Speaker 1: BCIs Julia Everslade says Angela Wagner's all vone activity showed
Speaker 1: several disturbing entries. He never called Chris senior like he
Speaker 1: told BCI agents after Chris died. Digital data plays such
Speaker 1: a huge role in all of these cases. You begin
Speaker 1: to see these little electron red crumbs as to their activity.
Speaker 1: This is the piked to massacre Returned to Pike County
Speaker 1: season four, episode thirteen, The Digital Trail Courtney Armstrong a
Speaker 1: television producer at Katy Studios with Stephanie Lydecker and Jeff Shane.
Speaker 1: It's important to note that Billy Wagner, George Wagner's father,
Speaker 1: whose trial is upcoming, has pled not guilty to all charges.
Speaker 1: We've so far heard rhems of testimony from different ballistics experts,
Speaker 1: from the coroner who did the autopsies on the Rodent family,
Speaker 1: from the victims family members. Last episode we heard from
Speaker 1: Billy Wagner, and now we hear more from the rest
Speaker 1: of the Wagners. But the day begins with the hearing
Speaker 1: before Judge during regarding the use of technology and media
Speaker 1: in the trial. Here's James Pilcher, longtime investigative reporter in
Speaker 1: Cincinnati now with Local twelve. This was a big day
Speaker 1: for the media covering the trial because the day before,
Speaker 1: the appeals court ruled that whatever shown in court, we
Speaker 1: can show either through still photographs, streaming video, whatever, because
Speaker 1: the judge had previously said he tried to put a
Speaker 1: ban on anything involving blood, involving miners, or involving bodies,
Speaker 1: and that's against the rules of jurisprudence in Ohio. Anything
Speaker 1: that's shown in court can be shown publicly. Now it's
Speaker 1: up to us to self censor. This morning's hearing is
Speaker 1: over how the appellate Court's ruling will affect the photos
Speaker 1: and videos that are presented in the trial moving forward.
Speaker 1: It harkens back to the beginning of the trial, when
Speaker 1: so much was about what would and would not be
Speaker 1: allowed to be released by the media. Defense attorney John
Speaker 1: Parker argues that jurors could go online and see images
Speaker 1: that were not previously introduced as evidence, and that that
Speaker 1: could taint the view of the defendant, George Wagner. The
Speaker 1: fourth judge, Daring asked the prosecution about the possibility of
Speaker 1: the jury viewing sensitive material, in particular material that is
Speaker 1: not being admitted into evidence. Assuming the jurors are following
Speaker 1: the cors order, there's absolutely no reason to it. They're
Speaker 1: or not, and they're not going to be looking at
Speaker 1: any type of media or being so anything out of
Speaker 1: the media anyway. Yeah, that would be our position, or
Speaker 1: it's not very good, it doesn't be fished. In the end,
Speaker 1: Judge Daring sides with the news media and the prosecution.
Speaker 1: That morning, the judge has a hearing and says, hey,
Speaker 1: we've got to abide by this and from now on
Speaker 1: you go ahead and use the screens, but no that
Speaker 1: it's going to be it can be shown, and that
Speaker 1: the prosecution at that point had been going to the
Speaker 1: photographers and saying, hey, this is gonna have blood and
Speaker 1: it don't show it. Well, it was allowing the prosecutors
Speaker 1: to self censor, our censor what was going to be
Speaker 1: shown on what wasn't, and that's really not what the
Speaker 1: court is supposed to happen. So, yeah, that was a
Speaker 1: big day with the media policy clarified. The trial resumes.
