“The items you added, previous fights (between gangs), meeting location changed, and bikers came from farther away than nornal don’t establish a prior agreement between any two individuals.”
As I posted, there does NOT have to be a prior agreement to commit the act.
“The poistion you are taking, and denying at the same time, is that all members of the Cossacks and Bandidos who appeared at this meeting conspired to commit a crime at this meeting.”
I don’t believe that I have expressed that position.
For conspiracy, there has to be prior agreement to commit an illegal act. The complaint accuses the actors of either agreement to commit murder, capital murder, or aggravated assault; or actually committing one of those crimes.
I agree that IF there was agreement to commit aggravated assault, and what actually occurred was murder, that the agreement or conspiracy still exists.
But the fact of an act doesn't establish conspiracy.
Based on your posting history, I believe that you are just playing word games, and doing that in bad faith. So, for now, I've exhausted my willingness to act in good faith toward you, so will stifle further comment to you.