Appeals Court Leaves Twin Peaks Gag Order In Place (WACO)

Judicial Rope A Dope.

Corruption all the way up, and all the way down.

Why should ANYONE trust government at ANY level?

One again, we have confirmation that the local court’s decisions have been proper, despite all the hooting and hollering from the conspiracy crowd to the contrary.

Seriously?

Yes, of course. If there was really such judicial abuse as the paranoids claim, we should expect to see the local rulings struck down, not upheld time and time again.

IBTG

Judicial Rope A Dope.

Yes, the Court of Appeals statement, as quoted in the article, is far less than illuminating...

This portion;

the trial court is the proper venue for review of alleged violations of its gag order.

leaves it open to interpretation, coming as that does right after the Court having written;

"In this procedural position, we decline to act; based on the complaint raised by the real party in interest (the defense)

Among other considerations, Broden had raised the issue that the District Court was not the proper venue.

We see in the above, that the District Court appears to be agreeing with that when they say that "the trial court is the proper venue".

Well, okey-dokey then.

What trial court would that be?

Has Mr. Clendennen had charges filed against himself?

Has ANY court been notified of what a prosecutor is alleging that Mr. Clendennen is guilty of?

We know that he was arrested...but has he been charged yet?

Isn't the answer to that "no"? Wouldn't that leave things to be, once all things are considered... that Renya sought to impose a gag order EVEN BEFORE HE TOOK THE MAN TO COURT???

If the above article is summarizing without leaving critical portions aside; the Waco Court of Appeals didn't clear things up, but instead left it all hanging, as if they were denying Broden's motions to lift the gag order, that by default they apparently are at the same time agreeing was wrongfully filed with their court by Renya (improper venue) in the first place.

From a filing on Sept. 14 2015 (days earlier than the Sept. 21, 2015 filing I previously supplied transcription for)

http://www.wacobikerjustice.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/9-14ccabrief.pdf

IV. The District Court Did Not Have Jurisdiction to Enter the Gag Order in this Case.
Mr. Clendennen has yet to be indicted and this case remains pending by
criminal complaint complaint in the justice court. In order to secure a reduction of his
$1,000,000 bond designed "to send a message," Mr. Clendennen was forced to file
a Writ of Habeas Corpus with the District Court and later sought modification of
bond conditions. Under the precedent of this Court, the District Court was not vested
with the authority to enter a wholesale gag order completely unrelated to the bond
conditions which were the only proper subject matter of its Writ jurisdiction.

Renya:

Appeals Court:

???

bears striking resemblance to DA Renya

You should have known that they would not have. This is going to be a Stalin Era Show Trial from start to finish.

...the trial court is the proper venue for review of alleged violations of its gag order.

“In this procedural position, we decline to act; based on the complaint raised by the real party in interest (the defense)...”

But it sure bought Waco another month of delay, courtesy of the CCA.

Hopefully some more newspapers will get into it now.

Yes.

The CCA ordered Broden to return to Reyna’s law partner to seek relief.

It really sucks to be caught up in a biker gang shoot-out in Waco.

Judicial Rope A Dope.

This is where Civil Servants prove themselves a class of Americans with totally different rights than the rest of us.

They get to punish us first, and if they were wrong, answer for it later (if ever). As will happen here when the 177 cases finally get to court three or four years from now, in 2017-2018.

Then maybe "we" can dole punishment to them for the crime of permanently severely damaging the finances and reputations of probably more than 117 law-abiding free Americans who love to ride big bikes on America's roads.

Too late, done deal. Mission accomplished by May 18, if that was the mission.

There are people who actually believe that if a guy in a club is wearing a 13 patch diamond or some damned thing, it means that he lives by dealing drugs, as sure as you're born, that it's a big conspiracy among bikers, a code, but the cops are wise, and so is Sons of Anarchy and the MSM, and they all say that's what the patch means.

How is it that people are hearing and believing that kind of extreme poppycock, and why?

Bikers are an American icon. They represent the rebel, the societal outlaw, independent, self-sufficient. Plus the big bikes are plain fun, and America has great roads. Veterans and adventurous types take to biking. A lot of patriotic folks are bikers.

This Waco thing scares me because the very Judicial Rope A Dope you identify is what fuels it, and that's trouble.

I haven't seen the opinion and order yet. If this court refuses to act, the previous posture was that the gag order is lifted. Reyna asked this court to order the 10th Court of Appeals to rescind its order. The report reads as though the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals is refusing to grant what Reyna asked for.

Riffing off my previous ...

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals refused Wednesday to force a lower appellate court to lift a gag order ...

The lower appellate court is the Texas 10th Court of Appeals. Its order was to lift the gag order. What Reyna had asked of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals was for it to order the 10th Court of Appeals to maintain (not lift) the gag order.

The reporting is all muddled.

One more point - notice that it is "refusing to act," and that "the trial court is the place to push for action on violations."

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals may be doing nothing more than telling Broden that his "unclean hands" argument is out of place. It could well be that a decision on the merits of the gag order hasn't been issued yet.

Reading the article a little more carefully, and while it contains plenty of mistakes, I think that the only thing the court did was address Broden's recent Motion, arguing unclean hands.

Some quotes from the article, and thoughts ..

" ... based on the complaint raised by the real party in interest (the defense), the trial court is the proper venue for review of alleged violations of its gag order."

The case was brought to this court, Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, by the state, not by Broden. The only complaint Broden introduced to this court was the Emergent Motion re: unclean hands.

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals granted "conditional relief" to the state and ordered both sides to submit briefs on the issue.

This is part true and part false. It was the 10th Court of Appeals that granted a conditional order, and that order was to lift the gag order in 7 days. The 7 days was enough time for the state to appeal its second loss (the state lost at the 54th District Court first, appealed that to the 10th Court of Appeals, lost that, and appealed to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals).

