Return to Transcripts main page

CRIME AND JUSTICE WITH ASHLEIGH BANFIELD

Mystery Deepens, Cops Close To Finding Teacher`s Killer; Defiant Driver Attacked By Police K-9. Aired 6-8p ET

Aired May 22, 2018 - 18:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


[18:00:00]

ASHLEIGH BANFIELD, HOST, HLN CRIME AND JUSTICE: Good evening, everyone, I`m Ashleigh Banfield. Welcome to "Crime and Justice." Tonight he had

homemade license plates and he refused to obey the police. Even after repeated warnings that the canine officer was about to be unleashed.

Justin Freiman is covering the story. Justin, was it an absolutely terrifying and bloody arrest, but he insists, he is not guilty of any

crime? How is that possible?

JUSTIN FREIMAN, SR. PRODUCER, HLN CNN: That is right. You know, he didn`t give his license, he didn`t given his name, he doesn`t have actual plates

on the car, and yet he says he was acting lawfully. Why? You can ask him when he joins you in a few minutes.

BANFIELD: I look forward to that, because that doesn`t look so lawful to me.

Also tonight, the list of people linked to a teacher who was mysteriously shot dead on her driveway is growing a lot longer tonight. Bernice Man is

on top of this story. How many people, Bernice, had a strange connection to that victim, Rachel DelTondo?

BERNICE MAN, CRIME AND JUSTICE PRODUCER: Ashleigh, there are a lot of people connected in a lot of different ways. The brothers of the guy, she

was dating the brothers of the guy that she was with the night she died, the parents of the girl she was also with the night she died, they`re all

connected. And there`s also a connection to the police. She is already a familiar face with them. We`ll walk you through all of it.

BANFIELD: All right. Well, try to keep all straight and pretty unbelievable. May have to have a check list, because that is a lot of

people in one particular investigation. Thank you for that, Bernice.

Also later, she was looking after a bed-ridden old woman, but the Oklahoma caregiver was doing strip teases on the side for that old woman`s husband.

We are going to tell you about the perks that she was raking in and why she ended up with that, because that my friend is what you call a mugshot.

Speaking of mugshots, why the people who made a living off other people`s worst moments are suddenly finding themselves with a few of their own worst

moments. Yes, those people. They had the whole mugshot.com thing. What do you suppose is happening to them now? We will let you know all about

that in a moment.

First though, I want to get you to a quiet street in Ohio, where a man was mauled by a dog. Now that would not make the national news, but this was

not just any dog. This was not just any man either. 45-year-old Ronald Wagner got a Belgian Malinois to the arm, after he was pulled over in

Canton, because that Belgian Malinois was a K9 officer.

And that Ronald Wagner was allegedly breaking the law. He`d been driving with homemade license plates, and he refused to give officers I.D. when

they asked him over and over again. He also refused to get out of that car over and over again. Leaving a whole crew of police officers to spell out

what they were going to have to do to him if he continued to resist. And both he and the officers were rolling tape when this happened.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RONALD WAGNER, SUSPECT: I`m driving in my private capacity, trooper.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Now we`re just going to wait.

WAGNER: Well, that is fine.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If you don`t want to do what I ask you to do --

WAGNER: I just don`t consent. I`m driving in my private capacity. That is all I`m doing, trooper.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is my first official pullover, and I know that I have the right to travel unimpeded by government enforcements when they try

to enforce statutes on me.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Can we get your name?

WAGNER: I will give you my name. My name`s Ron. That is my first name. I won`t give you my last name tough, because you`ll use it against me.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, how can I use it against you?

WAGNER: Because I plead the fifth on that. I don`t consent and I plead the Fifth. There`s a difference between legal and lawful. I know my

rights. I`m just trying to get to where I`m going and wish to be on my way officer. I`m not bothering nobody. I`m a lawful man.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you live in the city?

WAGNER: I don`t answer questions, officer.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Are you from this state?

WAGNER: I`m not going to answer no questions, officer.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I`m going to ask you to get out of the car.

WAGNER: I refuse to abandon my property. I refuse to abandon my property. I`m refusing to abandon my property.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK, I`m ordering you to get out of the car or else you`ll be placed under arrest.

WAGNER: What lawful reason are you articulating, I got a crime to arrest me for officer? You`ve got no reason to arrest me. I`ve not done nothing

unlawful. I`m traveling in my private capacity.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is what`s going to happen. As much as I`m a man and I`m standing here alive today, this is what`s going to happen. We`re

going to break that window. At which time that window`s broke, I`m going to send this hundred pound Belgian Malinois in there, he is going to

apprehend you. At which time, I`m going to drag him and you out on the ground. If you continue to resist, there will be compliance put on you and

you will no longer (inaudible).

WAGNER: You`re saying you are going to sick on a dog on a lawful man who is being peaceful?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: 100 percent. This is your final -- he is ready. I`m telling you, as we speak.

[18:05:05] WAGNER: I`ve done nothing unlawful, officer.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You are going to get bit by this canine if you do not act accordingly.

WAGNER: I`m acting lawfully.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Are you willing to open this door?

WAGNER: I do not consent. I`m willing to do anything except be on my way.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK. Open the door or we are breaking it and come on before you.

WAGNER: I`m going to exercise my fourth amendment right to not be intruded upon, unlawful seizures. Look at this, guys. This shit`s is real.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think we`re better off breaking it. Getting him out of the car. If he wants to fight, we will back off, get the dog.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is your final chance, sir.

WAGNER: I do not consent to any unlawful searches and seizures.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Stop him!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I got him.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Stay there.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Stop fighting the dog.

WAGNER: I`m not!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Roll over on your side! Roll over! Roll over! Give us your hands!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Take his right hand. All right. Put that cuff.

WAGNER: Oh my god, ow!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Extend that arm all the way out.

WAGNER: Ow, ow, ow! That hurts, guys. My arm`s hurting guys, please. I`ve been lawful.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Release his hands. Release your hand.

WAGNER: I`ve been lawful.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: If you`re thinking that has got to hurt, it must have, because Ronald showed up for court yesterday with a left arm covered in bandages

and swollen sausage fingers. He is now facing four charges, everything from his license plates to the lack of a driver`s license, to obstructing

official business and resisting arrest. But he just pleaded not guilty to all of it. Though he is not nearly as defenseless as the day he was

arrested.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WAGNER: That I`m on medication where I wouldn`t want to commit to an answer.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think at this point he is agreed that until we get all of the information, he is going to get on with his life, start healing,

get on, rest up and start getting better.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: Joining me now, Ronald Wagner, the man that you just saw attacked by that canine Malinois and his attorney is with him, Derek Lowry,

former police officer, Brandon Tatum is here, and defense attorney, Troy Slaten is also here. Ronald, let me begin with you. I think, first and

foremost, I need to know if you`re on medication tonight or if you`re OK to speak freely.

WAGNER: I`m definitely on a little bit of medication this evening. I will be for a length of time.

BANFIELD: But you feel clear-headed enough to do this interview?

WAGNER: At the moment, yes, I do. And I`m trusting in my representation.

BANFIELD: OK. I think first and foremost, how are you doing? How is your arm and how are you feeling?

WAGNER: My spirits are good. I`m doing OK. My arm is hurting and still sore. I will have to go through numerous treatments and physical therapy.

I don`t know the exact extent of everything right now. I do have an appointment this Thursday and Dr. Seth will fill me in with more details.

BANFIELD: You`ve had two surgeries already, right?

WAGNER: Yes.

BANFIELD: And what happened? Can you tell me about the extent of the injuries? Like, what kind of injuries did you sustain from this?

WAGNER: Definitely internal muscle damage. I believe ligaments and tendons were damaged. And I definitely have a bunch of dog-bite wounds and

puncture wounds up and down my arm.

BANFIELD: Stitches from that?

WAGNER: Pardon?

BANFIELD: Any stitches from the puncture wounds?

WAGNER: Oh, yes, definitely.

BANFIELD: Anything permanent you think at this point or do you know?

WAGNER: As of right now, I know I have nerve damage.

BANFIELD: OK. So, you know, the biggest question I would have for you, Ronald, why on earth did you not just give them your driver`s license and

give them your name like the rest of us do when we`re driving on public roads?

DEREK LOWRY, ATTORNEY FOR RONALD WAGNER: Well, Ashleigh, if I could step in here.

BANFIELD: No, Derek, I do want to hear from you, but first I want to hear from your client, because that is a simple question.

