Law&Crime Sidebar - Pike County Massacre Openings Recap, Alex Jones Trial — What to Expect

Episode Date: September 13, 2022

The Law&Crime Network’s Jesse Weber and Angenette Levy recap key moments from day one of the Pike County Massacre Trial. Plus, what can we expect from Alex Jones' next trial? Attorney Matt Tympanick comes on to discuss. PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHOW:Get 10% OFF your first month of online therapy with BetterHelp at https://www.betterhelp.com/sidebar/GUESTS:Matt Tympanick: https://twitter.com/TympanickLawLAW&CRIME SIDEBAR PRODUCTION:YouTube Management - Bobby SzokePodcasting - Sam GoldbergVideo Editing - Logan HarrisGuest Booking - Alyssa FisherSocial Media Management - Kiera BronsonSUBSCRIBE TO OUR OTHER PODCASTS:Court JunkieObjectionsThey Walk Among AmericaCoptales and CocktailsThe Disturbing TruthSpeaking FreelyLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrime/Twitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lawandcrimeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Wonderly Plus subscribers can binge all episodes of this Law and Crimes series ad-free right now. Join Wonderly Plus in the Wondery app Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Agent Nate Russo returns in Oracle 3, Murder at the Grandview, the latest installment of the gripping Audible Original series. When a reunion at an abandoned island hotel turns deadly, Russo must untangle accident from murder. But beware, something sinister lurks in the grand. views shadows. Joshua Jackson delivers a bone-chilling performance in this supernatural thriller that

will keep you on the edge of your seat. Don't let your fears take hold of you as you dive into this addictive series. Love thrillers with a paranormal twist? The entire Oracle trilogy is available on Audible. Listen now on Audible. This was not a crime of passion. This was not in a fit of rage. This was not in self-defense. These murders happened after a period of three months of planning and plotting and purchasing and preparing and executing eight individuals of a family. We recap some of the major moments from day one of the Pike County Massacre trial and I'll be joined by my co-host, Anjanette Levy, who was inside the courtroom.

Plus, what can we expect from Alex Jones' next trial starting this week where we see more incredible moments of the conspiracy theorist on the stand? attorney Matt to panic comes on to discuss. Welcome to Sidebar, presented by Law and Crime. I'm Jesse Weber. It is day one of the Pike County Massacre trial, a truly horrific case out of Ohio. George Wagner, the 4th, stands trial for the murder of eight people, seven members of the Rodin family, Christopher Sr., Kenneth, Gary, Dana Lynn, Clarence, Frankie Rodham, Hannah May, Christopher Jr., and also Frankie's fiancé, Hannah Gilley. The defendant faces 22 counts, including eight counts of aggravated murder.

His father, George Billy Wagner, has also pleaded not guilty, while the defendant's brother Jake and his mother, Angela, have pleaded guilty and are planning to testify against him, all in an effort to get the death penalty taken off the table for the entire family. They just have to testify truthfully in order to do that. And this all stemmed from a custody dispute gone terribly wrong between Hanamey Rodden and Jake Wagner. They were in a relationship at a very young age. They had shared a daughter together.

In fact, as we recap the prosecution's opening statement, listen to this chilling Facebook message that Hannah Mae wrote and had sent only a few months before the murders, before she was killed. And she was communicating with a woman named Tess, who was the mother of Tabitha Wagner, the former wife of the defendant, George Wagner, who had her own extreme difficulties with the Wagners. Take a listen to this. Private Facebook conversation. So, you know, the messenger and I don't know how many of you know Facebook, but you know, you can post stuff on your Facebook and everybody can read it, or you can instant message somebody, you know, message

them privately and nobody else can see that conversation except you and the person you're conversing with, right? But they are talking about the Wagner's and the custody issues that Jake and Hannah Mae are having, and Tess, Tabitha's mother, says to Hannah May, just make sure you don't let them make you sign papers like they did to Tabitha. right? To which Hannah May responds, I won't sign papers ever. They'll have to kill me first. All right. So let's recap some of what happened in court on day one. I'm joined by my co-host here on Sidebar and a reporter and anchor on the Law and Crime Network. And Jeanette Levy. And Jeanette,

good to see you. I feel like I want to talk quiet right now because I understand you are in the courthouse right now. Yeah, I'm in the hallway. And so we have to be very careful. where we are in the courthouse when we talk about these things because it's a small place and you never know a juror could be walking through so we're being very careful now a word from our sponsor better help no matter what you do in life work family relationships activities how we care for our mind affects how we experience all aspects of life so it's important to invest the time and the care into keeping your mind healthy if you think about it you update your phone you get your car tuned up you should really do the same thing for your brain and one of the easiest ways to do that

