News
An appeals court hears arguments on whether to grant a new trial in the Pike County murders case
By: David Forster
Posted on:
CHILLICOTHE, Ohio (WOUB) — A lawyer representing a man convicted in the execution-style murders of a Pike County family argued in court Thursday that his client deserves a new trial.
The two brothers and their parents were charged with the 2016 shooting deaths of seven members of the Rhoden family and the fiancee of one of the victims.
Prosecutors struck a deal with Jake under which he and his family would not face the death penalty if he testified against the others.
George did face the death penalty at his trial three years ago, but this was dropped at the end after Jake testified as promised. George is now serving life in prison.
Grube argued Jake’s plea deal was coercive and unfair because prosecutors never had any intention of actually holding the death penalty against his brother.
Grube said the deal pressured Jake to make sure he gave testimony that would satisfy prosecutors.
“Jake knows he has to give a story that’s going to get George convicted,” Grube told the judges.
Steven Taylor, one of the attorneys representing the state in the appeal, said plea deals like this, in which dropping a charge is conditioned on giving testimony, are common and courts have said they are not inherently coercive.
Grube also questioned a decision by the judge in George’s case to deny a request before trial for access to records about Jake’s mental state.
He argued the judge at least should have reviewed these records in private to see what was in them before rejecting the subpoena by George’s lawyers.
Seth Gilbert, another attorney representing the state, countered that the subpoena was “a blatant fishing expedition.” He said there was no need for the judge to review the records before making a decision because the request did not overcome the strong protection usually afforded to things a client discloses to their attorney.
“The problem,” Grube countered, “is they all look like fishing expeditions until a judge decides whether there are any fish.”
If Jake was experiencing mental health issues, Grube argued, this is something the defense should have known about so it could call experts to the stand during trial and also ask Jake about during his testimony.
“If Jake is losing his mind and making all this up, that is a fair subject for cross-examination,” Grube said.
The 4th District Court of Appeals will issue its decision sometime in the coming weeks.