WAVERLY, Ohio — Two forensic experts walked jurors through their findings Tuesday about the three guns used and the Walmart athletic shoes the killers wore when they fatally shot eight family members of a southern Ohio family in April 2016.
Firearms examiner and ballistics expert Matthew White, who works at Ohio's Bureau of Criminal Investigation, testified that three guns were used in the deaths of Rhoden family members: An SKS rifle that fires 30-caliber rounds, a 40-caliber Glock handgun and a .22-caliber Walther Colt 1911 handgun. All three are semi-automatic weapons, meaning the operator of the gun has to pull the trigger each time to fire a bullet.
The type of guns used to kill the victims are a key piece of physical evidence in the trial of George Wagner IV, 30.
He and his mother, father and younger brother, are each charged with eight counts of aggravated murder, conspiracy and burglary in the deaths of members of the Rhoden family. The Rhodens and Hannah Hazel Gilley were killed in three trailers and one camper at separate locations in one spree that began late April 21 and stretched into the morning of April. Prosecutors have said the motive in the state's largest and most criminal case was custody of a shared toddler.
George Wagner's younger brother, Jake, pleaded guilty in the case and agreed to testify against his family members in the case. He also lead investigators to the guns, which were broken down and buried in concrete in 5-gallon buckets found in a pond on his grandmother's nearly 2,000-acre property.
White's testimony spanned two days as he described the mechanics of guns and ammunition. Christopher Rhoden Sr. was shot with both .30-caliber and .40-caliber rounds in his trailer. Gary Rhoden, his cousin, was killed with .40-caliber rounds. The same .40-caliber gun and bullet were used to kill Kenneth Rhoden, he testified. Kenneth was shot once in the right eye.
White testified that a a.22-caliber Walther Colt 1911 that fired .22 caliber long rifle ammunition was used to kill Frankie Rhoden, 20, and Gilley, 20, who was his fiancee, in one trailer as well as Dana Manley Rhoden, 37, and her daughter, Hanna May Rhoden, 19, and her son, Christopher Rhoden Jr., 16, in another trailer.
Shoe prints in blood and 'ah-ha' moment
Suzanne Elliott, a BCI expert in trace evidence and shoe print and tire impressions, testified Tuesday that she examined shoe print impressions left in blood at the scene in Christopher Rhoden Sr.'s trailer, which prosecutors have dubbed Scene 1.
Elliott said she examined the samples investigators sent her from the crime scene against thousands and thousands of impressions in two different databases of shoe impressions. She didn't get a match. So, she testified, she went shoe shopping.
She went to several footwear stores before, she said, she realized the impressions left at Christopher Rhoden's trailer were from cheap shoes.
“Finally it dawned on me: ‘I got to go to Walmart.’ So I went to Walmart.” Using her knowledge and what she saw of impression, she found an athletic work type shoe that looked like it could match.
She bought the Athletic Works brand black shoes with velcro tabs instead of laces. She said she thinks they cost about $15.
"I'd been looking at shoe designs for days," she testified. "It was an a-ha moment! Here's the shoe!"
She bought several sizes of the same shoes before she was able, through her analysis, to narrow the sizes. She said one impression, left by a left foot, was made with a size 10 1/2 size shoe. The other, also left with a left foot, was from a size 11.
Investigators never found the shoes.
However, Special Prosecutor Angela Canepa has said investigators have video of Angela Wagner, the mom of Jake and George, buying shoes from a Walmart store shortly before the killings. They also found the receipt for the shoes. Canepa said that Angela Wagner, who also pleaded guilty last year, will testify she bought the shoes for her sons to wear the night of the killings and that she later threw them away.
Pike County Common Please Judge Randy Deering adjourned court after the lunch recess Tuesday. He did not give a reason for the early dismissal.
Elliott's testimony is expected to resume Wednesday at 9 a.m.
Questions for students:
As the story states, the judge recessed the trial early. This could be an interesting development and needs further reporting. Who might you ask to determine why the judge recessed early (note: judges generally do not talk to reporters during a trial)? Is there any place you might look for written documentation for his decision?
Forensics is key in criminal trials and reporters are often thrown into hearing about these highly precise sciences without much knowledge but they still have to write a story on deadline. Tell me what you might do, or where you might go, to quickly check facts and develop an understanding of some of the more technical testimony. List two things you might do.
In order to find out why the judge recessed early, I would ask the stenographer if they knew about it at all. The stenographer if usually who you ask if you have questions about the trial, because they know all about it. They also might have written documentation.
You might find more information through whoever is in charge of dealing with the media for this particular case. You could get a lot of this information, including the court documents from the court administration.
I would get in touch with those who are connected with the judge and take care of all the paperwork on their behalf. Those serving as messengers are only carrying out their duties and have no stake in the case. a secretary or stenographer, for instance.
Could you speak to the coroner about some of the technical aspects of the bodies? I'm not sure whether you could do this. You might ask for the records that listed the items found at the crime scenes along with the evidence.
The next person you could ask is the officer that helps the judge leave and enter the room but they most likely wouldn't say anything either. You could ask one of the attorneys because they do the know the schedule of what is going on so they would be able to answer that question. Again, the attorneys might be handed something earlier in the day notting that the judge will call for an early recess but you never know in those situations since every judge is very different in what they do.
Two things I might do to figure out more about forensic sciences is research on the internet about forensic sciences. I also might get an expert opinion. This person doesn't have to be involved in the case. However, they might be able to help me understand the language and science better.