WAGNER: I believe that I was protected by the Fifth Amendment against illegal searches and seizures. That is why I didn`t get out of my

property.

BANFIELD: Are you a constitutionalist?

WAGNER: No, I`m not a constitutionalist.

BANFIELD: OK. So why did you think that you were protected from the fifth amendment -- fourth amendment actually, is search and seizure, fifth

amendment is the right to remain silent. But why would you think that the fourth amendment would apply to you when you were not being asked to have

your car searched?

[18:10:05] And you were not being asked to give over anything permanently in a seizure. You were asked for your identification, which is something

the police can do when you`re driving on a public road.

LOWRY: Well, and I am going to step in here in that there`s a pending litigation. He is facing criminal charges at this time. And the crux of

that case and part does rely upon some of those answers. And until we have all of the information, I`ve advised him not to answer specifics with

respect to those constitutional issues.

BANFIELD: OK. This could be a difficult interview then. Because I think everybody wants to know, my god, I mean, just do what everybody else does

and hand your license over. Speaking of license, why did you have a homemade plate on the back of the car and a sign saying yet "not for hire,

non-com"? Non-commercial, why did you have that on the car?

WAGNER: Because I was not driving in a commercial capacity. I was driving in a private capacity. So I put that on the back of my automobile as a

courtesy to law enforcement.

BANFIELD: OK. So that the homemade license plate you drew up had UCC 1- 308. I wouldn`t have known that from Adam. And I guess actually the police didn`t know anything about the significance of those characters

either until they tried to plug it in and came up with somebody else`s name. But in fact, we looked it up, that is kind of a signal. Those

digits, UCC 1-308 are actually commonly used as a protest of a process, of some kind of a legal process. Did you mean that license plate to be a

protest of a legal process?

WAGNER: No. For one, there was no actual --

BANFIELD: How did you pick those numbers?

WAGNER: Those numbers to me mean I reserve all my rights. That is why I put it on the automobile. As a courtesy to law enforcement.

BANFIELD: You know the difference between your rights and also when you`re on a public street and the privilege of driving, you have to abide by

certain regulations, right? You know the difference between your rights and also just general regulations?

WAGNER: Yes.

BANFIELD: OK. Do you know that you were actually not allowed to put UCC 1-308 on the back of your car?

WAGNER: I do not believe that I know that or commit -- can commit to that answer at all.

BANFIELD: OK. So do you regret not agreeing -- not at least, you know, submitting to the simple request of the police for your license and your

registration the way we -- I mean, we see it on live P.D. every day? You just have to do it. Do you regret not doing it?

WAGNER: No, I do not.

BANFIELD: You would do this again?

LOWRY: I`m going to advise him, again based upon the pending criminal litigation not to answer that question.

BANFIELD: I think that is probably a very smart idea, Derek.

LOWRY: Thank you.

BANFIELD: Brandon Tatum, let me just -- don`t go anywhere, guys. I still have questions for you, Brandon Tatum, I want you to come in here if you

can, as a police officer, I know you come across people all the time who say, I know my rights, but how often does that work out well for them?

BRANDON TATUM, FORMER POLICE OFFICER: Well, I`ve never seen a successful case go forward with a person making these accusations. There`s no case

law or no law that I`m aware of where a federal state that gives somebody some immunity to laws that most citizens have to abide by. I think it`s

very simple. Don`t be selfish, and educate yourself. It is selfish for you to think that you`re absolved of any kind of ramifications when

everybody else have to spend all that money for the registration and have to get the driver`s license. And we have to abide by the laws of the

roadway.

BANFIELD: Well, hopefully we`re a big world community, right. And if you`re going to drive on the public streets that are paid for by public

taxpayer money, and the policed by publicly paid police, you got to be part of the public plan. If you want to drive around on your 50-acre farm, you

can do that. That is your private right. You might not need to have your vehicle licensed for your private drive. But if you`re going to be on the

public drive, you do have to be. Real quick question Brandon, was that excessive force, seeking the dog on him to get him out of the car?

TATUM: No. I think it was reasonable. You have to use a reasonable amount of force in this series of excluded risk. If a person is resisting,

then they have to arrest them that way. I think the K-9 was a deterrent verbally. And if the person denied the deterrent, then once they seek the

K-9 or commanded the K-9 to detain him, then that is what the K-9 did. I`m not surprised that it hurt and I am not surprise there are surgeries

involved in this. Because that is what happens when a Malinois bites you.

BANFIELD: I don`t want a Malinois on me. That is for sure. Real quickly, Troy Slaten, -- sorry -- go ahead Brandon, real quick.

TATUM: No, I`m saying, I definitely don`t want one on me, because I`ve been through training with Malinois and that is exactly what they`re used

to do, to detain people.

[18:15:03] BANFIELD: That is what they do. Troy Slaten, help me navigate this from a legal perspective. Put a pin in it. What do I have to do at a

traffic stop? What do I not have to do at a traffic stop, Troy?

TROY SLATEN, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, under Ohio law, just like the law in most of the 50 states, if a police officer is conducting a traffic

enforcement stop, that means he had reasonable suspicion to pull you over for a violation of something in this case, not having proper tags on the

vehicle, then you`re required to give your license, registration, and proof of insurance.

You got to tell who you are. You have to identify yourself. And if you don`t, if you choose not to, then the police can take you into custody for

what would otherwise be a cite and release. They can take you into custody for the purposes of determining who you are. And in this case. When he

refused that, then he committed some other crimes, like interference with a police officer in the performance of his duties. So -- then resisting

arrest.

So it just kind of snowballed for him here, and although the police could have used some other tactics like maybe taser or some other less violent

means of apprehending him, the police officers are also concerned for their safety. They don`t know who this person is. A traffic stop is the most

dangerous thing for a police officer.

BANFIELD: True. You are right.

SLATEN: They don`t know who he is, and what he has in the car, if he has a gun under his seat. And everybody wants to go home safely.

BANFIELD: And in this instance, Ronald Wagner, you do not go home safely. And many people watching us will say it`s your own damn fault. Other

people will say that look excessive to me. Are you going to sue Mr. Wagner? Is that your plan in the future, once you deal with this all

criminal part?

LOWRY: Right now, we`re handling the criminal matter and when that matter is resolved, he will explore the rest of his avenues.

BANFIELD: Derek, I appreciate the law and the lawyerly answer, but Ronald, do you feel like you`re owed something?

LOWRY: And again, while I appreciate your right to ask the questions. I`ve met with Ronald and Ronald has retained me to answer some of these

questions on his behalf.

BANFIELD: How about this, Ronald, are you mad?

WAGNER: No, I`m not mad.

BANFIELD: What are you? What`s you`re feeling about all this?

WAGNER: Shock. Never in my wildest dreams did I thought that scenario was going to unfold like that.

BANFIELD: Oh, I saw it coming. I got to be honest watching that tape, I saw it a million miles away. But, I will be interested to see how this

plays out. Maybe you come back and join us once you deal with the litigation and all of this?

WAGNER: That would be possible. Ashleigh, would I have a moment to ask a brief question?

BANFIELD: Well, we`re out of time on this segment. Will you come back and ask the next time?

WAGNER: Yes.

BANFIELD: OK. I appreciate both of you coming on, I do wish you a speedy recovery, Mr. Wagner and I do wish those officers well in their job, it is

dangerous every day when they are out there. They don`t know who is behind the wheel of that car. Thank you to all my guests. Derek Lowry, also

Brandon Tatum. Troy Slaten is going to stay with me and Ronald Wagner.

When Pennsylvania teacher Rachel DelTondo was gunned down outside of her home, it left a small Pennsylvania town in utter shock. It was mother`s

day. She was riddled with bullets. Now we`re learning a little bit more about who she was involved with and where she was the night she died, and

where those people that she knows that are connected to her were the night she died. And it is getting very strange.

[18:20:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: Tonight a beautiful, young schoolteacher is gone, and the police are on the hunt for the person who killed her. 33-year-old Rachel DelTondo

wasn`t just found dead. Rachel was riddled with bullets, and was found bleeding out on her mother`s driveway on mother`s day. And still no

official suspects have been named. But tonight the list of people who were linked to Rachel is growing longer. And the last name that has just been

added to that list is Stephanie Watkins.

It`s going to take a second to explain Stephanie Watkins` connection, but I`m going to get to that. Just remember the name Stephanie Watkins. On

the last night of Rachel`s life, Rachel had been out getting ice cream with two people. A young man named Terry Jeter, and an unnamed female friend.