Speaker 1: Special Prosecutor Angie Kinnepa and her team called Ohio BCI
Speaker 1: intelligence supervisor Dana Forney to the stand. Forney was a
Speaker 1: criminal intelligence analyst at the time of the murders in
Speaker 1: twenty six team as investigators were looking into the Wagner's agent,
Speaker 1: Forney analyzed their cell phone data. Forny says she first
Speaker 1: looked at Billy Wagner cell records in the months and
Speaker 1: days leading up to the murders on April twenty first
Speaker 1: and twenty second, twenty sixteen. Forney has been working in
Speaker 1: the criminal intelligence unit for ten years. She wears a
Speaker 1: purple shirt with a black blazer and is calm and
Speaker 1: confident on the stand. Forney lays out why she was
Speaker 1: looking into the phone records of Billy Wagner, father, the
Speaker 1: defendant and also accused murderer. Once Billy was interviewed by
Speaker 1: the investigative team, they requested the records to either corroborate
Speaker 1: or refute any statements that he made about his locations
Speaker 1: who he was calling. So the investigative team had asked
Speaker 1: me to just take a look at the records and
Speaker 1: create a map of where Billy was on the day
Speaker 1: of the twenty first and the twenty second. Okay, and
Speaker 1: so did you do that? Yes? Angie Kneppa brings the
Speaker 1: map on the screen for the courtroom to see. It
Speaker 1: shows various cell towers and their relation to the three
Speaker 1: crime scenes, as well as the Wagner residences. Agent Forney
Speaker 1: also had access to the call log so she could
Speaker 1: see who Billy Wagner was calling and who was calling Billy.
Speaker 1: On April twenty first, the day of the murders, there
Speaker 1: were several calls from Billy Wagner's son, George. The fourth
Speaker 1: though stopped at around five forty four pm. It was
Speaker 1: at five fifty five pm when Billy made his last
Speaker 1: phone call of the day. The last outgoing call from
Speaker 1: this device that night of April twenty first was to
Speaker 1: Christopher Roden Senior. Billy Wagner's last call of the night
Speaker 1: was to Christopher Roden Senior. Chris Roden tried to call
Speaker 1: Billy back five separate times up until ten fifteen pm.
Speaker 1: Each time it went to voicemail. Previous testimony stated that
Speaker 1: Chris Rodin was likely murdered soon after eleven pm. Can
Speaker 1: you tell us did that device of Billy Wagner's ever
Speaker 1: make any attacks to contact Chris Senior's phone after receiving
Speaker 1: those series of calls the night before that were routed
Speaker 1: to voicemail. No even though he checked his voicemail that
Speaker 1: following morning. Yes, did you see any evidence whatsoever that
Speaker 1: he ever called or attempted to call Chris Rodan Senior
Speaker 1: after that last call to him shortly before six pm
Speaker 1: on April twenty first of twenty sixteen. There were no
Speaker 1: outcoing calls from Billy's phone to Chris Rodan Senior. So
Speaker 1: the other thing that they found in those records, of course,
Speaker 1: was that he never called Chris Senior, like he told
Speaker 1: BCI agents after Chris died. You know, he said he
Speaker 1: destroyed his phones and he got a new number because
Speaker 1: he kept getting upset at himself because he kept calling
Speaker 1: Chris Senior's phone by accident, because he was his best friend. Well,
Speaker 1: they proved that never happened. Using triangulation of the cell
Speaker 1: towers and the geolocation of Billy's cell phone. Agent four
Speaker 1: was also able to narrow down Wagner's location when he
Speaker 1: used his phone when I conducted the analysis first of
Speaker 1: just his common towers. These were the most common towers
Speaker 1: in Billy's records, the two that serviced the area of
Speaker 1: the Flying W and the one that services the area
Speaker 1: of Peterson Road. The Flying W was where Billy Wagner's
Speaker 1: parents lived. Billy spent most nights there. The Peterson Road
Speaker 1: address was where Angela, Jake and George Wagner lived. Prosecutor
Speaker 1: Knappa asked about the location of Billy's cell phone the
Speaker 1: day of the murders and the day after. She also
Speaker 1: asked if there was a change in Billy's habits on
Speaker 1: those days. So significant to you would be if the
Speaker 1: last outgoing or incoming contact or communication was at a
Speaker 1: particular location at that night and then also in that
Speaker 1: same location in the morning. Correct, we dedicate to you
Speaker 1: at the habit of spending the night or whatever. Yes,
Speaker 1: Kneppa pulls up on the big screen a calendar of
Speaker 1: Billy's cell phone locations during the month of April. This
Speaker 1: is April twenty sixteen's calendar of Billy's last serving cell
Speaker 1: site and first serving cell site. Okay, And specifically, you
Speaker 1: have the last cell site, which is the services the
Speaker 1: Peterson Road address. Correct, Yes, at eleven o four pm.
Speaker 1: And then the first phone utilization the following morning also
Speaker 1: still located at Peterson Road. Correct, And why was that significant?
