Posted on 12/16/2015 6:23:55 PM PST by Elderberry
The prosecution in the case of the Waco Twin Peaks Massacre may have suffered a little defeat yesterday in Abilene, 185 miles from the scene of last Spring's crimes.
The possible defeat occurred during the trial of Bandido Motorcycle Club member Curtis Jack Lewis. At the least, McLennan County Criminal District Attorney Abelino "Abel" Reyna showed his hand.
Law Of Parties
Many observers of the case, including some of the defense lawyers, have appeared to be genuinely baffled by the arrests and indictments of so many obviously innocent people for murder and assault during the aftermath of the most deadly biker brawl in history. Men and women who ran away from the confrontation between members of the Cossacks, Bandidos and other motorcycle clubs were charged with "engaging in organized criminal activity with the underlying offense being aggravated assault and murder."
The charges have seemed far-fetched to most of the world but they weren't far-fetched to Reyna who has intended all along to convict everybody under Texas' so called "law of parties." Waco has always been a conspiracy case.
The law of parties, which is contained in Section 7.02 of the Texas Penal Code, declares that: "A person is criminally responsible for an offense committed by the conduct of another acting with intent to promote or assist the commission of the offense, he solicits, encourages, directs, aids, or attempts to aid the other person to commit the offense; or having a legal duty to prevent commission of the offense and acting with intent to promote or assist its commission, he fails to make a reasonable effort to prevent commission of the offense. If, in the attempt to carry out a conspiracy to commit one felony, another felony is committed by one of the conspirators, all conspirators are guilty of the felony actually committed, though having no intent to commit it, if the offense was committed in furtherance of the unlawful purpose and was one that should have been anticipated as a result of the carrying out of the conspiracy."
Yes, the law is a mouthful. Its broadness and opacity make it virtually headline proof. But it is the law in Texas. About 80 people are now on death row in the Lone Star State because they were convicted of murder under the law of parties. Given the progress of the Twin Peaks case so far, it seems very plausible that some defendants may be convicted of murder because they were carrying deadly weapons in anticipation of a deadly conflict. Or, if they were unarmed, they might be convicted because they should have known that weapons carried by their companions were likely to lead to a deadly conflict. Or they might be convicted because they knew that a potentially murderous conflict was simmering between the Cossacks and the Bandidos and they still chose to ride with the Scimitars or they wore a shirt that declared their intention to "support the Fat Mexican."
In Abilene
In Abilene, Lewis is on trial for aggravated assault charges stemming from a brawl between Bandidos and Cossacks in the parking lot of the Logan's Roadhouse restaurant there on November 2, 2013. Lewis faced two counts of aggravated assault, In Count One, he was charged with actually stabbing a Cossack named Timothy Shane Satterwhite. Satterwhite testified against Lewis Monday. Lewis was also charged with a second count, under the law of parties, of stabbing Cossack Edward Corley.
Satterwhite was arrested at the Twin Peaks last May 17. According to official documents, Edward Corley's "black 2007 Dodge Ram was also found in the parking lot of the Twin Peaks Restaurant in Waco on May 17, 2015. A witness to the stabbing at the Logan's Roadhouse Restaurant, Michael Don Baxley was also identified as a Cossack and arrested for Engaging In Organized Criminal Activity at the Twin Peaks Restaurant in Waco on May 17, 2015."
Two McLennan County Assistant Criminal District Attorneys have been attending the Lewis trial in Abilene to confer and cooperate with prosecutors there.
Directed Verdict
Yesterday, Taylor County Assistant District Attorney James Hicks presented the state's case that Lewis was guilty of stabbing Corley under the law of parties. According to a usually informed source, "The state's theory on count two was that because Lewis was president and everyone followed his order to leave, that it could be reasonably inferred that he ordered the stabbing." The source believes this is "similar to the state's theory in the Twin Peaks case."
At the end of the day, defense attorney Jon Hanna asked Judge John Weeks to order a directed verdict of not guilty. Hanna argued "that the state had failed to present any evidence of Lewis actually directing or encouraging the stabbing." The judge agreed with the defense and Lewis has now been acquitted of stabbing Corley.
What lessons the visiting prosecutors from McLennan County have now learned and the ramifications of those lessons for the Twin Peaks defendants remains to be seen.
Today the prosecution began presenting its case that Lewis actually stabbed Satterwhite.
Marked for later...
In the basic concept of “felony murder” (you’re committing a felony and someone dies for any reason, you’re then guilty of murder) but more precisely and broader:
“If, in the attempt to carry out a conspiracy to commit one felony, another felony is committed by one of the conspirators, all conspirators are guilty of the felony actually committed, though having no intent to commit it, if the offense was committed in furtherance of the unlawful purpose and was one that should have been anticipated as a result of the carrying out of the conspiracy.”
So... What’s the primary felony here which all arrestees were conspiring to commit?
Wishin in one hand, poopin in your other.....
This ‘directed verdict’ was no across the board defeat for Law of Parties, that can or will carry over to any other case. The verdict was NOT directed by the Texas Supreme Court.