While we`re not naming that female minor, we do know her last name is Watkins, because she is the daughter of a local police officer, Sergeant

Kenneth Watkins up on the right, and her mom is, you guessed it, Stephanie Watkins, that one I had to explain.

So right now, Kenneth`s co-workers, the police officer, they`re starting to get to know Sergeant Watkins` wife a little better, Stephanie. Because

they just executed a search warrant on Stephanie`s Facebook posts from the week that Rachel was shot. And whether or not she has anything, any

connection at all to Rachel`s killing, the search warrant is welcome news to a few other people that the police are investigating, like one of

Rachel`s many lovers.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

[18:25:10] MICHAEL SANTICOLA, SHELDON JETER JR.`S ATTORNEY: I certainly hope this woman was not involved in any way in this murder, but at least at

some level, we`re starting to look at other possible avenues to figure out what happened in the case. As we`ve been saying since day one, Mr. Jeter

was not involved, but somebody was.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: Mr. Jeter was not involved, but somebody was. So couple of Jeter`s involved here. Just in terms of players who come into the story,

Mr. Jeter was that 17-year-old who was found in a steamy car with this murder victim two years ago. And Mr. Jeter`s older brother Rashon Jeter,

was dating Rachel. So was the younger Jeter. And there`s a third Jeter who was out for ice cream with her that night, with that minor, whose

parents are also involved now. It`s all very complicated.

Joining me now, is John Paul, who is the founder and reporter at Beaver Countian Publication. Michael Santicola, is an attorney for a friend of

DelTondo, happens to be Sheldon Jeter, that 17 year-old`s attorney. And also want to introduce Nishay Kimbro, a friend of the victim who is joining

us on the telephone and Defense Attorney Troy Slaten is still with me. John Paul, I would like to begin with you, if I can, because this

complicated story has just gotten a little more complicated in that that -- that minor, and I`m going to put up that flow chart again. Just so our

audience can sort of figure out who`s who in all of this. That minor female friend in the bottom middle was out for ice cream with Rachel and

was out for ice cream with one of the three brothers Tyrie. And her cell phone records have now apparently been requested by the police. Do you

know anything about that?

JOHN PAUL, FOUNDER AND REPORTER, THE BEAVER COUNTIAN: From what I gather from talking to my law enforcement sources, it seems that this is part of a

large effort to -- what investigators are calling, tie up loose ends is what my law enforcement sources are referring to it as.

Seems like there`s several people who have had search warrants executed related to their social media posts, other than Stephanie Watkins. And it

seems like they`re looking into the cell phones of multiple individuals as well. So we kind a heard this over the weekend, that law enforcement was

gonna take some time to go down these other avenues and make sure that everything`s been investigated fully and to the best of their abilities is

what they`re describing.

BANFIELD: So, again with the chart, the female friend in the middle, I might as well have said, instead of female friend on the chart, I might as

well say Sergeant Watkins and Stephanie Watkins` daughter who happened to be getting ice cream with Rachel and Tyrie and four minutes after they left

her on the driveway, she is gunned down in a hail of bullets.

Can I just go over some timeline issues with you John Paul, you tell me where, you know we may be wrong and where there may be some discrepancy or

some issues that as of interest to the police.

Let`s start with 9:30 p.m. that night of the ice cream. So the police officer`s daughter, as well as Rachel, and that third Jeter brother, they

go to a place called Hank`s Frozen Custard. These are the things in yellow that this daughter told the police. We don`t have a fact to go with it,

but she told them this. At 10:41 p.m., we do know there`s a text from that minor daughter to Rachel, saying, go for a walk and I`ll come pick it you

up after. Three minutes later, Rachel is texting right back to her, you serious? Ha-ha.

At the same time, this minor daughter of the cop, was riding along for ice cream, 17 years old, says that she dropped off Rachel and then after that,

dropped off Tyrie, and then after that, mom told her to come home. And four minutes after that, the shots are fired. That is when the police are

dispatched.

Four and a half. At 10:48 p.m., the police -- excuse me. 10:56 p.m., that young daughter again texts to Rachel, be there soon. 11:03, she texts to

Rachel, on my way. At 11:07 tried calling Rachel. Clearly Rachel is dead and is not answering.

John Paul, the things that this young minor daughter of the police officer told the police about the timeline are strange. That is a lot to happen

all at 10:44 p.m. And if we`re to believe what she says, they`re all in the car together while they`re texting each other, is that correct?

PAUL: I`m not sure what police believe as far as those time lines go currently. But what I can tell you is, my understanding from my law

enforcement sources is, they shared some of that same confusion. And my understanding is they reached out to this minor, who my publication has not

identified, to talk with her further and get some additional clarification. I know they were also conducting interviews of some other people to get

some clarification on that timeline as well.

ASHLEIGH BANFIELD, CRIME AND JUSTICE SHOW HOST, HLN: It does seem odd that daughter and her cell phone records being looked into, was dovetailing off

of her mom`s Facebook records being investigated as well. And so John Paul, I guess the question I have -- let`s put the chart back up, so people know

what I`m talking about. The 17-year-old who`s out for ice cream, who says, mom told me to come home. Four minutes later, Rachael is dead.

Are they trying to figure out if Stephanie, the mom, and the young female friend, the 17-year-old minor in the car, if they`re social media and their

messaging all matches up? And by the way, while we`re at it, Sergeant Kenneth Watkins has been sent off on paid leave. I`m going to ask you a

little more about that in a minute. But are they trying to figure out if mom and daughter`s stories are the same by their messaging?

PAUL (via telephone): I don`t believe that they are looking specifically to the messaging for timeline based on the law enforcement sources that I

talked to. I think they are more trying to get a better understanding of the dynamics between all these different people that are involved.

BANFIELD: OK. And then just to be clear, Sergeant Kenneth Watkins, he has a connection to Rachael DelTondo as well. And as we understand it, not only

did he show up at the murder scene that night, even though he wasn`t called on duty to go there, he showed up there off duty.

He also happened to be the same officer from two years ago who busted her in the steamy car with the 17-year-old who now we know was having a

relationship for a long time, since at least 16 years old with Rachael, even though she was engaged to be married and had a $10,000 wedding dress

planned. Sergeant Kenneth Watkins is that same officer, correct?

PAUL (via telephone): That is the same officer as of that night. He along with a second officer, he would have been the commanding officer on scene,

approached the vehicle. He would have been the one who reportedly gave Sheldon Jr. at the time a ride home when Miss DelTondo was told to go on

her way.

BANFIELD: OK. So he has been sent away and the police, Chief Donald Couch of Beaver County, says he`s off on leave because -- a critical incident

leave. At first, we were told that he -- the D.A. told that he needed to spend some time with his family, they needed to heal together.

OK, odd, I get it, his young daughter, 17 years old, was the last person who was with Rachael before she died. He shows up off duty to the murder

scene. Now he`s placed on leave so he can heal together.

I`m thinking, if my child`s friend died, I wouldn`t get any time off my job. I wouldn`t need to heal together. I find it odd. Now that the chief is

saying, this critical incident leave is granted when an officer has personal connection to a significant case. Personal connection to.

Is that a big enough personal connection, John Paul, because in a town of 9,000 people, everybody has a personal connection to every police officer?

How on earth could they get any work done if they had to let anybody with a personal connection to a case go off on paid leave?

PAUL (via telephone): OK, I can tell you what I know, based on my reporting. The statements that are being made publicly as far as his leave,

based on my reporting, don`t tell the whole story.

My sources provided me with internal documents from the police department, raising concerns about this officer, specifically a letter that I`ve

obtained drafted by someone in the chain of command of the department, raising concerns that this man acted in an unprofessional way at the crime

scene that night and is alleged to have crossed the crime scene tape off duty on two separate occasions despite admonitions to the contrary by on-

duty officers.

So, someone in command staff wrote to the chief expressing concerns that he --

BANFIELD: Wow.

PAUL (via telephone): -- would have been in a position to potentially contaminate the crime scene.

BANFIELD: And you`ve seen these documents?

PAUL (via telephone): Pardon me?

BANFIELD: You`ve seen the documents that say that?

[18:35:00] PAUL (via telephone): I`m in possession of them. And we have reported it publicly.

BANFIELD: Can you -- sorry, go ahead. Real quickly because I got to get to break. Put in the second thing.