Speaker 1: I guess that on April twenty first the device was
Speaker 1: at Peterson Road when typically it would be in the
Speaker 1: flyin w. There were just comments made to the investigative
Speaker 1: team about the family was all together that night and
Speaker 1: we didn't know if that was a common for them
Speaker 1: to all be together at Peterson Road and then again
Speaker 1: through kind of the end of April. Do you see
Speaker 1: that same pattern continuing as far as the Peterson Road address. Yes,
Speaker 1: so then from that point forward you see a shift
Speaker 1: in the device's behavior that now the typical last serving
Speaker 1: cellsite and first serving cellsite the next morning are in
Speaker 1: the Peterson Road area. And the other thing they were
Speaker 1: able to show is that leading up to the murders
Speaker 1: that Billy up until then, his phone at night when
Speaker 1: he would go to bed was at the Flying w
Speaker 1: After the murders, for at least a month and a half,
Speaker 1: except for the times they went to Alaska, it was
Speaker 1: at Peterson Road. So that was a major alteration in
Speaker 1: his behavior. On the day after the murders. Here's Stephanie
Speaker 1: and Jeff And by the way, this is the very
Speaker 1: very first time I've personally ever heard that Billy Wagner
Speaker 1: accused father that he wasn't sleeping home. And while this
Speaker 1: evidence doesn't necessarily tie George Wagner directly to the murders.
Speaker 1: It does support the prosecution's argument that the Wagners were
Speaker 1: in contact and were physically together the night of the murders.
Speaker 1: It's fascinating now that we can better understand the comings
Speaker 1: and goings of everyone based on their cell phones, and
Speaker 1: it's always interesting to see behind the curtain a little
Speaker 1: bit about an investigation, cell towers, information regarding where their
Speaker 1: cell phones were. It kind of becomes this map, and
Speaker 1: in many cases that's extremely meaningful. I will say, in
Speaker 1: this case, again we're not seeing too too much yet
Speaker 1: about George, but it is certainly interesting to see where
Speaker 1: everybody else was and who they had been calling. In
Speaker 1: those final days, people were frustrated with law enforcements, timeline
Speaker 1: of how long it took to make arrests, or how
Speaker 1: the public felt like they didn't know what was going on.
Speaker 1: But I think this kind of police work just proves that,
Speaker 1: like you said, behind the curtain, there was a lot
Speaker 1: of investigative work happening that really helps not just getting arrest,
Speaker 1: but hopefully commiction. What's your inclination? Does that mean that
Speaker 1: Billy Wagner, Accu's father was calling victim father Chris rod
Speaker 1: In to see if he was home at that hour,
Speaker 1: and doing sort of a scout to see if typically
Speaker 1: he's home between those certain hours. I think it probably
Speaker 1: points to Billy Wagner knowing that every cell phone call
Speaker 1: is tracked or could be tracked, and he is planting
Speaker 1: some seed or trying to lay some sort of what
Speaker 1: will eventually be his defense. Good point. It should also
Speaker 1: be important to note staff that while the cell phone
Speaker 1: data helps give an idea of Billy Wagner's location and
Speaker 1: habits before and after the murders, it doesn't actually detail
Speaker 1: what was said during these phone calls. More importantly, it
Speaker 1: doesn't specify how the Wagner's allegedly coordinated the killings. All
Speaker 1: of that is about to change with the next witness
Speaker 1: called by the prosecution, Julia Evslidge, a BCI agent who
Speaker 1: analyzed the search history, images and text messages on Angelo
Speaker 1: Wagner's phone. BCI's Julia Everslage says Angelo Wager's cell phone
Speaker 1: activity showed several disturbing entries. Here's forensic medical examiner Joseph
Speaker 1: Scott Morgan. Digital data plays such a huge role in
Speaker 1: all of these cases, you begin to see this little
Speaker 1: what I refer to as electron bread crumbs as to
Speaker 1: their activity. Agent Everslage wears a purple blazer and white shirt.
Speaker 1: She has dirty blonde hair that falls to her shoulders.
