Posted on 10/16/2017 4:51:02 AM PDT by Elderberry
The defense in the trial of Dallas Bandido Christopher Jacob “Jake” Carrizal may start its rebuttal of the accusations against him this week, When the defense finally gets its turn, three mysteries, one old and two new, might be solved.
The old mystery is why the security guards the Twin Peaks restaurant hired never showed up on May 17, 2015.
“If I owned a security guard business, and one of the largest, if not the largest restaurant and bar in town hired my company, I would definitely show up,” an attorney not associated with the criminal case said. I am pretty sure it would require a contract, per the Texas Occupations Code.”
Hanging Out There
The applicable law is the “Texas Occupations Code, Title 10. Occupations Related To Law Enforcement And Security. Chapter 1702. Private Security.
“Did the Twin Peaks simply not hire anyone,” the lawyer continued. “Did the Twin Peaks try to hire someone, but no one wanted the job? If they were hired, was there a contract? Did they back out at the last minute? Did someone tip them off about what was about to happen? Had they worked for the Twin Peaks before? If they had, did they get a visit from law enforcement seeking intelligence before hand? More often than not, the owner of manager of a security guard company is former law enforcement, and they are often in regular contact with local law enforcement officials.”
Why the guards, if they were hired, didn’t show up for the Confederation of Clubs meeting has been a mystery, at least to the public, for 30 months. There are five security services in Waco: G2 Security Solutions, Inc., Pro Security Group, Eagle Systems, Paladin investigation & Security and Centurion Security Group. The legwork should be simple. It would be shocking if the defense hasn’t done it
“I don’t know,” the lawyer said. “Just curious. It is just one of those things hanging out there, itching for an answer.”
AP Story
Two more mysteries popped up just four days ago in a story by Emily Schmall of The Associated Press. Schmall is notably good at her job. She has been on top of this story from the beginning. She was the first to report that at least four of the Twin Peaks dead had been killed by police. Wednesday she reported that “A Waco policeman reported that he spoke to an FBI agent at the scene immediately after the shooting.”
And in the same story, Schmall wrote, “A senior official closely involved in federal prosecutions of the bikers insisted in an interview with the AP that federal investigators were not aware of the Twin Peaks meeting or of ‘any impending violence.’”
Then why was an FBI agent there?
Schmall exposed a third mystery in the case in the same story when she wrote:
“In a conversation captured by her bodycam, Waco police officer Nicki Stone told a colleague after the shooting, ‘I really didn’t think it was going to end like this.’
“‘I thought that we were supposed to stay back and let them fight this out,’ she said.”
The defense has to wonder about the context of Stone’s statement. To whom was she talking? Another officer? A supervisor? Stone was a rookie in 2015. Most rookie cops are conscientious and female cops especially so. Stone wouldn’t have said that if that wasn’t exactly what she had understood her job to be.
This week, or early next week, the defense should provide answers to these questions.
All the idiocy like this post are attempts to cloud the issue that 200+ drug-dealing motorcycle gang scum came to Waco, multiple people were murdered by these scum, and now some of them are going to prison for a very long time, in full accordance with Texas and federal law.
Articles like this are simply poorly disguised attempts by a far-left lawyer to try to make everyone forget his clients are murderers.
Hey, don’t be negative, man.
IBTG!
I think IBS6, that is “in before Strac6”, is going to become a meme also.
Either you are speculating, or you have personally bought drugs, and hits from over 200 US citizens.
Have you forgotten our rulers murdered almost 80 US citizens there a few decades ago?
I do not speculate. I read law, (and understand) both statues and case law.
Unfortunately, you have obviously not read and/or do not understand Texas Penal Code Section 71 dealing with Criminal Street Gangs nor the multiple elements of Texas law dealing with Conspiracy, so your legal observation is a non-starter.
Koresh and Company are not a defense to the 2015 drug gang murders, nor is that little thing you were involved in a justification in a physical attack on you.
Please quit posting this crap in the news forum.
“Drug dealing murderers? Either you are speculating, or you have personally bought drugs, and hits from over 200 US citizens.”