PAUL (via telephone): Yeah, the second thing is an e-mail from the chief responding back to that person, expressing additional concerns about this

officer and asking city officials to address him as far as his status in the department at a future time.

BANFIELD: So this is not just critical incident leave in your opinion, then?

PAUL (via telephone): Certainly at first -- the first e-mail we`ve obtained, that was the reason that the chief gave to counsel, but that was

quickly followed up the next day with the letter about him having crossed the tape and other alleged --

BANFIELD: And you`re the second person. You know what? John Paul, you`re the second parson to say that. Michael Santicola, the attorney for Sheldon

Jeter in this case, one of the boyfriends, has also said that`s what he knew. That there might have been. We have not independently confirmed that.

I`m going to squeeze in a quick break. I`m going to ask all my guests to stay. But after the break, Nashae Kimbrough, who is a friend of Rachael

DelTondo is going to weigh in with a couple of things that he knows about his friend, and especially what happened before she died. That`s next.

[18:40:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: We`re still talking about the list of Pennsylvania locals who are linked to a gunned down schoolteacher. By all accounts a sweetheart, a

daddy`s girl, from a big loving family. And Rachael DelTondo knew a lot of people in Aliquippa. So police are hoping that all those connections might

just provide some clues as to who gunned her down in a hail of bullets on mother`s day.

My panel is back with me. Nashae Kimbrough, as her friend, what can you tell me about her connections? I mean, there`s such an unusual thing

happening with this. The brothers that she`s dating and she`s out with another third brother and the ice cream and the there`s a police officer

who saw her in a car two years ago and then shows up at the murder scene.

And now he`s on leave and his daughter`s being investigated and his wife`s being investigated, and the whole police department is being looked at

possibly for corruption. What do you know about her connections to the police department?

NASHAE KIMBROUGH, FRIEND OF VICTIM (via telephone): Actually, her connection to the police department, when I started to read that, I just

recently heard that. I knew about the case with young Skyler because I`m best friends with his mom. We`re very cool. However, what I do know, I

mean, that makes sense because I was over there and I know her mom and dad.

They`re not going to say Skyler name or bring that name up without nobody telling them that. They not just going to do that, because they know that

girl. And Rachael was a free spirit. She might have been connected to all these different people, but it wasn`t like she was --

BANFIELD: It seems like, you know, I don`t mean her any ill will, but she certainly seemed to have a lot of relationships going on at the same time,

with Sheldon Jeter, with the fiance, with RaShawn Bolton, out for ice cream with the third brother Tyrie, and it didn`t seem to be like -- it certainly

provides a lot of complications for police who have to look at motive, right?

So, let me ask this. Michael Santicola, you`re the attorney for Sheldon Jeter, the 17-year-old who was in the steamy car with his much older

girlfriend and he`d been with her for quite some time, since maybe at least 16 years old. And now the police are collecting his clothes because he`s

out with her that night and he is not happy with his older brother maybe dating her. They had some words back and forth.

But when you hear there may be documents that say that a police officer crossed into a crime scene and may have contaminated the scene and is now

on leave and we`re getting conflicted reports as to why. He needs to heal with his family. No, it`s something else. Some kind of critical incident

leave. No, maybe he is on leave because he contaminated a scene possibly, allegedly.

What do you think about the evidence they collected from your client, the 17-year-old kid?

MICHAEL SANTICOLA, ATTORNEY FOR VICTIM`S FRIEND: Well, Ashleigh, listen, I think that the evidence they`ve collected from my client is going to

exonerate him completely. I mean, he was the first person they went to talk to after the incident and they`ve had his clothing and information for over

a week. And I think it`s consistent that it doesn`t indicate that he was involved whatsoever.

BANFIELD: Yeah, but know something, Michael, you`re no dummy. You`re a good lawyer and you and I both know that one of the first things defense

attorneys bring up is, the evidence is contaminated. Remember O.J.? The police contaminated everything in O.J.`s case, right? That was the case

that was made. But now you`re actually hearing about police contamination.

So now I`m wondering if that`s something you`re going to seize and say, if the scene was contaminated, what the hell about the stuff they took from my

client`s bedroom?

[18:45:01] How do I know that wasn`t contaminated?

SANTICOLA: I would agree with you. I think that`s a serious question. We also have information to believe that the original clothing that was taken

from my client was not bagged properly. It was picked up and just thrown into the back of the police car at the time.

BANFIELD: Seriously?

SANTICOLA: That they gathered that first morning.

BANFIELD: Seriously?

SANTICOLA: Yep. It`s true.

BANFIELD: Wow. Let me tell you something else. I don`t even need to take your word for it, because I can tell you this -- and I do take your word

for it. I take you at your word. But I will say this. I have this one taped. Sheldon Jeter`s mom, in 2017, was informed about a police report

that became public, and it wasn`t ever supposed to be public. So some big old mistake happened with this police department, right?

SANTICOLA: Yes.

BANFIELD: And she was told that this report showed that her 17-year-old boy was caught in a steamy car with a much older woman, and this was her

reaction. By the way, not just to the police report, to the whole incident from the get-go. This was her reaction. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (voice over): I don`t know if you`ve seen this, this is a copy of the police report.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Are you serious? A police report? I really don`t want to believe this is real. I have been hearing rumors going around. If this

is true, why wasn`t I notified?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: So there you go. I think there`s a lot to chew on in this case. But, you know, it is curious. Your client surely could have a motive. He is

not happy with his older brother who is also dating his girlfriend of many years. But I think it`s just a big, huge list of characters. I got to have

to get you back. Michael, are you going to come back again as we learn more?

SANTICOLA: I certainly will.

BANFIELD: Thank you for that. My thanks also to John Paul, who is doing some great reporting for the Beaver Countian. And also Nashae Kimbrough, a

friend of Rachael who joined us.

I`m going to ask Troy Slaten to stay on because we all worry about the abuse of our elders, our older parents, our older loved ones, who we

entrust with other people. But what about when those we entrust them to, allegedly use sexy videos to get their names on bank accounts and their

hands on cash and cars and maybe even homes? You know where I`m going with this. That`s next.

[18:50:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: Elderly abuse comes in many forms. It can be physical, psychological, and guess what? It can be financial. Which brings me to

Oklahoma where an 85-year-old man hired this young woman to care for his nonverbal, bed-ridden wife.

That caregiver allegedly started doing a little more care for herself by luring that man out of his money. She was reportedly first enticing him

with a sexy video of herself. Shelly Struck (ph) showed him some pictures of her doing exotic dancing.

And the authorities say she also dressed very sexy around the house. And that was reportedly enough for the man to start making some big changes,

legal changes, like leaving his house and family heirlooms to her and putting Miss Struck`s (ph) name on the joint bank account, listing her as

the co-owner of a brand-new car. He even said he wanted to give her power of attorney.

But that`s where his lawyers stepped in. Now she`s accused of two counts of felony abuse by a caregiver. She told Adult Protective Services it was all

his idea. And that she denied any wrongdoing. Nonetheless, she could face up to 20 years behind bars.

Troy Slaten, one question. Morally I`m with everybody here. Legally though, if you`re 85 and you`re of sound mind and you haven`t deemed, you know,

(INAUDIBLE), can`t you do what you want with your money?

TROY SLATEN, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Absolutely. And that`s where this whole case hinges. It`s on what his mental capacity was. If he wasn`t competent

to make decisions about his finances, about his person, then yes, she`s absolutely committing a crime. But if he knows what he`s doing and he`s

doing it because he wants to, then I don`t see the crime here.

What if he was 50 and this same thing was happening? You mean, a man is giving gifts to a young woman? This happens all the time. It just seems a

little bit icky because he`s 85.

BANFIELD: It sounds totally Anna Nicole Smithy to me, right?

(LAUGHTER)

BANFIELD: But that worked out for her.

(LAUGHTER)

SLATEN: He`s entitled to do what he wants with his own stuff.

BANFIELD: We`ll see how this case rolls out. And I love your bow tie. Thank you, Troy. Stick around.

SLATEN: Sure.

BANFIELD: I got this next thing that I love. I love this story. Love it. Love it. Mugshots.com. It has made a small fortune by publishing people`s

mugshots online and then making them pay to take the mugshots down, so they don`t get humiliated. But you`re not going to see these three mugshots on

their main page because they`re the company owners. So what the hell happened to their business plan?