Speaker 1: On the stand she speaks in a very matter of
Speaker 1: fact manner about the Google searches of Angelo Wagner. So
Speaker 1: the bottom line here is a Google search for Alaska
Speaker 1: houses for sale and what I believed to be in Seward,
Speaker 1: which is a city or a town in Alaska, a
Speaker 1: visit of a website Seward real Estate, Inc. And a
Speaker 1: second visit of that. Just a minute later, Prosecutor Kaneppa
Speaker 1: and Agent Eversledge walk through the various searches. There are
Speaker 1: many about houses for sale in Alaska, living in Alaska,
Speaker 1: jobs in Alaska, both before and after the murders. Here again,
Speaker 1: Joseph Scott Morgan. You know, we all go into a
Speaker 1: trial with a presumption of innocence in our system. However,
Speaker 1: when the prosecution is presenting this case to the jury,
Speaker 1: you have to draw upon the common sense of the
Speaker 1: jury and say it isn't it interesting you know that
Speaker 1: this individual might be searching out things like you know,
Speaker 1: the nature of what it's like to live in Alaska,
Speaker 1: or you know, are are there jobs available, for instance
Speaker 1: in Alaska. But Angelo Adner wasn't only googling about Alaska.
Speaker 1: The Google search is symptoms of sexual Penetration in a
Speaker 1: Toddler and that took place on January eighteen, twenty sixteen.
Speaker 1: And then the final lineup of the top is Trauma
Speaker 1: Responses in Children, a website that was visited here again
Speaker 1: James Pilcher. The other thing that came up from Angela's
Speaker 1: phone is that she had been searching for several months
Speaker 1: previously on signs of sexual abuse and a toddler. We
Speaker 1: know that they will later accuse the Rodents of or
Speaker 1: somebody in the Rodent family of abusing Jake's daughter. But
Speaker 1: one key thing that on Angela's phone which kind of
Speaker 1: got me to thinking about this paranoia about sexual abuse
Speaker 1: and rape. She looked up rape culture in Alaska. Now,
Speaker 1: if you're moving to a place, is that one thing
Speaker 1: you would look up? Is that something you would google?
Speaker 1: Is there rape culture up there? So obviously it's front
Speaker 1: of mine in this family for her. We're going to
Speaker 1: take a break. We'll be back in a moment. The
Speaker 1: prosecution and agent of a Sledge turned to Angela Wagner's
Speaker 1: searches in March, just one month before the murders. There
Speaker 1: are first searches on Facebook for Hannah may rodin photos,
Speaker 1: an attempt to look at the friends of Hannah Roden's
Speaker 1: on her Facebook, and then another search on the same
Speaker 1: friends list of Hannah Roden. On March thirteenth, twenty sixteen,
Speaker 1: Agent of A Sledge reads Angela's search history just days
Speaker 1: after the murders. These were searches pertaining to the homicides themselves.
Speaker 1: On April twenty seventh, there was a Facebook search Roden
Speaker 1: family massacre. They were reading of comments from the search
Speaker 1: as well as Roden Family shootings, and then reading of
Speaker 1: two articles pertaining to the homicides from the Inquirer. When
Speaker 1: you've got a person that is essentially the matriarch of
Speaker 1: the family and who many people have pointed to is
Speaker 1: kind of the brains behind the operation. And when you
Speaker 1: begin to see the searches that Angela was engaged in,
Speaker 1: when you marry that up with the physical evidence that
Speaker 1: you have and you see how of that plays out,
Speaker 1: then I think by extension, you begin to comparely thinks
Speaker 1: you know well, you can searching thing you want to
Speaker 1: on your phone. It doesn't necessarily mean that you're guilty.
Speaker 1: The defense points out that Angela's search history doesn't prove
Speaker 1: that she acted on the information. However, the text between
Speaker 1: Angela and her husband Billy Wagner Do Shine a Lad
Speaker 1: in their dynamic Evislige begins to read text messages aloud
Speaker 1: that were sent between Angela and Billy Wagner. Angela, I
Speaker 1: still love you, but I would like to spend some
Speaker 1: time with you, just you, not all of all our problems. Billy.
Speaker 1: That's not going to happen, and it's only going to
Speaker 1: get worse. Shit just starting, Angela, What are you talking about.
Speaker 1: I'm trying to understand, Billy. I am preparing my head
Speaker 1: for disaster, Angela, for what your dad or Jake? Billy?