Based on the present charges, testimonies and videos I say “GUILTY”
That section does not apply to a significant number of those who were not only arrested on identical charges (there being no distinctions made between various individuals, and the differing motorcycle clubs) but in regards to MC's, who up until they had apparently become targets of some (but not all) Bandidos (and police department bullets too) was not known as being composed of criminals who purposefully banded together (as a club) in order to commit crime. Therefor, those MC's and those persons do not fit the legal definition of being a criminal gang, that being even stronger negative fit for clubs such as the Scimitars, and the tiny start-up riding club that billed themselves "Distorted" which such as Morgan, and William English were members of.
http://www.dallasobserver.com/news/a-survivor-of-the-waco-biker-shooting-talks-about-the-aftermath-claims-police-didnt-help-wounded-7947554So what do you think about the stereotype of [clubs like the Cossacks] running prostitution and meth rings and so on?
Well, let me just say this. It’s a 46-year-old club. Google it. Now, if we’d had four-and-a-half decades of criminal activity, you’re gonna find something. Now the only reason you ever heard of the other outlaw clubs out there is because of their criminal acts. You don’t know about the Hells Angels, the Bandidos, the Outlaws, the Mongols because of what they do for children. That’s not why they’re famous. They’re famous because of the things they got in trouble for. Our club is as old as some of those and older than some. And you don’t see any of that. Now if we’ve been operating in this state for 46 years and in that kind of stuff, you would have heard about it. But you didn’t. And you know, you can’t have hundreds of guys committing criminal acts and people not get caught. You cannot have a club that’s based around criminal activity, hundreds of members, operating for decades, and not be on the radar. We never were on any kind of gang list or anything to my knowledge prior to May 17. On May 17, law enforcement bullets entered some of our guys’ bodies, and then all of a sudden we’re a criminal street gang.
...
...What was the purpose of going there in force — the numbers of Cossacks who went?
Well, our understanding was to shake hands and make peace, attend the COC [Texas Confederation of Clubs] meeting, which people were wanting us to do forever, and you know, if you go up there with six guys, you put those six guys at risk. So I mean it wasn’t my decision to take that many people. I was just asked to show up and it was for peaceful purposes, and I reiterated that with the people I talked to before we went — we’re going there for peaceful purposes, correct? And nothing else. Because this is my town, and I was assured that was the case.
By someone in the Cossacks? Or the Bandidos?
No, I didn’t talk to anyone in the Bandidos. I was told by people in the Cossacks who were going there for peaceful purposes. And we were there for an hour before the stuff happened. There were Cossacks shaking Bandidos’ hands, and I’m sitting there looking around thinking, well, I guess it’s OK. And the only reason I went to it is because … if you’re gonna sit down and talk to these guys and try to make things right with them, what safer place than a public meeting at a public restaurant on a Sunday afternoon with a bunch of neutral clubs and probably law enforcement there? And so, we went there feeling pretty safe. And actually for an hour, with us and them both there at the same time, there were no problems at all until that last group rolled in. And that’s when everything started.
I know, you and the rest of the poor, picked-on motorcycle gang scum are simply wonderful two-wheeled child welfare agents who everyone misunderstands.
If you cannot understand the scums’ PR BS you posted is just that, BS and poor BS, then good luck with your own cognitive process. Too much cheap acid, for too many years, did not leave you a mentally healthy man. Luckily, your twisted view of both the law and facts does not prevail outside the width of your ears.
Finally, this all reminds me of a trip we “enjoyed” in our second year of law school. The class toured the hard case cell block at the State Penitentiary.
All the vicious cons doing hard had one thing in common. Despite all the overwhelming evidence that send these multiple case murderers, rapists, child molesters, etc. to prison, and the fact that their cases were so different, they all shared one trait
They were all innocent!
Like those poor Cossacks, Banditos, Hell’s Angles, and all the rest of the motorcycle gang scum murdering people in Waco, they were all poor innocent choir boys who had been railroaded by “the system” All you had to do to know they were innocent was listen to them.
To a man, even the one who had bragged to the cops on film about strangling three little girls, (on top of his 7 prior violent felony convictions,) he swore “so help me God,” that he was innocent.