[18:55:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: One more thing for you tonight. As they say, karma can be a real bitch. Just ask these three guys, reportedly the co-owners of mugshots.com,

a website who`s business plan is to publish other people`s mugshots and make them pay to take them down.

California`s attorney general though is charging them criminally. And they`re going to face extortion, alleging that they demanded the money in

exchange for removing people`s pictures from the site.

[19:00:00] And in case you`re wondering, no, they decided not to publish their own mugshots on mugshots.com. But man, you reap what you sew,

brothers. So, there`s that.

The next hour of CRIME & JUSTICE starts right now.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD (voice-over): When you are driving with homemade plates --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He has non-commercial back there.

BANFIELD: And you refuse to get out of the car, even when ordered by police.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Driving is a privilege, not a right.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I`m not driving.

BANFIELD: A police dog is definitely not your best friend.

Who is the in right? The cops? Or the guy?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I have the right to travel from point A to point B in my automobile, unimpeded.

BANFIELD: And why isn`t he so chatty at the courthouse?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I`m on medication and I wouldn`t want to commit to an answer.

BANFIELD: A beautiful young teacher shot dead on mother`s day.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: She had received death threats.

BANFIELD: And police are trying to track her killer.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, there`s a lot of twists and turns, a lot of rumors.

BANFIELD: But the list of locals mysterious linked to her grows longer and longer by the day.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: 20-year-old Sheldon Jeter.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The older brother of Sheldon.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The other two people who were with her.

BANFIELD: Now her friend`s mom is under the microscope.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We are starting to look at other possible avenues to figure out what happened in the case.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BANFIELD: Good evening, everyone. I`m Ashleigh Banfield. And welcome back to the second hour of CRIME & JUSTICE tonight.

We are going to begin with a violent and bloody arrest on an otherwise quiet city street. That`s where a police k-9 sank its teeth into 45-year-

old Ronald Wagner. But only after about 20 minutes of back and forth with the officers who pulled Wagner over.

You see, Wagner was driving with homemade license plates and he refused to show officers his driver`s license. He also refused their request to get

out of the car. So ultimately the officers made a choice. And both Wagner and the officers had their cameras rolling when the officers let that

choice off of its leash.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I`m driving in my private capacity, trooper.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK. I tried to be nice. But now we are just going to wait --.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, that`s fine.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If you don`t want to do what I asked you to do --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I just don`t consent. I`m driving in my private capacity. That`s all I`m doing, trooper.

This is my first official pullover. And I know that I have the right to travel unimpeded by government forces when they try to enforce statutes on

me.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Can we get your name?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I will give you my name. My name is Ron. That`s my first name. I won`t give you my last name, though, because you will use it

against me.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: How will we use it against you?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Because I plead the fifth on that. I don`t consent and I plead the fifth. There`s a difference between legal and lawful and I

know my rights. I`m just trying to get to where I`m going and wish to be on my way, officer. I`m not bothering nobody. I`m a lawful man.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you live in the city?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don`t answer questions, officer.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Are you from this state?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I`m not going to answer no questions, officer.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I`m going to ask you to get out of the car.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I refuse to abandon my property. I refuse to abandon my property. I`m refusing to abandon my property.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK. I`m ordering you out of the car or else you will be placed under arrest.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What lawful reason are you articulating I got a crime to arrest me for, officer? You have got no reason to arrest me. I have

not done nothing unlawful. I`m traveling in my private capacity.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is what`s going to happen. As much as I`m a man and I`m standing here alive today, this is what`s going to happen. We are

going to break that window. At which time that window`s broke, I`m going to send this 100 pound dog in there. It has apprehend you. At which time,

I`m going to drag him and you out on the ground. If you continue to resist, there will be compliance put on you.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You are saying you are going to sick on a dog on a lawful man who is being peaceful?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: One hundred percent. This is your final -- he is ready. I`m telling you, as we speak.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I have done nothing unlawful, officer.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You are going to get bit by this k-9 if you do not act accordingly.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I`m acting lawfully.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Are you willing to open the door?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I do not consent. I`m willing to do anything except be on my way.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK. Open the door or we are breaking it.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I`m going to exercise my fourth amendment right to not be intruded upon, unlawful seizures. Look at this, guys. This shit`s

real.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think we`re better off breaking it. Getting him out of the car. If he wants to fight, we`ll back off and get the dog.

[19:05:04] UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is your final chance, sir.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I do not consent to any unlawful searches and seizures.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Stop him!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I got him.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Stay there.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Stop fighting the dog.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I`m not!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Roll over on your side! Roll over! Roll over! Give us your hands!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Take his right hand.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I got his leg.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Put that cuff.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Oh my God!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Extend that arm all the way out.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That hurts, guys. My arm`s hurting. You guys, please! I have been lawful.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Release his hands. Release your hand.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I have been lawful.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BANFIELD: If you`re thinking that has to leave a mark, it did. Ronald showed up for court yesterday with a left arm covered in bandages and some

very swollen fingers. And he was in court because he is now facing multiple charges, everything from his license plate and the refusal to show

a driver`s license, to obstructing official business and resisting arrest. But he just pleaded not guilty to all of it. Though he is not quite as

defenseless as the day he was arrested.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And I`m on medication where I wouldn`t want to commit to an answer.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think at this point, he`s agreed that until we get all of the information, he is going get on with his life, start healing,

get home, rest up, and start getting better.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: Joining me now, Ronald Wagner. He is the man who you just saw attacked by that police k-9. He is seated by his attorney Derek Lowry. He

is on the left, wearing the suit and tie. Also with me, former police officer Brandon Tatum who knows a lot about procedure and defense attorney

Troy Slaton who knows a lot about your rights. Thank you all for being with me.

I want to begin with you, Ronald. That was really, really hard to watch. What was it like going through it?

RONALD WAGNER, UNCOMPLIANT MAN ATTACKED BY POLICE K-9: I really can`t exactly put in words. It was surreal. I couldn`t believe it was actually

happening. And it obviously got to a point where I was in fear for my life and my safety and was wishing it to end as soon as possible.

BANFIELD: And did you think it was going to end? And did you think for a minute, if I do what they say and I relax, it will stop?

WAGNER: Well, I did exactly everything that they told me and I was relaxing. And it never did stop until, you know, the very last moment.

BANFIELD: Most of the people who are watching this right now are probably thinking the same thing, and that is, why did you let it go this far?

WAGNER: I didn`t let anything go this far. The situation was beyond my control.

BANFIELD: But I think our viewers would say, all you had to do was what the rest of us all have to do when we`re on a public street, and that is,

show your license, say your name.

DEREK LOWRY, ATTORNEY FOR RONALD WAGNER: Well, I guess I would step in at this point and refer back to the prior segment with respect to excessive

force. That`s one of the questions we`re asking here today. The video that I watched, my client was never told that he was actually being placed

under arrest.

BANFIELD: No, I heard them say it. No, no. I heard them say it. We are going to arrest you. And I heard them say, if you don`t get out of the

car, I`m going to sick this hundred-pound mullion (ph) on you. It was clear to me. And he was way closer to the office than I was.

LOWRY: Well then, watched a different video. Because on the video I watched, he was told if he did not do something, certain actions, he would

be placed under arrest. At no point was Ronald told he was placed under arrest.

I will also indicate that if you watch the video, the officer acknowledges that throughout the entire process, my client was peaceful. He was

peacefully non-compliant with their questions and their answers.

BANFIELD: Yes, but you know what, Derek, you are smart. And you know that you can peacefully resist arrest, but you still get the cuffs put on you

and you get hauled down to the pokey.

LOWRY: Well, if we recall history, history does not look kindly upon police dogs being used to attack peaceful non-compliant civil rights people

in the past, last time I checked. Do you believe those actions of the past were appropriate?

BANFIELD: I think you have a point, because I think that a lot of people are weighing in, saying, wow, that really looks violent and excessive. But

at the same time there were 20 minutes` worth of warnings.

I`m going to ask my viewers right now, as we see these images and we hear not only Ronald Wagner and his account of what this was like, but his

attorney Derek Lowry weighing in. I`m going to ask them to jump on the twitter. I have a hash tag going, justice with ash. And I want to see how

you feel about what we are talking about and whether this was excessive or whether Mr. Wagner brought this upon himself.

I have one comment already that says, this is a good way to get bit by a dog.

And I kind have to say, if I was facing the k-9 teeth of that k-9 dog, and I was being warned that they are going to break the window and the dog`s

coming in if I don`t do what I`m told, I think I would do what I`m told. And I guess, Mr. Wagner, I don`t understand why you didn`t take that

seriously.