is Better Help Online Therapy. Life is tough. I don't have to tell you that. And there's really no shame in seeking help. Sometimes speaking to someone can be all the difference. But I get it. People are busy, you know, traveling to a therapist office can be time consuming. It can be inconvenient. Well, Better Help understands that. Better Help is online therapy that offers video, phone, and even live chat-only therapy sessions. You don't even have to be on camera if you don't want to be. And it's actually a lot more affordable than in-person therapy. Our listeners right now get 10% off of their first month at betterhelp.com slash sidebar. That's better, h-e-l-p.com slash sidebar.

Well, we want to make sure Angenet isn't arrested, as she does the sidebar podcast. Let's talk about the prosecution's opening statement, which was very lengthy, longer than we usually see. What stood out to you? Some of the detail that we're learning, there's a lot that we knew through court documents and things like that covering this case since it started more than six years ago. but now we're hearing in the opening statement about things that Jake Wagner told prosecutors they did the night of the homicides. And it's absolutely horrifying to me. Special prosecutor Angie Canepa talked about how Jake Wagner shot Hannah Rodin and then rearranged her body because her newborn baby was crying. And he rearranged the body so the baby could nurse

basically on her dead mother's body. And then that Jake had already shot Dana Roden. And this is all according to what Jake told prosecutors. Dana Roden is Hannah May Roden's mother. He went back and heard her making noises and shot her again because he didn't want her making noises to possibly wake up little Chris, Chris Jr. And then Chris Jr. was shot after that. So we're hearing about some of the horrific details that Jake Wagner told prosecutors about what happened that. night and just about the planning and the ruses that they came up with to lure chris senior out of his home it's really disturbing and it makes you think like what goes on in somebody's head that they could think that any of this would ever be justified question that has been asked the most

over the past six and a half years is why why did four individuals plot to kill eight members of another family and I think you will be disappointed to learn that there is no good reason now I say that there's rarely ever a good reason to kill somebody but you at some point in the middle of this trial or by certainly by the end of this trial it will dawn on you that these murders should have never happened it was the result of a series of misguided decisions by the defendant and his family. You will learn that some of the people they intended to kill, other people were killed simply because they were there. And you will learn that the defendants knew that before they walked out of the door that night to kill these individuals, that there might be other people

there. And they all agree those people would have to be killed too. There's a reason that Jake Wagner such an important witness for the prosecution because he can fill in those missing pieces. I do want to ask you about George Wagner. So the defendant, a lot has been made in these openings about the Wagner's in general. But what have you seen that the prosecution says they have evidence pointing and tying him, him specifically, to these murders? The special prosecutor, Angie Kineppa, has said that he was essentially the getaway driver that night. He was a lookout. And we all know from covering other cases. That's a common example, when you're involved in a case and your prosecution alleges aiding and abetting or

complicity, that it doesn't matter. If you know about it, you're there, you helped. You're going down too. And so that's what they're saying. They're not saying, oh, yeah, he took a gun and killed anybody, alleging that Jake Wagner and Billy Wagner did. But they're saying that he bought the truck. They call this, this prosecution calls it the murder truck. They bought a vehicle just to use that night for one night only to carry out these homicides. They're saying that George drove. that truck. And it sounds like the plan was for George to possibly shoot somebody, but we're not hearing anything that says that he did at this point. We're also hearing that he did wear those shoes, the Walmart gym shoes, that their mother brought to carry out the homicides. There was a size

10 and a half and a size 11. Jake and George both wore those shoes that night, according to Jake. And we're hearing about the wiretaps, too, that that implicate George kind of after the fact. He's upset about Jake being too honest and things of that nature, saying, you're honesty has always gotten us in trouble. And it makes you think, you know, well, maybe you didn't shoot anybody, but you wouldn't say that unless you were part of something. You will hear George telling Jake that he should have gotten rid of the laptop that was confiscated in Montana. He will hear him telling Jake that he should have smashed his phone rather than give it up to BCI. You will hear George telling Jake that his honesty has gotten them into trouble their entire lives, that Jake is too

You will hear George mocking God. Jake is religious, believes in God, and at least during that time, George was very much mocking him for that. George, you will hear George threatening harm to the agents on the case. And you will hear him saying that it is a family emergency when Special Agent Scheider texts a picture of Jake, the 1911, they're several states away from Ohio when they get this information. And upon receiving this, it's a family emergency and they turn the vehicle around and go back.