So, of course, all your motorcycle gang scum are innocent. Just ask them.
That thing?? Who are you? Peter Pottomus? This statement makes no sense whatsoever.
We are supposed to have due process, and the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. Be aware, you judge others and you will be also.
You've got nothing, so you open with ad hominem.
Missed me -- by a hundred miles.
And not "child welfare agents" you say? Where'd you get that reasoning? Did you get it from the man I was quoting (whom I do not know, but understand was legitimate, Waco area motorcycle dealer)?
More ad hominem. The man had a point. Who ever heard of this Cossack outfit?
They are not a "one percenter" MC, nor had reputation for regularly engaging in crime -- that last needing be condition to fit the definition of the code you keep citing -- but apparently may not understand.
All the rest of the crap you spewed isn't worth bothering to address. It's more of your usual --- nothing but wall-to-wall avoidance of any and every thing that would challenge your own (and the McLennan County DA's) little theories.
I'd noticed that. What's that guy smoking? Maybe it's not something smoked, maybe he's just "on glue"?
In recent past, I've tried in the past to warn the guy of that very thing, and got nothing but shat upon for my effort in return. He's still flinging the poo, to this day. At this point I'm ready to say to God --turn him over to the devil he loves so much. Let the Accuser bring the accusations into his own life, and have himself be weighed with the same measures he does not hesitate to use when weighing others, making that same way of measuring apply to his very life --- starting tomorrow.
They are guilty
They are going to prison for a very long time.
Get over it.
Yep, every time ya pluck the speck it just adds to your beam.
Some of them likely are. I never said anything different.
But is Matthew Clendennan guilty too? How about Cody Ledbetter? I tend to think the man I'd quoted (in part) in previous comment most is not guilty as charged.
How many of the 154 presently under indictment (and the one that is presently being tried) will?
In prior threads you've been repeatedly saying "all" in regards to each defendant, and in context of guilt (all of them "drug dealing scum bags", according to you) --- even though you had said months ago that a lawyer friend of yours estimated somewhere in range of 6 to 12 (or was it 14?) would be convicted, and the rest not.
Obviously Reyna and Company must have been lying their asses off when they told judges and a grand jury that they had, or even believed they enough evidence enough to convict on the charges initially brought identically, in fill-in-the-blank-with-the-name template fashion against each of 177 accused -- or else they'll convict a few, maybe even a dozen, and then deliberately set free a large number whom should have been convicted. Should have been, since there were sworn oaths asserting that for each and every individual defendant the DA had evidence sufficient to convict each and every one of them.
Many, even a majority of the accused and presently under indictment will most likely not even be brought to trial.
But no, charging instruments, under the laws as written, are not intended to be allowed to be inflated beyond what the actual evidence for commission of crime may be to give law enforcement and DA's leverage to force people to plea to lesser charges.
I was "over it" long before you signed up (again) onto FreeRepublic as a re-tread.
What name did you used to go by here?
Indubitably --- immutably (as in, that higher law is)
I’ll make this easy for you.
All can and will be convicted unless the State decides to back off charges. That will be easy, because, as the cases are now coming to trial, all the smart defs will looking for deals, and to go SE on everyone else.
AND THAT SE OR GW TESTIMONY WILL GO FAR BEYOND JUST WHAT HAPPENED AT WACO. Lots of other open cases will be rolled up with the “help” of the new SE or GW. Lot of druggies going down, even if they weren’t within 500 miles of Waco. The rats will be fleeing the fast sinking shop, and offering up all their drug dealer friends to escape.
Remember, only the first perps to the court house get the Get Out Of Jail Free cards.
Secondly, all indictments had to be the same, as they were all accused of conspiring with each other to perfect a common crime.
The “rubber stamp” indictment cry was legal BS from the start.
It’s about time to realize that the fools who are complaining here are, in the most part, simply repeating false rumors and legal table pounding.
They are going to be very sad for some when all this is over, and the perps are all in prison, some for very long sentences.
Thanks for your input always good, as for retread, have some pretty good guesses, or another one of the undercovers that have weighed in at times.