[19:10:41] LOWRY: Well, and Ashleigh, I also point out if you watch the video, the dog --

BANFIELD: Well, let me just ask -- I love when you speak because you are bright and articulate. And I want to hear what you have to say, but not

when I ask Mr. Wagner that specific question. Why didn`t you just believe the warning and do what you were told?

LOWRY: And I guess -- I appreciate that, but with all due respect, during the last segment, I attempted to ask a question and I was not given the

opportunity.

BANFIELD: I will give you the opportunity, but when I ask a question of the guest I`m addressing, I want to see his lips move.

LOWRY: Absolutely.

BANFIELD: So, Ronald, why didn`t you just do what they asked when they told you specifically that dog was coming your way if you didn`t do what

you were told?

WAGNER: I just believe that I was a man with God-given inalienable rights that were protected by the bill of rights and the U.S. constitution.

BANFIELD: Yes, but nowhere in the constitution does it say you don`t have to show your license and registration when you are on a public road.

So now, Mr. Lowry, during our 6:00, we were right at the end of the segment, we are actually a minute over, and you said, I have a question for

you. And I`m going to let you ask that question now.

LOWRY: I appreciate it. And I guess I was referring to the police officer that posed question, does he believe the use of the dog was excessive

force? His response to that question was, my client was warned that the dog was going to be used. I would first point out that the officer in

question acknowledges on the video that at no point was my client acting in anything other than a peaceful manner.

Police training would have been, there were multiple officers. No officer at any point touches or pulls their weapon. The officer in question

acknowledges through the course of these 20 minutes, my client acted peacefully. The officer`s response to whether or not it was excessive

force was that what once you are warned the police are going to take an action, that gives them the right to do so --

(CROSSTALK)

BANFIELD: I got to be honest. On the twitter, I`m getting half the people saying, you got what you deserved. Wow, that was excessive, you brought it

on yourself. I want to know why he didn`t just show his license if he`s innocent.

Let me bring in Brandon Tatum, really quickly.

Brandon, that`s a good point. Why not use some other kind of enticement, like a taser or a physical brute force? There are several officers, why

not just open the door, grab him, pull him out?

BRANDON TATUM, FORMER POLICE OFFICER: Right. The beauty of modern technology and the beauty of what we have today in using tools like k-9s,

is that the officers have a right to protect themselves as well. They don`t know what this guy`s capable of doing. He can be compliant at one

minute, he can be agitated and then he can pull out a gun. So for all intents and purposes, the officers don`t have a right to try to guess and

put themselves in danger. If they told him to get out of the car, he had an opportunity to have a conflict with the police officers --

LOWRY: So would they suggest he would be shot if he didn`t exit the car? Your reasoning is that the officers would have therefore been justified in

shooting my client?

TATUM: That`s not my reasoning.

LOWRY: Is that a society that you wish to live in?

TATUM: You know --.

BANFIELD: I have an interesting comment I want to read, guys. I do think this is worth sharing. This is from Miss Bee. This is excessive. I`m not

condoning his non-compliance, but the dog is excessive. Had he been black, he would be dead. I think that`s interesting point because we do often see

stops where there`s a lot of, you know, umping up --

TATUM: I want to jump in real quick. I want to jump in because we can`t conflate the two. It is different officers, different departments,

different policies. So in this specific situation, the officers have a right to utilize the use of force that they did.

LOWRY: Two wrongs make a right, I understand your point.

(CROSSTALK)

BANFIELD: The gentleman needs to -- I didn`t interrupt you --

LOWRY: Did the officers believe my client was peacefully non-compliant? They warned they were going to sick and maim him with the dog. The trooper

then yanks him in the opposite direction. My client is being pulled in one direction by an officer and his arm is being ripped apart, pulled in the

other direction with both the k-9 and the law enforcement dog.

BANFIELD: Mr. Wagner, I want you to weigh in on this. Since we are talking about you being the person who was being pulled in two different

directions, if that`s the way it played out. Do you feel as though you have been wronged? And if so, do you feel like you played a part in that?

[19:15:12] LOWRY: Well. And again, I understand that that could make a boring segment, but that is what our trial before judge (INAUDIBLE), if it

gets to that point in a municipal court, will be for.

BANFIELD: Mr. Lowry, again, I love you to pieces, but you have to let your client talk about the emotional parts of this. He is not going to sink

himself by feeling it, you know, wronged about something or upset about something.

So Mr. Wagner, do you feel upset about this? And if you do feel upset, do you think you were a contributor to it?

WAGNER: I`m upset about the extent of the injuries.

BANFIELD: Do you think you had a part in it?

LOWRY: At this point, again, that`s what our trial will be for in the (INAUDIBLE) courts. I appreciate your wanting to ask.

BANFIELD: OK. I understand that. You are a good lawyer.

TATUM: Can I ask him real quick? The escalation happens when you don`t get out of the car and they are forced to break your window out. When they

start to have to do things like that, there`s no reason for an officer to put themselves in danger with a person that`s that non-compliant.

BANFIELD: And Brandon, I`m going to jump on this. I just want to say, as to the aspect of officers being at risk, there were additional issues, and

that was that you had a license plate that was homemade, and it had the characters UCC 1-308. And to anybody who doesn`t know, that would just be

bunch of random numbers. But it turns out that`s a signal. That`s a series of characters that is commonly used to protest a process. Often

times by constitutionalists which police know right away, we got a live one here. And this could get ugly and dangerous.

So for those officers who see your signal there and they see that you have got written on the back of your car, not for hire, non-commercial, they

have their spidey senses up, that someone in that car may be anti- government. Do you understand that as well, Mr. Wagner?

WAGNER: I understand there may be some bias towards the knowledge about what the UCC 1-308 exactly means.

LOWRY: And I would also indicate that we have the beauty of a video in this case. And while that might have been their initial reaction, their

ultimate reaction was acknowledging that my client has been polite and peaceful throughout the entire process.

BANFIELD: You know what, I got to leave it there. I wish we had more time because I think this is a great conversation. And I wish you a speedy

recovery, Mr. Wagner. I`m interested to see how your case plays out. Brandon Tatum, you are smart, sharp as a tack, and I love having you on.

Troy Slaten is going to stay with us as well.

As police continue their pursuit for Rachael Deltondo`s killer, we are starting to learn a lot more about the people that this young woman

surrounded herself with prior to being gunned down in her driveway on mother`s day. Do those people know something? We are going to ask, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:22:47] BANFIELD: Tonight, a beautiful young schoolteacher is gone. And the police are on the hunt for the person who killed her.

33-year-old Rachael Deltondo wasn`t just found dead, Rachael was riddled with bullets and was found bleeding out on her mother`s driveway on

mother`s day. And still no official suspects have been named. But tonight the list of people who were linked to Rachael is growing longer. And the

last name added to that list is Stephanie Watkins.

Now, it`s going to take a second to explain Stephanie Watkins` connection, but I`m going to get to that. Just remember the name Stephanie Watkins.

On the last night of Rachael`s life, Rachael had been out getting ice cream with two people. A young man named Tyrie Jeter, and an unnamed female

friend. And while we are not naming that female minor, we do know her last name was Watkins, because she is the daughter of a local police officer,

Sergeant Kenneth Watkins up on the right, and her mom is, you guessed it, Stephanie Watkins, that one I had to explain.

So right now, Kenneth`s co-workers, the police officer, they`re starting to get to know Sergeant Watkins` wife a little better, Stephanie. Because

they just executed a search warrant on Stephanie`s Facebook posts from the week that Rachael was shot. And whether or not she has anything, any

connection at all to Rachael`s killing, the search warrant is welcome news to a few other people that the police are investigating, like one of

Rachael`s many lovers.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MICHAEL SANTICOLA, SHELDON JETER JR.`S ATTORNEY: I certainly hope this woman was not involved in any way in this murder, but at least at some

level, we`re starting to look at other possible avenues to figure out what happened in the case. As we`ve been saying since day one, Mr. Jeter was

not involved, but somebody was.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: Mr. Jeter was not involved, but somebody was. There is couple of Jeters involved here. Just in terms of players who come into the story,

Mr. Jeter was that 17-year-old who was found in a steamy car with this murder victim two years ago. And Mr. Jeter`s older brother Rashon Jeter,

was dating Rachael. So was the younger Jeter. And there`s a third Jeter who was out for ice cream with her that night, with that minor, whose

parents are also involved now. It`s all very complicated.