When they try to call off their bosses say, well, can't the other person continue on? And they said, no, this is a family emergency. It involves both of us. You will hear that sort of stuff. And George scolding his mother and father because, according to him, they've always caved whenever they're charged with a crime instead of standing up for it. And, you know, his opinion is you can't beat the charges unless you stand up to them.

Again, you'll hear Beth Ann talk about, she actually wrote kind of a dear diary letter to her grandfather about who is deceased. so it's more of a journal writing to herself, but she would write things and then throw them away. Well, you can't throw things away at the wagon residence because they'll dig it out of the trash and they'll take a picture of it with a gloved hand

and they'll send it to George, Angela, send it to George, again, just to kind of get the ball rolling on getting rid of Beth Ann. Was there aspects of the opening about the crime scene itself and it was incredibly grisly that you didn't know beforehand or that really stood out to you or you think that the prosecution wanted to emphasize for the jury? I didn't know. You know, I knew that Chris, we all knew Chris Sr.

had been shot eight times or something like that, something to that effect. But the fact that he had wood embedded in his face, I think, from being shot from a distance with the high-powered rifle through the door, you know, I don't think, I don't think I knew that. And I knew about the blood in the house and them being dragged to the back bedroom. But just the specificity, the detail that Jake Wagner gave to the prosecution about going into Dana, Hannah Mae, and Chris's home, and the movements within that home. And the fact that you hear a baby crying, you shoot the baby's mother, somebody who fathered or who was the mother of your child that you fathered. And you rearrange her bodies so the baby can nurse. I mean, it's like you're taking care of the baby, but killing her mother.

It is just confounding to me. I also thought it was really interesting in terms of the custody dispute, right? And there was some paperwork as well that kind of ties the wagons to it as well at what they were preparing. Exactly. And it's interesting because these documents were purported to be signed by Hannah Mayrodden back. I think they said Christmas Eve of 2014, but they weren't printed until 19 days before the murders in April of 2016. And it talks about these documents talk about should any of them? them die. And that means Hannah Mae, should Jake or George possibly die in this whole operation,

that the custody of all of those children don't go to the mothers of those children, or I should say the two children, Sophia and Bullvine. Bullvine is the son of George and Tabby. These children go to Angela Wagner. They don't go to their mothers. It shows you this, that kind of, I think, goes to the whole theory, but the prosecution is put out there that they operate as one unit, that they do everything together. And basically, it's like Angela Wagner is the mama in charge. Angela Wagner is to be the mother and no one else, the mother of her grandchildren. And Janette, I know we have to let you go back into court.

I do want to ask you real quick, what is it like being there for day one? Well, it's very sad because I look over at the other side of the courtroom. And Geneva Rodin, who is Chris Sr. and Kenneth's mother, the grandmother of Hannah Mae, Frankie and Chris Jr. I see her, she's an older woman. She's holding a tissue to her face and just watching her try to hold it together and hold in what has to be just years of grief and pain as she's listening to these grisly details about how her whole family was mowed down in one night. That has really struck me. She's obviously had time to prepare herself, but as a mother, I don't know how you ever prepare yourself for such a thing. That's a good question. I really

don't have the answer to that. It is a really difficult case. It is day one. We will see what unfolds at with this trial. Annette Levy, thanks so much for taking the time to break down what you've observed and what you've seen. Thanks, Ingenet. Thanks for having me, Jesse. John Jemaiah Gamble comes from CPS, who has been exposed for human trafficking and working with pedophiles. That's what you mean when you say you're taking this seriously. I take this as serious as cancer. And I mean, I don't know. You should have somebody else's clip that they're always a few seconds long, why don't you play the whole thing? Mr. Jones, that's not someone else's clip, is it?

Well, I didn't director or producer, what I'm saying. He certainly published it. Alex Jones is headed back to trial. The Infowars host and conspiracy theorist is facing another defamation trial, this time out in Connecticut. And as you might recall, we covered Jones's Texas trial this summer when he was sued by the parents of six-year-old Jesse Lewis, who tragically died in the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting.

and the parents sued him and he's facing this upcoming Connecticut lawsuit because of his comments that Sandy Hook was a hoax, that there were crisis actors, that this wasn't real. And the parents in the Texas trial testified about the pain and the harm that these statements had caused them. And the jury not only sided with the plaintiff so much, they sided with them so much that they awarded them almost $50 million in damages. And there's still an outstanding question of how much you'll actually have to end up paying out. But now we find ourselves in Waterbury, Connecticut. And the plaintiffs in this case are eight Sandy Hook families as well as an FBI agent. And a jury of six will have the same task as the Texas jury, not to determine if

