“You are an idiot.
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.”
But nevermind. They are not being prosecuted under 7.02 so it doesn’t apply.
Omitted "solicited" too. Blame Lewis's lawyer for that. Plus, in this case, the only people physically in position to aid or attempt to aid the commission of murder or aggravated assault are those few people who were close to the violence. The majority of people charged were not in that physical position.
-- But nevermind. They are not being prosecuted under 7.02 so it doesn't apply. --
"Law of the parties" is never stated as the basis for a charge, it is not an offense. It is a way to find people guilty of an offense even though they didn't perpetrate the offense. In this case the charged offense is "murder" and/or "aggravated assault." At trial, the prosecutor would invoke law of the parties to hook players who didn't directly perpetrate murder or aggravated assault.
As for the "nevermind," I specifically cited law of the parties in my initial remark, and you, being an idiot, claimed, "That is not what the Texas [law of the parties] statute says." Either that, or your claim was a total non sequitur, a fairly common error for an idiot.