Joining me now is John Paul who is the founder and reporter at the Beaver Countian, a publication. Michael Santicola is an attorney for a friend of

Deltondo happens to be Sheldon Jeter, that 17-year-old`s attorney. Also want to introduce Nashae Kimbrough, a friend of the victim who is joining

us on the telephone. And defense attorney Troy Slaten is still with me.

John Paul, I would like to begin with you, if I can. Because this complicated story has just gotten a little more complicated in that that

minor, and I`m going to put up that flow chart again, just so our audience can figure out who is who in all of this. That minor female friend in the

bottom in the middle, was out for ice cream with Rachael and was out for ice cream with one of the three brothers, Tyrie. And her cell phone

records have now apparently been requested by the police. Do you know anything about that?

JOHN PAUL, FOUNDER/REPORTER, BEAVER COUNTIAN (on the phone): From what I gather from talking to my law enforcement sources, it seems that this is

part of a large effort to, what investigators are calling tie up loose ends, is what my law enforcement sources are referring to it as. It seems

like there`s several people who have had search warrants executed related to their social media posts, other than Stephanie Watkins. And it seems

like they are looking into the cell phones of multiple individuals as well.

So we kind a heard this over the weekend, that law enforcement was going to take some time to go down these other avenues and make sure that

everything`s been investigated fully and to the best of their abilities is what they`re describing.

BANFIELD: So again with the chart, the female friend in the middle, I mean, I might as well have said, instead of female friend on the chart, I

might as well say Sergeant Watkins and Stephanie Watkins` daughter who happened to be getting ice cream with Rachael and Tyrie. And four minutes

after they left her on her driveway, she has gunned down in a hail of bullets.

Can I just go over some timeline issues with you, John Paul, and you tell me where, you know, we may be wrong or there may be some discrepancy or

some issues that as of interest to the police.

Let`s start with 9:30 p.m. that night of the ice cream. So the police officer`s daughter, as well as Rachael, and that third Jeter brother, they

go to a place called Hank`s Frozen Custard. These are the things in yellow that this daughter told the police. We don`t have a fact to go with it,

but she told them this, OK.

At 10:41 p.m., we do know there`s a text from that minor daughter to Rachael, saying, go for a walk and I will come pick you up after. Three

minutes later, Rachael is texting back to her, you serious? Ha-ha. At the same time, this minor daughter of the cop, was riding along for ice cream,

17 years old, says that she dropped off Rachael and then after that, dropped off Tyrie, and then after that, mom told her to come home. And

four minutes after that, the shots are fired. That`s when the police are dispatched. Four and a half.

At 10:48 p.m., the police -- excuse me. At 10:56 p.m., that young daughter again texts to Rachael, be there soon.

At 11:03, her texts to Rachael, on my way.

And at 11:07 tried calling Rachael. Clearly Rachael is dead and is not answering.

John Paul, the things that this young minor daughter of the police officer told the police about the timeline are strange. That`s a lot to happen all

at 10:44 p.m. And if we`re to believe what she says, they are all in the car together while they are texting each other, is that correct?

PAUL: I`m not sure what police believe as far as those time lines go currently. What I can tell you, my understanding from my law enforcement

sources is, they shared some of that same confusion. And my understanding is, they reached out to this minor who my publication has not identified,

to talk with her further, to get some additional clarification. I know they were also conducting interviews of some other people to get some

clarification on that timeline as well.

BANFIELD: Well, it does seem odd and that daughter and her cell phone records being looked into, you know, was dove-tailing off her mom`s

Facebook records being investigated as well.

And so John Paul, I guess the question I have, and let`s put the chart back up, so people know what I`m talking about. The 17-year-old who was out for

ice cream, who says, mom told me to come home, four minutes later Rachael is dead. Are they trying to figure out if Stephanie, the mom, and the

young female friend, the 17-year-old minor in the car, if their social media and their messaging all matches up? And by the way, while we`re at

it, Sergeant Kenneth Watkins has been sent off on paid leave. I`m going to ask you a little more about that in a minute. But are they trying to

figure out if mom and daughter`s stories are the same by their messaging?

JOHN PAUL, FOUNDER & REPORTER, THE BEAVER COUNTIAN (via telephone): I don`t believe that they are looking specifically to the messaging for

timeline based on the law enforcement sources that I`ve talked to. I think they are more trying to get a better understanding of the dynamics between

all these different people that are involved.

BANFIELD: OK. And then just to be clear, Sergeant Kenneth Watkins, he has a connection to Rachael DelTondo as well. And as we understand it, not

only did he show up at the murder scene that night, even though he wasn`t called on duty to go there, he showed up there off-duty. He also happened

to be the same officer from two years ago who busted her in a steamy car with a 17-year-old who now we know was having a relationship for a long

time, since at least 16 years old, with Rachael, even though she was engaged to be married and had a $10,000 wedding dress planned. Sergeant

Kenneth Watkins is that same officer, correct?

PAUL: That is the -- that is the same -- the same officer as of that night. He along with a second officer, he would have been the commanding

officer on scene, approached the vehicle. He would have been the one who reportedly gave Sheldon Jeter at the time a ride home when Ms. DelTondo was

told to go on her way.

BANFIELD: OK. So, he`s been sent away and the Police Chief Donald Couch of Beaver County says he`s off on leave because of -- it`s something they

called a critical incident leave. At first, we were told that he -- the D.A. told us he needed to spend some time with his family, they needed to

heal together. OK. Odd. I get it. His young daughter, 17 years old, was the last person who was with Rachael before she died. He shows up off-duty

to the murder scene, but now he`s placed on leave so he can heal together. And I`m thinking, if my child`s friend died, I wouldn`t get any time off my

job. I wouldn`t need to heal together. But I find it odd. Now, that the chief is saying this critical incident leave is granted when an officer has

personal connection to a significant case. Personal connection to -- is that a big enough personal connection, John Paul? Because in a town of

9,000 people, everybody has a personal connection to every police officer. How on earth could they get any work done if they had to let anybody with a

personal connection to a case go off on paid leave?

PAUL: OK. I can tell you what I know is -- based on my reporting, the statements that are being made publicly, as far as his leave, based on my

reporting, don`t tell the whole story. My sources provided me with internal documents from the police department, raising concerns about this

officer, specifically a letter that I`ve obtained drafted by someone in the chain of command of the department, raising concerns that this man acted in

an unprofessional way at the -- at the crime scene that night and is alleged to have crossed the crime scene tape off-duty on two separate

occasions, despite warnings and admonitions to contrary by on-duty officers. So, someone in his command staff wrote to the chief, expressing

concerns that he would have been in a position to potentially contaminate the crime scene.

BANFIELD: And you`ve seen these documents?

PAUL: And the second thing -- pardon me?

BANFIELD: You`ve seen these documents that say that?

PAUL: I`m in possession of them, yes. And we have reported it publicly.

BANFIELD: Can you -- can you --

(CROSSTALK)

BANFIELD: Sorry, go ahead. Real quickly because I got to get to break. Put in the second thing.

PAUL: Yes, the second thing is an e-mail from the chief responding back to that person, expressing additional concerns about this officer and asking

city officials to address him as far as his status in the department at a future time.

BANFIELD: So, this is not just critical incident leave in your opinion, then?

PAUL: Certainly, at first -- the first e-mail we`ve obtained, that was the reason that the chief gave to counsel, but that was quickly followed up the

next day with the letter about him having crossed the tape and other alleged --

(CROSSTALK)

PAUL: And you`re the second person -- you know what, John Paul, you`re the second person to say that. Michael Santicola, the attorney for Sheldon

Jeter in this case, one of the boyfriends has also said that that`s what he knew, that there might have been -- we have not independently confirmed

that.

[19:35:06] I`m going to squeeze in a quick break. I`m going to ask all of my guests to stay. But after the break, Nashae Kimbrough, who is a friend

of Rachael DelTondo is going to weigh in with a couple of things that he knows about his friend, and especially what happened before she died.