Good luck with that wishin.
Here’s a link to an indictment:
http://blog.bennettandbennett.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Waco-twin-peaks-indictment-1.pdf
So..... What’s the primary felony here which all arrestees were conspiring to commit?
*********************************************************************
I think they all were conspiring to eat lunch & possibly have a beer.
Love laws like this... never get used against cops, DAs, judges or elected officials. I’m surprised obama is trying to use this law to round up tea party and voting checking groups.
“So... What’s the primary felony here which all arrestees were conspiring to commit?”
Did you read the arrest affidavits?
OTOH, extortion is a felony.
“Love laws like this... never get used against cops, DAs, judges or elected officials.”
SAN DIEGO (CNS) - A San Diego County prosecutor convicted of conspiracy to obstruct justice and other misdemeanor counts for asking a San Diego police sergeant to fix a seat belt ticket she got while riding with a fellow prosecutor is scheduled to be sentenced Wednesday.
Thirty-seven-year-old Allison Debow, also known as Allison Worden, faces up to a year in jail. Had she accepted the ticket, she would have had to pay a $142 fine as a first-time adult offender, according to the California Office of Traffic Safety.
I really doubt they were thinking about some wine, but you just never know.
Maybe some are the ARTS & {French} Croissants type of people. You believe that, I got some water front property in Arizona, I'd like to sell you. /s
The indictment only uses “as a member of a criminal street gang” as the conspiring felony by which each is responsible for related felonies perpetrated by others.
Since when is simple membership a felony? No other “conspiracy to commit a felony” is specified. The indictment encompasses the named people on grounds of their participation at the Twin Peaks meeting, charging them all with an act which occurred at a different place & time for which most (all?) were not present at nor involved in.
By the indictment’s reasoning, Texas should be able to arrest & incarcerate (even execute) EVERY street gang member in the state for murder. That would solve many crime problems, but would unlikely stand precisely because the premise of the given indictment is absurd.
Either I’m still missing something (quite possible) or the DA is stretching _real_ far to nail them with _anything_ conceivable.
“. The indictment encompasses the named people on grounds of their participation at the Twin Peaks meeting, charging them all with an act which occurred at a different place & time for which most (all?) were not present at nor involved in.”
They are charged with events that occurred at the place and time for which they all were present and involved in ....
At Twin Peaks, they were conspiring murders & assaults?
The indictment ONLY references “membership in a criminal street gang” as the dominant felony (?!), no further conspiracy mentioned. Link to indictment is earlier in this thread.
“The indictment ONLY references “membership in a criminal street gang†as the dominant felony (?!), no further conspiracy mentioned. Link to indictment is earlier in this thread.”
I went to your link. Several places it says ‘then and there’ referring to the Twin Peaks shootout.
Again, where is the overarching felonious conspiracy? A gunfight broke out for still-unclear reasons; that the group was meeting there is not sensible/legal grounds for accusing members present of actually committing assaults (which must be discerned vs self-defense) which they did not actually commit. Simply being a member at a meeting, during which a fight (of unknown cause) breaks out, is insufficient for “law of parties” to apply.
Further complicating this thread: the lead post conflates those present at the Twin Peaks shootout with a fight at Logan’s Roadhouse on November 2, 2013, using Law Of Parties to indict those not present at Logan’s for the stabbings at Logan’s because they were present at Twin Peaks - a non-sequitur.
Reyna grabbed a tiger by the tail and seven months in, cannot figure out how to let it go.
The OP notes a failed application of law of parties to the Logan's incident as a parallel to the potential application of law of parties to the Twin Peaks incident.
There were two stabbings at Logan's. The accusations against Lewis were that he actually stabbed Satterwhite, and that he was guilty of stabbing Corley under the law of parties. The charge of stabbing Corley was tossed by the judge, because "that the state had failed to present any evidence of Lewis actually directing or encouraging the stabbing." The charge that Lewis stabbed Satterwhite was given to the jury. FWIW, the jury acquitted Lewis on that charge.
The parallel in Twin Peaks is that in order to obtain a guilty verdict under law of the parties, the state will have to produce evidence that an accused directed or encouraged violence.
“Again, where is the overarching felonious conspiracy? “
Bandidos conspired to extort money and cooperation of the other clubs.
Cossacks conspired to disrupt with violence if necessary the Bandidos intrusion into their ‘territory’.
“the state will have to produce evidence that an accused directed or encouraged violence. “
That is not what the Texas statute says.
Sec. 7.02. CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR CONDUCT OF ANOTHER. (a) A person is criminally responsible for an of fense committed by the conduct of another if: ...(2) acting with intent to promote or assist the commission of the offense, he solicits, encourages, directs, aids, or attempts to aid the other person to commit the offense ...
That's mightly close to my statement that "in order to obtain a guilty verdict under law of the parties, the state will have to produce evidence that an accused directed or encouraged violence."
There is also the intent element, which the state must also produce evidence for, should the state choose to pursue a "law of the parties" prosecution.
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.