 1: on the Acque side. People loved her. They we've heard
Speaker 1: very loving things about her, that she was sweet and kind,
Speaker 1: and she denies that her family is involved. Still, however,
Speaker 1: Courtney's heard quite the opposite. And I mean, listen, there's
Speaker 1: two there's two sides to every coin, right, and yes,
Speaker 1: Frederica did do altruistic things for the community, so that
Speaker 1: is true. Also true is that she had quite a
Speaker 1: bit of land, and so people would rent land and
Speaker 1: they would say, okay, so by the time and they'd
Speaker 1: make payments like on a car, the theory being okay,
Speaker 1: when you pay us the X amount, that house is yours,
Speaker 1: you own it. Well cut to this happened over and over.
Speaker 1: She'd pull it out right at the end, Oh you
Speaker 1: missed a payment or whatever, small thing, and she was
Speaker 1: stealing back these people's homes. So that's a matter of
Speaker 1: fact too. That's not speculation in the land of speculation,
Speaker 1: though after quite guilty if you found out any kind
Speaker 1: of scoop. As respond, she says that she still doesn't
Speaker 1: believe it. And we have called her directly and her
Speaker 1: family members directly. But one thing was because she was
Speaker 1: quite vocal Frederica in the press and she has I
Speaker 1: believe this is a fact. Has not spoken to the
Speaker 1: press since the Plea deals, but we've spoken a stuff
Speaker 1: said to people who are very close with her. She
Speaker 1: wears that black veil like right out of Central Casting too,
Speaker 1: you know, she wears a black veil like the Godmother
Speaker 1: goes to quarter. She looks so docile, like the sweetest
Speaker 1: little grandmamma you could ever wish for. I Meanwhile, she's
Speaker 1: allegedly raised up a generation of murderers. Yeah, ladies and gentlemen,
Speaker 1: thank you very much for joining us. This has been
Speaker 1: Crime Con twenty twenty two. Thank you, Thank you, guys,
Speaker 1: thank you, thank you. Please email us if you have
Speaker 1: a question real time. We really do try to listen
Speaker 1: and respond within the episode, so if something pops up,
Speaker 1: we were we would like to stay and engaged. If
Speaker 1: you're enjoying The Pikes and Massacre, listen to our other
Speaker 1: hit series, Crazy and Love. New episodes air every Tuesday
Speaker 1: wherever you get your podcasts. For more information and case photos,
Speaker 1: follow us on Instagram at Katie Underscore Studio. The Piked
Speaker 1: and Massacre is produced by Stephanie Lydecker, Jeff Shane, Chris
Speaker 1: Grieves and me Courtney Armstrong. Editing and sound designed by
Speaker 1: Jeff Tis, music by Jared Aston, audio mixing by Ken Novak.
Speaker 1: The Piked and Massacre is a production of Katie Studios
Speaker 1: and iHeartRadio. For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio
Speaker 1: app Apple Podcasts or wherever you listen to your favorite shows,
Speaker 1: we'd love for you to join us at crime CON's
Speaker 1: next big event. More details to come on our website.