That`s next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:40:26] BANFIELD: We`re still talking about the list of Pennsylvania locals who are linked to a gunned down schoolteacher. By all accounts, a

sweetheart, a daddy`s girl, from a big, loving family. And Rachael DelTondo knew a lot of people in Aliquippa. So, police are hoping that all

those connections might just provide some clues as to who gunned her down in a hail of bullets on Mother`s Day. My panel is back with me. And

Nashae Kimbrough, as her friend, what can you tell me about her connections? I mean, there`s such an unusual thing happening with this,

just the brothers that she`s dating and she`s out with another third brother and the ice cream, and there`s a police officer who saw her in a

car two years ago and then shows up at the murder scene, and now he`s on leave and his daughter`s being investigated and his wife`s being

investigated, and the whole police department is being looked at, possibly for corruption. What do you know about her connections to the police

department?

NASHAE KIMBROUGH, FRIEND OF RACHAEL DELTONDO (via telephone): Actually, her connection to the police department, when I started to read that, I

just recently heard that. I never -- like I knew about the case with young Skyler, because I`m best friends with his mom (INAUDIBLE) we`re very cool,

even just (INAUDIBLE) together. (INAUDIBLE) for losing -- however, what I do know -- I mean, that makes sense now being because I was over there and

I`m not -- I know her mom and dad, they`re not going to -- they`re not going to say Skyler name or bring that name up without nobody telling them

that. They not just going to do that because they know that girl -- and Rachael was a free spirit. She didn`t -- OK, she might have been connected

to all these (INAUDIBLE) but it wasn`t like she was, you know, (INAUDIBLE)

(CROSSTALK)

BANFIELD: It seems like -- you know, I don`t mean her any ill will, but she certainly seemed to have a lot of relationships going on at the same

time, with Sheldon Jeter, with the fiance, with RaShawn Bolton, out for ice cream with the third brother Tyrie. And it didn`t seem to be -- like, it

certainly provides a lot of complications for police who have to look at motive, right? So, let me ask this, Michael Santicolo, you`re the attorney

for Sheldon Jeter, the 17-year-old who was in the steamy car with his older -- much older girlfriend, and you know, he`d been with her for quite some

time, since maybe at least 16 years old. And now, the police are collecting his clothes because he`s out with her that night and he`s not

happy with his older brother maybe dating her, there had some words back and forth. But when you hear there are maybe documents that say that a

police officer crossed into a crime scene and may have contaminated the scene and is now on leave, and we`re getting conflicting reports as to why.

He needs to heal with his family -- no, it`s something else. Some kind of critical incident leave -- no, maybe he`s on leave because he contaminated

a scene, possibly, allegedly. What do you think about the evidence they collected from your client, the 17-year-old kid?

MICHAEL SANTICOLO, ATTORNEY FOR SHELDON JETER (via Skype): Well, Ashleigh, listen, I think that the evidence they`ve collected from my client is going

to exonerate him completely. I mean, he was the first person they went to talk to after the incident, and they`ve had his clothing and information

for over a week and I think it`s consistent that it doesn`t indicate that he was involved whatsoever.

BANFIELD: Yes, but you know something, Michael, you`re no dummy. You`re a good lawyer and you and I both know that one of the first things defense

attorneys bring up, the evidence is contaminated. Remember O.J.?

SANTICOLO: Yes.

BANFIELD: The police contaminated everything in O.J.`s case, right? That was the case that was made. But now you`re actually hearing about police

contamination. So now, I`m wondering if that`s something you`re going to seize, and say, well, if the scene was contaminated, what the hell about

the stuff they took from my client`s bedroom, how do I know that wasn`t contaminated?

SANTICOLO: I would agree with you. I think that`s a serious question. We have also have information to believe that the original clothing that was

taken from my client was not bagged properly, was picked up and just thrown into the back of the police car at the time, that it --

BANFIELD: Seriously?

SANTICOLO: -- that they gathered that first morning.

BANFIELD: Seriously?

SANTICOLO: Yes, it`s true. And that`s my understanding.

BANFIELD: Wow. Let me tell you something else. I don`t even need to take your word for it, because I can tell you this -- and I do take your word

for it. I take you at your word. But I will say this because I have this on tape, Sheldon Jeter`s mom, in 2017 was informed about a police report

that became public, and it wasn`t ever supposed to be public. So, some big old mistake happened with this police department, right?

[19:45:04] SANTICOLO: Yes.

BANFIELD: And she was told that this report showed that her 17-year-old boy was caught in a steamy car with a much older woman, and this was her

reaction. By the way, not just to the police report, to the whole incident from the get-go. This was her reaction, take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don`t know if you`ve seen this, this is a copy of the police report.

DELSHA CRUMB FLANNIGAN, MOTHER OF SHELDON JETER: Are you serious? A police report? I really don`t want to believe this is real. I really

don`t. I have been hearing rumors going around. If this is true, why wasn`t I notified?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: So, there you go. I think there`s a lot to chew on in this case. But, you know, it is curious, your client surely could have a

motive. He is not happy with his older brother who is also dating his girlfriend of many years. But I think that it`s just a big, huge list of

characters. I`m going to have to get you back. Michael, are you going to come back again as we learn more?

SANTICOLO: I certainly will.

BANFIELD: Thank you for that. My thanks also to John Paul, who`s doing some great reporting for the Beaver Countian. And also Nashae Kimbrough, a

friend of Rachael`s who joined us. I`m going to ask Troy Slaten to stay on because we all worry about the abuse of our elders, our older parents, our

older loved ones, who we entrust with other people. But what about when those we entrust them to, allegedly use sexy videos to get their names on

bank accounts and their hands on cash and cars and maybe even homes? You know where I`m going with this? That`s next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:51:39] BANFIELD: Elderly abuse comes in many forms, it can be physical, it can be psychological, and guess what, it can be financial.

Which brings me to Oklahoma, where an 85-year-old man hired this young woman to care for his nonverbal bedridden wife. The caregiver allegedly

started doing a little more care for herself by luring that man out of his money. She was reportedly first enticing him with a sexy video of herself,

Shelly Streck showed him some pictures of him -- of her doing exotic dancing. And the authorities say she also dressed very sexy around the

house. And that was reportedly enough for the man to start making some big changes, legal changes, like leaving his house and family heirlooms to her,

and putting Ms. Streck`s name on the joint bank account and listing her as the co-owner of a brand new car. He even said he wanted to give her power

of attorney.

But that`s where his lawyers stepped in, put the kibosh on it, now she`s accused of two counts of felony abuse by a caregiver. She told adult

protective services it was all his idea and then she denied any wrongdoing. Nonetheless she could face up to 20 years behind bars. Troy Slaten, I got

one question. Morally, I`m with everybody here. Legally though, if you`re 85 and you`re of sound mind and haven`t been deemed, you know, non-compos

mentis, can`t you do what you want with your money?

TROY SLATEN, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Absolutely. And that`s where this whole case hinges, it`s on what his mental capacity was. If he wasn`t competent

to make decisions about his finances, about as person, then yes, she`s absolutely committing a crime. But if he knows what he`s doing it and he

is doing it because he wants to, then I don`t see the crime here. What if he was 50 and the same thing was happening, you mean a man is giving gifts

to a young woman, this happens all the time. It just seems a little bit icky because he`s 85.

BANFIELD: It sounds totally Anna Nicole Smith-y, to me, right?

SLATEN: It does.

BANFIELD: But that worked out for her. Well, not in the end.

SLATEN: She`s entitled to do what he wants with his own stuff.

BANFIELD: We`ll see how this case rolls out. And I love your bowtie. Thank you, Troy, stick around?

SLATEN: Sure.

BANFIELD: OK. I got this next thing that I love, this story, I love it, love it, love it -- mugshots.com. It has made a small fortune by

publishing people`s mugshots online and then making them pay to take the mugshots down so they don`t get humiliated. But you`re not going to see

these three mugshots on their main page because they`re the company owners, so what the hell happened to their business plan?

[19:55:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: I got "ONE MORE THING" for you tonight, and it`s probably safe to say that mugshots.com, the Web site that nobody wants to be featured on,

right? Not even these three guys, and they`re reportedly the co-owners of the page. California`s Attorney General is charging them and one other

person with extortion, alleging that they demanded money in exchange for removing people`s mugshots from the site. And in case you`re wondering,

their mugshots, while delightful, are not being featured on mugshots.com. Instead, there`s a big banner saying "karma." I`m just kidding, that`s

just me talking.

See you back here tomorrow night, 6:00 Eastern. You can also listen to our show any time, download our Podcast on Apple Podcast, iHeart Radio,

Stitcher, TuneIn, or wherever you get your Podcasts for your CRIME & JUSTICE fix. Thanks for watching, everybody. "FORENSIC FILES" begins

right now.

END