Jones is liable for defamation, but purely how much he owes. That's because Jones already lost this case by a default judgment. Same thing happened in Texas. That's what happens when you refuse to comply with discovery obligations in a litigation. You don't participate. You don't comply with court orders, the court will say you automatically lose. So again, that's what happened here. And it's just a question of how much he has to pay in damages. So I'm joined right now by Matt to Panic, a former felony prosecutor and experienced civil trial attorney who've been following the Alex Jones saga with me on the Long Crime Network. Matt, good to see you and welcome back to Cybar. Thank you, Jesse, for having me on. So I guess the question is, how do you think this trial is going to be

different from what we saw out in Texas? Well, for one thing, there is not going to be the punitive damage cap that you saw in Texas. Remember, there was a approximately several million dollar judgment followed by a, I think, $46 million punitive award that eventually might be reduced on appeal. That's not the case here in Connecticut. For that trial, there is no punitive damage cap. Additionally, part of this case is there's more than one plaintiff in this case, as there wasn't in the Texas case where you had one victim's family against Alex Jones. You have numerous plaintiffs against Alex Jones, all of which could receive a judgment against Alex Jones. And the one award Alex Jones receives in Texas might be exemplified in this

case because he has eight potential plaintiffs who could get a judgment against him, a monetary and a significant one at that. I, you know, I'm going to ask you the, I would say the $50 million question, but I don't know what the damage award could be in this case. I'm just going to play you something right now. This is Alex Jones outside of the courthouse in Texas during one of the breaks in court. Let's watch this for a second. Aren't you smart? I'm very smart. And we also... This is the incredible decepts we're dealing with. I'm going to tell again, you're having all of your rights robbed. This is a kangaroo court. This is a show trial. This is a constitution destroying absolute total and complete travest. My question is, are we going to

more of this in Connecticut. It was easy for him in Texas to get to the trial, right? He lives there, he works there. He could go in and out of the courtroom. I'm curious if he's actually going to have to be in Connecticut, if he's going to be required to be there, but whether or not he would actually go and stand outside of the courthouse and say this too is a kangaroo court, whether or not he will testify and take the stand. What do you think? As we saw in the Texas case, anything goes with Alex Jones, including his own attorneys turning over privileged information to the other side. have no idea. But what I can tell you is this, Alex Jones would be smart not to actually go and show up every day, maybe just appear virtually if he were to testify on his own behalf. The thinking

being is, as we found out in the Texas case, the amount of money info wars makes a day. He might be incentivized almost to show up and spout more of the allegations he was making about the Sandy Hook, the judicial proceedings, because he's somehow profiting off it. Is it a a smart legal decision? Absolutely not. Would I recommend it? No. Is that going to potentially stop Alex Jones from actually listening to his attorney? Hopefully after getting hit with what, $50 million judgment in Texas, he might have learned his lesson. It might be best to say as little as possible, take his attorneys as advice and say as little as possible to as few people as possible. Clearly you don't like entertainment. Clearly you don't think it was highly entertaining.

Look, I mean, this is a really, really sad subject matter. Let's not. that's be very clear. But to have Alex Jones there who's so unpredictable, right, you just don't know what's going to happen with him. I have a feeling, first of all, I don't even think his attorneys can control him. I believe that he's going to maybe look at some, and this is, I guess, is a larger question, is are he and his defense attorney's going to look at what happened in Texas and say, we have to adjust our strategy? And we know that Alex Jones can't come out and say that he's innocent. He lost that right, but it's the default judgment. But do you recommend a different strategy? Do you think that he and his attorneys will go forward with a different strategy?

I think what the biggest thing is is going to be in trial preparation. He's going to take the stand, I think, one way or another. I think they need to better prepare him than his Texas attorneys did. The thinking being is he took the stand and he turned it into a conspiracy. And once you do that on the stand, the jury's like, okay, I'm missing work for this. Some of them aren't even being paid. The lucky ones, their job pays for it. So I'm missing work to hear your case and you're spouting.

off alternate alt-right theories about whatever comes to your mind about nothing without any fact. And that's why you're here. You said the Sandy Hook situation was to get more gun control for the government, that it was fabricated, the whole story. If I'm his attorney in the Connecticut case, I'm like, I'm going to be like, we're not going to do that for this case. We're going to actually take it seriously. Like, you're already screwed up if it were not contesting the case and allowing a default judgment against you. What you need to do now is, actually look like you're taking the process serious and that you were actually sorry to save yourself from potentially paying out $50 million again times eight. And remember, this is Connecticut.