Speaker 1: Just everything has turned to shit all Angela. Yes, I
Speaker 1: agree with you. Can I help you in any way? Billy?
Speaker 1: Bullet to the head would fix me right up. She
Speaker 1: reads a text exchange four months before the murders, this
Speaker 1: one about Hannah Rodin Angela. All hell is happening here
Speaker 1: with Hannah and Angela. She is trying to keep Jake
Speaker 1: from getting her tomorrow. Billy did you get her yet? Billy,
Speaker 1: you can run away with me, Angela. I promise, if
Speaker 1: it weren't for me and I would be gone. Billy.
Speaker 1: Anytime you want, Billy, you just say the word and me,
Speaker 1: you and babies will be off on the big adventure. Billy,
Speaker 1: just give me a sign and I will come running.
Speaker 1: James Pilcher there were several between Billy and Angela that
Speaker 1: showed very, very tumultuous nature of the relationship. You know.
Speaker 1: Billy even said, I wish I could take you away.
Speaker 1: She said, yeah, if it weren't for the kids and
Speaker 1: the grandkids, I would go with you. But I'm with them.
Speaker 1: More messages about Billy and Angela Wagner running away together,
Speaker 1: sent three months before the murders. Billy, I am moving on.
Speaker 1: You are more than welcome to come bring babies and
Speaker 1: come on. Angela. Well, they are not our babies. And
Speaker 1: I would never do that to George and Jake. I
Speaker 1: would have killed someone if they would have even mentioned
Speaker 1: going away with my babies. And if you really missed me,
Speaker 1: you would do anything or go through anything for me.
Speaker 1: Here's Jeff and Joseph Scott Morgan. Again. It's interesting because
Speaker 1: I don't think any of her texts our Google searches
Speaker 1: are totally point to George's guilt, certainly, but they do
Speaker 1: paint a picture of maybe the dynamics of the family.
Speaker 1: The way I've kind of come to view this case
Speaker 1: and in context to everything, is that Angela is essentially
Speaker 1: the hub of the wagon. Will Okay, and everybody else
Speaker 1: that is involved in this, whether it was Jake or
Speaker 1: Billy or George who's currently on trial, their extensions, they're
Speaker 1: like spoke and all of this. She's the hub that
Speaker 1: everything else radiates out from, And when you begin to
Speaker 1: take all of that into consideration, it does paint this
Speaker 1: picture of the world that these people existed in. They
Speaker 1: live in this world that's dominated by Angela. Prosecutor Kneppa
Speaker 1: and agent Everslage walk through text messages set nearly two
Speaker 1: months before the murders. Billy, it's a fine mess Angela. Well,
Speaker 1: maybe it is worth you helping me work it out.
Speaker 1: As the date of the massacre draws near, a particularly
Speaker 1: disturbing message, Billy, I got a plan If you just
Speaker 1: take one damn minute and listen, Angela. Okay, tell me,
Speaker 1: Billy when I see you. This is the last time.
Speaker 1: I am going to try. If the three of you
Speaker 1: don't take time to listen to me, then oh well, Angela, okay,
Speaker 1: Stephanie and je At that time, remember Billy Wagner's father
Speaker 1: was dying. There was a husty to dispute heating up
Speaker 1: between the Wagoners and the Rodents. So when he's talking
Speaker 1: about things being, you know, really bad, perhaps that's what
Speaker 1: he was talking about, not necessarily anything to do with murder.
Speaker 1: Knowing what we know now, you can put a lens
Speaker 1: on anything the Wagners did, whether it's something they google,
Speaker 1: something they said to each other, something they said in writing,
Speaker 1: where they went, what they did, all of those things
Speaker 1: can be scrutinized in a way that they couldn't before.
Speaker 1: Agent Evislage then turns to text messages sent between Jake
Speaker 1: and Angela. These were sent just one month before the murders.
Speaker 1: It was a conversation of interest because it appeared to
Speaker 1: have been discussing parts that were purchased. Jake okay, also
Speaker 1: at okay, I'd done paid for it all, but I
Speaker 1: do not need two three quarter inch stuff now, So
Speaker 1: see if you can, if you can return it, Angela,
Speaker 1: I will take care of it. Jake, Okay, it's a
Speaker 1: die and two fittings that I do not need. Pick
Speaker 1: up the other die and bit still need them? Angela, okay,
Speaker 1: we'll do. Did you pay cash or put them on
Speaker 1: your card? Jake cash? Angela okay. And when you say
Speaker 1: that was of interest because it related to items that
Speaker 1: have been purchased, what are you talking about, specifically items
Speaker 1: that we believe we're used to build suppressors. There's information
Speaker 1: openly available on the internet about parts required or that
Speaker 1: can be used to make suppressors. Tap and dies, for instance,
Speaker 1: are parts that can be used, Drill bits that are
Speaker 1: long can be used, and those are just components that
Speaker 1: are used to build suppressors. When it comes to the
Speaker 1: testimony of Julia Edislage, she's kind of had access to
Speaker 1: the beating heart of information. She has a unique insight
Speaker 1: into this world that the Wagoners inhabited, because you begin
Speaker 1: to think about, well, is it a matter of them
Speaker 1: being able to talk about these things open freely or
Speaker 1: are they going to have to create coded language in
Speaker 1: order to do this? In order to get messages through
Speaker 1: to one another, Evslas reads another text message with what
Speaker 1: appears to be coded language George Wagner continues to stare
Speaker 1: at his feed. Jake ps, look in the cabinet at
Speaker 1: the bottom of stairs, not finished yet and need one more. Angela,
Speaker 1: Are there pink bunnies there? Jake? One is Angela? What
Speaker 1: about sprinkles? Jake ain't got them yet. They are coming
Speaker 1: in mail and at Okay. Next Friday, Prosecutor Knappa asked
Speaker 1: the agents why she thought the words quote sprinkles and
Speaker 1: quote pink bunnies were quoted language. Well, first, there was
Speaker 1: a mention of and okay, which in the prior messages
Speaker 1: there were parts to be picked up or exchanged at Okay,
Speaker 1: which I interpreted to be okay. Auto parts were known
Speaker 1: purchases that we identified later from various autoparts stores, and
Speaker 1: as well as the conversation the pink bunnies, that was
Speaker 1: right on the heels of the discussion about the various
Speaker 1: parts regards what you testified too could be used to
Speaker 1: make silencers correct, Yes, okay. If you have an awareness
Speaker 1: where you feel though you're gonna have to speak in
Speaker 1: coded language, why in the world would you even offer
Speaker 1: up any conversation at all. As it turned out, you know,
Speaker 1: they were able to pick up the multiplicity communications that
Speaker 1: were going on, and you began to see this a
Speaker 1: little trail of electronic breadcrumbs that have been created. Here again,
Speaker 1: Stephanie and Jeff, there's a lot made of Billy and
Speaker 1: Angela Wagner using code words when they're talking about sprinkles
Speaker 1: and pink bunnies. And I don't know, that might be
Speaker 1: a little bit of a leap, if you know, we're
Speaker 1: all working on the assumption that these are code words
Speaker 1: that could very well be but those code words could
Speaker 1: be for anything, you know, as mentioned, it could be
Speaker 1: for autoparts, it could be for drugs. It could also
Speaker 1: be for ingredients to make a cake. Yeah, Steph, I mean,
Speaker 1: this is very circumstantial evidence, if it's even considered evidence
Speaker 1: at all, and it certainly doesn't point to George Wagner
Speaker 1: being guilty of murder. Local news jumps on this finding
Speaker 1: of quoted language text messages between Angela and Jake, which
Speaker 1: include pink bunnies and sprinkles nothing to do with cartoons
Speaker 1: or ice cream. The prosecution says they are code words
Speaker 1: for firearm accessories that Jake ordered. Now, today's testimony also
Speaker 1: took jurors to Montana's border with Canada. That's where agents
Speaker 1: intercepted the Wagners, who were driving back to the US
Speaker 1: from Alaska more than a year before they ended up
Speaker 1: being arrested. Next, the prosecution calls up Agent Ryan Shy.
Speaker 1: He wears a gray suit with a purple shirt and
Speaker 1: tie and was the lead investigator in the Rodent family murders.
Speaker 1: The prosecution begins by laying out the evidence collected thus
Speaker 1: far in the investigation. So at this point, now you
Speaker 1: have collected ballistic evidence that we heard Matt White also
Speaker 1: talk about that matched the shell cascenes or cartridge casings
Speaker 1: that were fired at both scenes two and three. And
Speaker 1: we have the shoeprint evidence that has now been linked
Speaker 1: to the Wagner's via the Walmart receive in the image
Speaker 1: of Angela Wagner. We had those forged custody documents, et cetera.
