Posted on 12/16/2015 1:41:19 PM PST by don-o
” These people are entitled to be treated individually, whether they are being arrested and booked or making bonds. They are also entitled to individual assessment when they are going before a grand jury.”
They were treated individually when they were arrested, booked, made bond and indicted ...
The ‘police-Detective was NEVER head of that Grand Jury ..
Not True
Head will serve as foreman...
“Head will serve as foreman...”
Duh ... That was NOT the same jury that heard the Twin Peak cases.
If you read your link it say there is a POSSIBILITY that they might hear the cases!
The officials in Waco said that jury would NOT hear the TP cases.
Fletcher:
Damn you, Senator. You promised me those men would be decently treated.
Senator Lane:
They were decently treated. They were decently fed and then they were decently shot.
Gotta love people like the Senator and Texas Lizard.
-- Organized crime statutes are specifically designed to hold all individuals in the organization responsible for crimes committed by the organization. --
ROTFL. You aren't quite as much the idiot that Texas Gator is, but you're darn close.
It only took one day to issue a set of over a hundred cookie cutter indictments, about a month ago. I assume you find that to have been a job properly done. Why should it take another 90 days to issue another batch to cover the remaining accused?
Personally, I see this case a an early rush to judgment, followed by foot dragging in order to maximize the punishment by process, and NONE of DA's job has been done properly. No particularized allegations, all cookie-cutter accusations and allegations. Sloppy, sloppy work, and a sort of work that ought to cause a person to distrust the criminal prosecution apparatus.
"And now you know....the rest of the story."
“ROTFL. You aren’t quite as much the idiot that Texas Gator is, but you’re darn close.”
Coming from the likes of you, I take that as high praise.
Don’t forget that. I may send more “praise” your way later. You’ve earned all of it, and then some.
“It only took one day to issue a set of over a hundred cookie cutter indictments, about a month ago. I assume you find that to have been a job properly done.”
Nonsense. The grand jury convened October 14th, and didn’t issue those indictments until November 10th.
“Why should it take another 90 days to issue another batch to cover the remaining accused?”
Why don’t you ask the members of the grand jury? If you had any sense, you would know they are the only ones that are in any position to possibly answer that question. Of course, they’re legally restricted from answering you, so the question itself is pointless to ask in the first place, isn’t it?
If you followed this thing even halfway closely, you would know that Reyna made it known that he presented his “case” and got his 106 indictments in one day.
I think you’re confusing the arraignments with the indictments. Or do you think the Grand Jury was just sitting around playing charades for weeks before the DA showed up to present them with a case?
Anyone who has followed these threads knows that cboldt has provided reams of relevant and substantive posts. Same folks know who shows up to troll.
What makes you think they started considering the cases on the first day they met? Oh wait, by your argument, you can't know that because the GJ is sworn to secrecy.
Reyna said 106 cases were presented to the grand jury Tuesday and 106 indictments were returned [the same Tuesday].Grand jury indicts 106 bikers in connection with Twin Peaks shootout - WacoTrib.com
There was a flurry of criticism at the time, along the lines of "the GJ only took five minutes to review the evidence for each person charged."
You'd probably take it as really high praise if I said you were a bigger idiot than TexasGator.
I am not confused at all.
If you call them “relevant and substantive”, then they’re surely just worthless conspiracy tripe.
You just exposed the fact that you do not even read the threads. You just jump on and troll.
Good work. I was going to go looking for that one.
Ok, seems I made a mistake in assuming the Grand Jury was actually hearing the cases from the time they convened.
Still not really seeing what the big issue is here. The grand jury heard the cases and felt the evidence presented was enough to return an indictment based on. Not too surpising to me, since the fundamentals of the case are pretty straight forward, after all.
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.