This is not Texas. There is no cap on punitive damages like there is in Texas, which I'm sure Alex Jones's attorneys are going to be looking to get the judgment in the Texas case reduced to the statutory cap on punitive damages. And I interviewed Mark Bankston, who was representing the plaintiffs in the Texas trial and said he thinks he has strong arguments that would say there is no cap, but the cap shouldn't apply in the Texas case. But you talked about as attorneys here in Connecticut, we know that unlike in Texas, he's going to be represented by Norm Patis, who is a, I'd say, a very controversial lawyer, very colorful lawyer. This is somebody who actually got into a little bit of trouble about, you know, potentially releasing information on the plaintiffs and disclosing

their private medical information when he shouldn't, became a question of how he had the and why he disclosed it. Norm Pattis representing Alex Jones. What do you predict there? I think we could be, based on what you're saying and what I know of Norman Pattis, we could be looking for a situation, looking at a situation, much like the Texas one, unfortunately, if not, even exacerbated. To me, I think this is going to, I hope it for argument, Satan, for the victim's sake,

that it's like we do a judicial process and we go through the, do everything. But a part of me thinks, I think we're just going to have the same thing in Texas, but in Connecticut this time with a lot more alleged victims and a lot more potential speeches of Alex Jones and about the deep state and how this is a conspiracy, how this is a kangaroo court. I, as an attorney, I'm always trying to get my client to tell the truth and to take the process serious. But I think I'd have, even I would have an accept, and I'm pretty good at it. I'd have an exceptionally difficult time getting Alex Jones to do that.

But do you think he's going to make fun of the courtroom? You think he's going to make fun of the judge, make fun of the attorneys, make fun of the plaintiffs in the case, the jury, similar to what he did in Texas? A part of me thinks that he should have learned his lesson that did him no favors, considering he got hit with a $50 million judgment. But at the same time, if he really doesn't take the process seriously, considering he had a default judgment against him, which means that you literally refuse to participate in the process and the judge, like, all right, you

automatically lose because of it. I have a feeling that he's going to turn it into a circus and he's going to turn it into content that he can potentially sell and profit off of. Well, let me ask you this, the bankruptcy question, right? The way that I understood it was this bankruptcy court said this trial can move forward. There's a question of him putting his companies into bankruptcy and shielding them from liability, but he hasn't declared bankruptcy personally. And doesn't it become a question that, you know, how much he can personally pay out? I know there could be experts like we heard in Texas that he himself is worth hundreds of millions of dollars, but he's going to deny that. Is it possible that this trial could bankrupt him personally?

It depends. It all depends on what the monetary judgment is. I think that trying to put his companies into bankruptcy, like you said, he is trying to shield them. but I felt like when I think I said this on the program when he did it on long crime that you can't just be like I declare bankruptcy like you're Michael Scott Scott and it's like effective in court for me it's I think that he's he's not going to be able to get around that personally and I think that if they are able to pierce the corporate shield a corporate bail if it were he might he might be able to pay out personally especially if this case ends up being a couple hundred million dollar award which would not be out of the question given the allegations what the Texas jury has already done and this sure number of plaintiffs there are in this case and I'll just add one final thing about this this is in Connecticut this is where the shooting happened I think it's going to be have some sort of impact on the people the family members the victims family members to have this trial

right there Matt I'll give you a quick final word on that I think yeah this is the difference was with the Sandy Hook case, it was one victim in Texas. Now you're going to the place that 10 years later, it still rings true the pain that those victims' families have felt. That community will never be the same. And you see somebody who's spouting off literal lies, if it were, and he knows them to be lies. And now he comes in, he's got a choice. Alex Jones has got a choice. He can show up and try to salvage what is left of the default judgment, save himself money or he can go in and do the same thing he did in Texas and likely get hit with a nine figure award. Well, we'll watch it unfold together. Matt's a panic. Thanks so much for coming on

to Sidebar. Really appreciate you taking the time. Thank you. And everyone out there, thanks for joining us here on Sidebar. Please subscribe on Apple Podcast, Spotify, YouTube, wherever you get your podcast, we very much appreciate it. I'm Jesse Weber. We'll speak to you next time. You can binge all episodes of this law and crime series ad free right now on Wondery Plus. Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify.