Posted on 09/22/2015 8:49:25 AM PDT by Robert Teesdale
A member of the Desgraciados Motorcycle Club named George Bergman appeared at an examining trial last Friday in Waco. Bergman had just arrived at the Twin Peaks restaurant last May 17 and was walking to the Don Carlos restaurant on the other side of the parking lot to use the bathroom there when he heard a gun shot.
He was detained, found to be in possession of two, small, legal knives incarcerated for hours and finally arrested. He spent 20 days in jail before being released on $80,000 bail. He lost his job and continues to suffer from injuries suffered during his incarceration. Last Friday he asked that the charges against him be dismissed because there was no probable cause to believe that he was guilty of participating in organized criminal activity.
A judge named James E. Morgan refused to dismiss the charges so Bergman’s nightmare will continue. But before he left the court he read the following statement into the record.
(snip)
"I then saw one police officer in front of me just shooting wildly toward the crowd at Twin Peaks with a rifle..."
ALL evidence indicates the bikers did most of the shooting.
I found this and it makes more sense
The Diamond patch with “1%” or “13” worn with the 3pc back patch signifies the club is a 1% or 1% support club.
I agree with you. We are no longer the society we once were. The feds continue to trample the rule of law when it suits them and cover up anything and everything they wish to. Then have another fed agent in a black robe rubber stamp it.
Nonetheless bergman is a moron for willingly putting on that cut that tells the entire world “look at me, I run errands for the bandidos and if I am capable I may get asked to put on the big boy patch someday.
That’s what I figured and good reason why “cat got your tongue” teesdell and not one of the criminal bike gang groupies ‘conveniently’ could remember.
Somehow these biker gangs seem to think they can skate like the damn klintoons, either baldface lie or conveniently can’t remember.
By the way, you sure did put a lot of words in my mouth that I never said or intended. Do you do that to everyone?
>>> How then did he get injured? <<<
I seem to remember these guys having their hands tied behind their backs for around 18 hours or so.
That makes the cause of the injury either police negligence or torture. Take your pick.
Respectfully, it is a fallacious premise. It tells "experts" in law enforcement, reality show producers, and Wikipedia writers "look at me," etc. etc.
You can call those groups "the entire world," but you'd be wrong.
Man o manischevitz, I DISAGREE!!
*running and ducking*
Skipping through the first pages of the pdf (it is a real pain to convert it into html which will properly display, it being almost easier to transcribe by hand, keystroke by keystroke, than stitch all the words back together after copy/paste from a pdf splits them into small fragments, I'll here pick and chose portions to transcribe & post here, while encouraging any and all to go to the pdf link and read it) I may not fully capture all which is in the pdf file at the above web address link.
To the peanut gallery (not you don-o, and to any whom I also ping, but others we can think of, but whom I will not ping...) I will further say, do not reply to this comment on FR until after reading the entire pdf, for my own representation of it, is in hope of conveying the gist of the issue for those who may not care to take the trouble to open and read it, and for those who may later desire to copy from this hand transcription...
If one were to look at this from LE and prosecutorial perspective, imagine what a DA would do if a defense attorney had been successful in having a judge impose a gag order, after the defense attorney had brought the case to pre-trial in the press, then continued to make statements to the press about it, while somebody in his own office, or from the defendant's side of the case had leaked;
Yet effectively, that is what the prosecution side of things has done. I don't know how a Court could deny it, at this point, even though the complaint at one point does narrow it down to Renya giving interview/providing statements to the press...
Filed Sept 21, 2015,
[end of transcription to FR, by my own hand, of the pdf court filing liked to at the top of this reply]On August 7, 2015, the Tenth Court of Appeals entered its unanimous opinion
conditionally granting a Writ of Mandamus in this case in the event the District Court
did not withdraw its unconstitutional gag order by August 14, 2015.On August 13, 2015 and upon Relator's opposed motion, this Court stayed the
Court of Appeals' Writ of Mandamus and ordered the parties to brief three questions.After the filing of the briefs in this case, Relator has continued to violate the
very gag order he requested this Court to consider in his petition for Writ of
Mandamus to this Court.
II "Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy, not issued as a matter of right, but at
the discretion of the court. Although mandamus is not an equitable remedy, its
issuance is largely controlled by equitable principles." Riverfront Associates v.
Rivera, 825 S.W.2d 366, 367 (Tex. 1993). Indeed, this Court has noted that
"equitable principles are necessarily involved when we consider whether mandamus
should issue." Smith v. Flack S.W.2nd 784, 792 (Tex. Cr. App.1987).Of course, it is also well settled that "a party seeking an equitable remedy must do equity
and come to the court with clean hands." City of Fredericksburg v. Bopp 126
S.W.3rd 218, 220 (Tex. App.-San Antonio 2003).
[page] 2 In fact, the law recognizes that “the doctrine of unclean hands applies to a litigant whose own conduct in connection with the same matter or transaction has been unconscientious, unjust, marked by a want of good faith or violates the principles of equity and righteous dealing.” Id. at 221.1
In sum, “Texas courts have held that, because mandamus is governed to some
extent by equitable principles, a party that comes before the court with unclean hands
is not entitled to issuance of a writ of mandamus.” In re Simon Property
(Delaware), Inc.985 S.W.2nd 212,215 (Tex.App.-Corpus Christi 1999) (emphasis
added), citing, Axelson, Inc., v. McIlhaney, 798 S.W.2nd 550,552 n. 2 (Tex.1990)
III It appears that, on September 18, 2015, Relator, Abelino Reyna, again violated
the very gag order he is asking this Court to uphold. Indeed, KWTX News in Waco,
Texas reported:McLennan County District Attorney Abel Reyna, in a brief statement, said “someone violated their ethical and legal obligations” in making the material available to AP.
“Our focus in the Twin Peaks matter will remain on the facts and the law and not the ridiculousness that is occurring all around it,” he said.
________________________________
1See also Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438, 483-484(1928)(Brandeis, J.
dissenting) (Regarding unclean hands;"The Court's aid is denied only when he who seeks it has
violated the law in connection with the very transaction as to which he seeks legal redress").
[page] 3 Attachment A hereto (emphasis added).2
Mr. Clendennen agrees that, if it was a defense attorney who released discovery
materials to the AP, that attorney may very well have violated his/her "ethical and
legal obligations." On the other hand, Mr. Clendennen strongly disagrees that
Relator Renya's focus has been on the "facts and the law" of this case and submits
that Relator has fully contributed to "the ridiculousness that is occurring all around"
the case.
IV Mr. Clendennen continues to submit that what has occurred and what is
occurring in relation to the gag order is very transparent to even the casual observer.
Immediately after the May 17, 2015 incident, Relator, personally, along with other
state actors sought to fill the public's mind with pictures of roving "outlaw biker
gangs" and, only when the believed that they sufficiently accomplished that task,
Relator requested a gag order. But it seems like even that is not enough for Relator.___________________________
2This is not the first time Relator Renya has violated the gag order he seeks this Court to
enforce using equitable principles. On or about July 8, 2015, Mr. Renya gave a press interview discussing the selection of the grand jury foreperson for the grand jury that could possibly
consider Mr. Clendennen's case. See Appendix 1 to Mr. Clendennen's September 14, 2015
brief. During that interview, Mr. Renya told the media; "That's the system. He was chosen totally
at random, like, the law says."3Of course, the person who released the material may very well be a conscientious
whistleblower from Relator's own office or from a law enforcement agency associated with the
case.