Or is that recently, newly added to your homepage 'little story' there at the end made out of whole cloth?
... or perhaps more to the truth of that matter, that excuse-making tale has now recently been included to avoid having admit to yourself that you were here once years ago, but were booted way back when for being too much of a rude jackass? (rather than being too loose-of-lip with goobermint secrets?)
Regardless of accuracy (or lack of) for the previous speculative inquiry, just what was that previous freep-name of yours? Now that things (whatever it was, if there was truly anything to that) has now been (according to you) declassified, what's there left to be afraid of? Is somebody out to get you? And could they, over that one boo-boo that's no longer in realms of prohibited to be revealed-lands? Put up, or shut up with the "story telling".
That does not line up well with what you'd told us about your Texas lawyer friend having opined that something on order of LESS THAN ten percent of the defendants would be convicted (if even brought to trial, in the first place).
Although I see how the remainder of what you wrote is attempt to justify yourself, and your own support for the broadly sweeping accusations that you keep making -- holding on to those come what may, regardless of anything else that has occurred as part of overall, larger picture.
The “rubber stamp” indictment cry was legal BS from the start.
From the start, you say?
When was that starting point? It seems to me that Broden may have put his finger on just where "it" started.
DA Reyna, for whatever reasons* decided there was "conspiracy" on the part of one and all ---to all of the defendants having agreed with and "conspired" with one another to go to the Twin Peaks in Waco and fight it out with one another?
How would DA Reyna have come to that conclusion, being as there had not been time enough at that point, at the start as you put it, for anyone to have, for instance; have gone through all the cell phones and gathered text messages indicating that one and all had conspired to go to Twin Peaks in order to assault one another? The evidence points the other way reasonably enough, for a large number of the defendants, all of whom were identically indicted...unless perhaps there was State or Federal wiretapping going on prior to the warrants authorizing such surveillance being obtained right after the incident at Twin Peaks ...?
I'm not the only one wondering about what Federal agents may have been pouring into Reyna's ears immediately proceeding production of the initial affidavits submitted to a Justice of the Peace (wasn't it?) when the DA's office was using Waco PD to obtain the cookie-cutter, blanket arrest warrants covering anyone who had merest affiliation with the two largest MC's, including a clear example of this having been too broadly sweeping over-reach that I'd just previously supplied link to, for such as Morgan English.
What did the Feds actually know (compared to what they told Reyna?) and when did they know it? What did the Fed's tell Reyna, anyhow? If they were weighing in, say hello the Micheal Morton Act, mister Federales? *what was the Federal involvement and influence preceding the meeting at Twin Peaks, and immediately thereafter?
If there truly was "conspiracy" on the part of some to -- deliberately and as you've said, "with malice aforethought go to Twin Peaks intent on killing people, in the instances of those who were not informed of such intents, and whom did not participate in any of the violence that took place, it is mere assumption on your own part that these others (who most likely did not criminally "conspire" to do anything at Twin Peaks in Waco) are as you've consistently painted each and every defendant ---murderers.
[cough-cough, ahem] http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3595139/replies?c=38
To: Strac6The Gov’t needs to prove that they never had any “professional” contact with Paddock.
296 posted on 10/5/2017, 10:32:35 PM by Paladin2 (No spelchk nor wrong word auto substition on mobile dev. Please be intelligent and deal with it....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 275 | View Replies | Report Abuse]
To: Paladin2One cannot prove a negative. I cannot prove I am not a CIA trained killer, nor can anyone else,
306 posted on 10/05/2017 8:40:39 PM PDT by Strac6 ("Mrs. Strac, Pilatus, and Sig Sauer: All the fun things in my life are Swiss!") [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 296 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
To: trebb; TexasGatorThere are multiple problems with your logic, but, just for starters, they are not innocent!
17 posted on 10/15/2017 10:25:17 AM PDT by Strac6 ("Mrs. Strac, Pilatus, and Sig Sauer: All the fun things in my life are Swiss!") [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
Multiple problems with somebody else's logic, you say? just wowza.
but you do deserve to have your face smashed in, you hypocrite.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.