Speaker 1: So various pieces of evidence that you have collected. Can
Speaker 1: you tell us then, did this signify a change or
Speaker 1: a shift in the investigation? Yes, it did. Scheider's calm
Speaker 1: demeanor reflects his years of experience with the Ohio Bureau
Speaker 1: of Criminal Investigation. On the stand, he has serious and
Speaker 1: matter of fact. So at this point they're suspects. The
Speaker 1: Wagners now have become suspects and these crimes. But this
Speaker 1: point is when you first had both ballistic and other
Speaker 1: physical evidence tying into the correct Before it was suspicion
Speaker 1: and things weren't adding up. Now we have evidence, We
Speaker 1: have physical evidence that says that somebody at that residence
Speaker 1: at two sixty Peterson Road, which the only people that
Speaker 1: lived there were George Wagner, Jake Wagner, and Angela Wagner,
Speaker 1: possessed the firearm that killed five people on Union Hill Road.
Speaker 1: Here again investigative reporter James and Pilcher, that flicked a
Speaker 1: switch from them being people of interest to being suspects.
Speaker 1: That was a pretty teammate, but with the Wagners in
Speaker 1: their sites, investigators had a problem. When you have an
Speaker 1: investigation with multiple suspects, one of the things you want
Speaker 1: to do is get a statement from each one of those. Well,
Speaker 1: the best way to do that is to how we're separated, like,
Speaker 1: you don't want them together when you talk to them
Speaker 1: because they feed off of each other. So one of
Speaker 1: the things we wanted to do is figure out how
Speaker 1: can we get a statement from all four Wagoners at
Speaker 1: the same time where they're away from each other, and
Speaker 1: can you tell us what plan did you come up
Speaker 1: with in order to effectuate that. Our plan was to
Speaker 1: intercept them at the border of Canada and the United
Speaker 1: States when they returned back from Alaska. Scheiderer testified that
Speaker 1: they made preparations with their sister agency in North Dakota
Speaker 1: to intercept and interview the Wagners at that entry point.
Speaker 1: Agents also wanted to listen to the conversations the Wagoners
Speaker 1: were having on their phones and wanted to plant a
Speaker 1: listening device in the Wagner's vehicle. But to do this,
Speaker 1: they needed a special warrant, the intercept warrant, so that
Speaker 1: you can receive the intercept warrant through Ohio. So the
Speaker 1: warrant is good for the county in which the crimes
Speaker 1: are committed. The investigators needed intercept warrants for both Ohio
Speaker 1: and North Dakota since that is where they would be
Speaker 1: installing the listening devices. Here again, Jeff and Joseph Scott Morgan,
Speaker 1: can you explain what an intercept warrant is? First off,
Speaker 1: in order to warrant, you have to be able to
Speaker 1: go to a judge and have them sign off on
Speaker 1: this because you know, we have certain protections, constitutional protections
Speaker 1: that extend out to warrants that involve listening devices. So
Speaker 1: you have to state specifically what you're going to be
Speaker 1: listening to, and just think of it very simply like this.
Speaker 1: It's intercepted communications between parties of interests that are involved
Speaker 1: in a case. It's say, for instance, your suspect and
Speaker 1: they've gotten an intercept warrant for your phone. Well, if
Speaker 1: you're talking to another individuals, that might be a principle
Speaker 1: in the case that gathering of information might be permissible.
Speaker 1: You can't just collect everything randomly. There has to be
Speaker 1: a reason why this data is collected and to make
Speaker 1: it viable for court. We're going to take a break.
Speaker 1: We'll be back in a moment with the intercept warrants
Speaker 1: for North Dakota and Ohio in place. Agents then traveled
Speaker 1: to North Dakota a boarding Air Force plane their plan
Speaker 1: to intercept the Wagners on May twentieth, twenty seventeen. What
Speaker 1: happened when you arrived in North Dakota. We got off
Speaker 1: the plane and then we were alerted by Customs and
Speaker 1: Border Patrol HSI that we were in the wrong state.