[page] 4 Relator apparently believed he was creating a situation where Mr. Clendennen and
his attorneys were denied their free speech rights under the United States and Texas
Constitutions but he was free to continue to make statements to the press.As explained in Mr. Clendennen's September 14, 2015 brief, the ruling by the
Waco Court of Appeals was not an abuse of discretion for several reasons. First, the
district court did not have jurisdiction to enter the gag order. Second, there was no
"imminent or irreparable harm" or even a "substantial likelihood of prejudice" to
justify the extraordinary broad gag order. Third, there was no indication that the
District Court in this case considered any less restrictive means of preserving the
rights to a fair trial- a trial that would be at least a year in the future- instead of
imposing blanket restrictions on free speech rights. Fourth, a gag order in a case
involving 177 defendants in different courts, involving related civil litigation in state
and federal courts, and involving judges who give their own press interviews is
unworkable as a practical matter.To compound all of this, it is now abundantly clear that Relator comes to this
Court with unclean hands. Mr. Clendennen has been denied his free speech rights for
more than two months and Relator has succeeded in persuading the Court to issue
a stay and thereby continue the denial of such rights while, at the same time, Relator
goes right on making statements to the media. For that reason alone, Mr. Clendennen
5 submits that the stay issued by this Court was improvidently granted and requests the
Court to dissolve the stay as soon as practical.
Respectfully submitted,
F. CLINTON BRODEN
Attorney for Matthew Alan Clendennen
Source for Attachement 1;
Article one with one of the Renya brief interviews; Waco Officers Shot Bikers In Deadly Twin Peaks Gun Battle with that web page reproduced and displayed with accompanying photo also in the court filing of September 21, 21015 (that's yesterday, as of this writing).
And no, I'm not connected with the defense. I found the pdf at The Aging Rebel link at the top of this FR thread.
The way Renya has been going about his bizness, courting Tea Party folks, being mr. hardcore law & order with the stink of the cynical manipulations of the legal system engaged in by McLennan County DA's office in regards to the Twin Peaks incident, and in view also of "everyone does ninety days" sort of stinking garbage
I feel a song coming on...
This next tune goes out to Abelino Reyna;
At first, I couldn't figure out how to download this particular pdf. Then once I figured that out (its simple enough, although some pdf's are not downloadable) I didn't care for giving access to the computer I'm using, and an email address to some anonymous outfit who could be I don't know who --- but would be in it for the money, if only to sell my email address.
So I gave up, and typed it out mainly by hand, although there were some central portions which I'd copy/pasted, then painstakingly put back together from how it becomes scattered into just a few letters at a time when I attempted to lift it straight from the file as diplayed when opened.
But thank you for the link. I'll look into Zamar, and see what I can find about that service, good or bad, before deciding. They have to make money in some way or another, and right now, I don't want to buy the programming tools which would allow me to do it all on the same desktop.
As for free, online service, one outfit I checked into (a little) had terms of service which stipulated there would be ads attached to the rendered into html doc. Maybe I should have gone with that.
If I could find a place where I could somehow export a pdf to a site without needing to download it first (and not have to pay$$ to do it also) that would be ideal, but I suspect is as of yet, made of unobtanium and fairy-dust sprinklings.
Wha...?
And let the flying fickle finger of fate award bow-tied strings I have on each index finger --- go to waste?
Hunt and peck meets pickin' and a-grinnin'.
It is time consuming though.
All you needed to do is use the HTML tag “img src = “ and insert the link to the pdf document.
Or just let me know you want it done. I can usually get the pdf and convert it. I do it often, to post excerpts.
LOL! Historically speaking, 'Diamond 13' or 'Diamond M' is a companion patch to the 'Diamond 1%' patch - They are the same size and offset each other generally. If one is wearing one of them, one likely will be wearing the other. Outlaw MCs regularly adopt them as part of their cut. which should be no surprise...
The 'Diamond 1%' patch declares the wearer an 'outlaw' (began as not complying with the AMA rules of membership) - Later to signify rebellion generally...
'The Diamond 13' and later 'Diamond M' patches signify thirteen members of a court proceeding - It declares the wearer to be 'his own judge and jury'.
'Outlaw' and 'My own law'.
In the abstract, it is no different than a redneck boy wearing a Rebel flag.
Now, it's been a while, but that is what they meant back in the day, and I doubt it has changed definition that much today. That it signifys what you suggest is simply laughable - Denigrating it's symbolism to such a lowly purpose would be a shame.
Really?
I don't think so.
Here ya' go;
What do you see? And empty box.
Right click on that, select 'view image info'.
In this instance, it is the web address of the pdf, which is (without coding to make a link)
http://www.wacobikerjustice.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/ccasupp.pdf
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.