“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.