Speaker 1: What do you mean by that? As the Wagners had
Speaker 1: exited Alaska to go into Canada, they had to declare
Speaker 1: their boordamentry once they were trying to get back into
Speaker 1: the United States. At the point they declared they were
Speaker 1: coming through sweet Grass, Montana. The agents then boarded another
Speaker 1: plane and headed to Montana. So now your timeline is
Speaker 1: shortened a little bit, and you are now in a
Speaker 1: state that you did not make the corporations with correct. Correct,
Speaker 1: and it's also on a weekend. Correct, Okay, So tell
Speaker 1: me what you did. We scrambled, so kind of panicked
Speaker 1: a little bit. Law enforcements scrambled to redo the applications
Speaker 1: for the intercept warrants this time in Montana. We spent
Speaker 1: most of the night obtaining those warrants because we had
Speaker 1: to write them. They had not been written yet. So
Speaker 1: sometime around five am Sunday morning, Montana time, we were
Speaker 1: alerted that the wagoners were making better time than expected
Speaker 1: and that they would be arriving at sweet Grass sooner
Speaker 1: than we thought. So we had to rush up to
Speaker 1: the border early that morning and await their arrivals. Here again,
Speaker 1: James Pilcher, the Wagoners went to Alaska one way. They
Speaker 1: crossed in North Dakota, so the investigators assumed they would
Speaker 1: come back the same way. Well they didn't. They indicated
Speaker 1: they were going to come back through Montana. So here
Speaker 1: they had flown on an National Air Guard cargo plane
Speaker 1: with all of their stuff, had everything set up at
Speaker 1: the North Dakota border to intercept them, and then they
Speaker 1: found that well they're going to be cross again Montana.
Speaker 1: Twenty four hours that to hop the plane, get on
Speaker 1: the phone with the Montana Attorney General's office, make sure
Speaker 1: they had the permission for the warrants that they needed.
Speaker 1: So they worked around the clock, NonStop, when no sleep,
Speaker 1: and then stop them at the Montana border in this tiny,
Speaker 1: little US Border Patrol facility that didn't have really the
Speaker 1: capability to interview for people separately, but that's what they did.
Speaker 1: At this point, I'm getting the impression that they're not
Speaker 1: just putting George Wagner on trial. They are showing the
Speaker 1: entire Pike Counted community, the entire state, at the entire country,
Speaker 1: what they went through to get here. They left no
Speaker 1: stone unturned, even if they admit during some of this
Speaker 1: they made mistakes. Stephanie and Jeff I thought It was
Speaker 1: so interesting to hear the play by play of how
Speaker 1: authorities had to switch things up from North Dakota to
Speaker 1: the Montana border, and you know, you can kind of
Speaker 1: picture this and see how this is unfolding and how
Speaker 1: hectic it must have really been. And again, they've been
Speaker 1: tracking them for a long time. So the idea that
Speaker 1: they could have missed them and were able to adjust
Speaker 1: and switch their plan up pretty quickly, I thought was powering.
Speaker 1: I was. I was frankly on the edge of my seat.
Speaker 1: And it goes back to behind the scenes, law enforcement
Speaker 1: is working in ways that the public is not aware of.
Speaker 1: They were tracking this family and they were moving in
Speaker 1: real time as the Wagoners were moving to ultimately get
Speaker 1: the goods. With the Montana intercept Warrens in hand, the
Speaker 1: agents intercepted the Wagoners at the border in Montana and
Speaker 1: were they each placed in a separate room and interview
Speaker 1: attempts made with each of them. Yes, the gig was up.
Speaker 1: They knew we were looking at them. More on that
Speaker 1: next time. For Warre information on the case and relevant photos,
Speaker 1: follow us on Instagram at Katie Underscore Studios. The Pike
Speaker 1: and Maskers produced by Stephanie Lidecker, Jeff Shane, Chris Cacaro,
Speaker 1: Andrew Arnow, Gabriel Castillo and me Courtney Armstrong. Editing and
Speaker 1: sound designed by Jeff Tis, Music by Jared Aston. The
Speaker 1: piked in Masacre is a production of iHeartRadio and Kati Studios.
Speaker 1: For more podcasts from I heart Radio, visit the i
Speaker 1: heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to
Speaker 1: your favorite shows.