At any rate, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals stayed the conditional order from the 10th Court of Appeals, and order briefs. None of that was conditional, and none of that is "relief," it just holds status quo while deciding the case. I think the case is not decided yet.

Then twice in subsequent days, Broden filed motions with the higher court asking the original gag order be lifted because the 54th District Court had no jurisdiction to issue the gag order in the first place and because, he said, the state had violated the gag order several times by continuing to talk about issues in the case.
In denying the motions by Broden, the Court of Appeals did not address those issues but said if there are questions about the validity of the original gag order, the place to raise those questions and make accusations of violations is in the original court, not at the appeals level.

Muddled crap. Broden filed a BRIEF on the 14th. A brief is not a motion. Broden filed ONE motion with the Texas Court of criminal Appeals, that is the "unclean hands" motion filed on the 21st, past the deadline for submitting briefs.

If the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals did not address the jurisdiction question, then what it issued today is not a decision on the merits.

The only reason the gag order remains in place is that the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals stay remains in place. That stay will remain in place until the Texas Court of Criminal appeals issues an opinion and order.

I think you are right, Cboldt.

Your explanation makes it much more clear.

Thank you.

I agree with you Finny. And that’s what originally interested me in the issue. I could give a flip about Bandidos. But I know more than a few Patriot Guard or Legion rider types.

It is very educational. Your average Joe gets to witness not only the outcome of a major LEO operation gone seriously awry, but also law enforcement and the judicial system’s corrupt gamesmanship and cover-up, all leaving a wake of destruction, and the perception is that none of them really give a rat’s behind.

I think the LEO “brand” is quietly suffering serious damage among people who have been and would otherwise be supportive. People are watching, and they know that many clubs they might belong to, like hunting and gun clubs, could be taken out in a similar fashion in some future administration. I have an informal goal to share this site with at least one person every day - http://www.policemisconduct.net/

That’s why the Gator types serve a purpose here. Their statements strike me, and apparently many others, as those of the prototypical degenerate sadist LEO who enjoy and perhaps delight in the suffering of others, even the innocents.

Great educational stuff.

As you noted;

The report reads as though the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals is refusing to grant what Reyna asked for.

And also;

What Reyna had asked of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals was for it to order the 10th Court of Appeals to maintain (not lift) the gag order.

The reporting is all muddled.

Yeah...

I see that you helped clear much up confusion coming from the way this particular article switched around with identification of various Courts, and what happened where, in your comment #16 by drawing attention to there being 3 different Courts, and that Renya had filed in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals...

I'll take you word for that, although I'm still unsure of what was otherwise filed in Texas Court of Appeals rather than filed in the 10th Court of Appeals though...

Ugh. If "wacobiker" would make it a little plainer just what was what, rather than simply have the pdf's themselves, maybe it would be easier.

I admit I haven't gone through each and every of those that are listed. What is in the pdf's is all public knowledge. I suppose the gag order precludes there being extra-curricular identifying comments. Only Renya gets to run his mouth, I guess. I'm beginning to really not like that guy, and I've never met him. Funny how that works. He set out along with others to try to turn public sentiment against those who were arrested, and now [said in Jeremiah Wright voice?] "their chickens...are coming home to roost".

Here's to hoping Renya and Co. find a goose egg, in Austin.

It appears to me that the 10th Court of Criminal Appeals all-of-a-sudden appeared to pretend they didn't have jurisdiction over the 54th District Court in this matter, seeming to be playing like they were confused by Broden's reminding them that the 10th Court of Criminal Appeals didn't have jurisdiction to make or enforce a gag order in this instance , with themselves (the 10th) not having jurisdiction over the 54th District Court ---when the 54th Court District apparently issued a gag order contrary to Texas court, even the same 10th Court of Appeals, and U.S. court precedents.

The underlying issue in a nutshell? ----

Until there is an indictment filed against Clendennen, it does not appear that Johnson's 54th has jurisdiction to impose gag order either, even though Johnson did, as covered by Waco Tribune, June 30, 2015 article entitled "Judge prevents public release of Twin Peaks video, issues gag order".

From that article;

"Prosecutor Mark Parker told the judge that the state has every intention of complying with the rules of discovery but said the case is complex, is still under investigation and forensic testing is ongoing".

So? Where's an actual indictment, properly filed with a court in the State of Texas (beyond initial charges for arrest) that would justify having any court order that M. Clendennen and his attorney being prohibited from speaking to the press when it's not clear that M. Clendennen will even be taken to court?

And this, after many on the prosecution side have already spoken to the press, having repeatedly characterized all whom were arrested as being in 'gangs' and even criminal gangs?

Continuing from the same article from June 30;

"He (prosecutor Parker) said the DA’s office will comply with discovery, but had not intended on doing so in “piecemeal fashion” one case at a time."

Well mr. Parker, then you don't get to tell people they can't talk about your "investigation" either. "Still investigating" means you then, at that time, didn't know who to charge precisely with what crime, and as far as I know, here we are 4 moths later and you still don't know? Or won't say, if you do...

In the meantime, without a trial court to have jurisdiction, what has occurred is a DA's office (so far) successfully muzzling a potential defendant.

What's up with that?

And when you, mr. Parker do begin to file charges, then you will be handing over the files, the whole enchilada, to somebody other than the Associated Press ---for a change!

The reporting is all muddled.

It makes a person wonder if the actual court response was as conflicting and less-than-clear as was the OP, recent article, at the head of this FR discussion thread...

I have a bad feeling, that it probably is.

I swear, these people would kill Kenny, over and over, if they could get their stinking mitts on him.

Where to next (and would it help Broden's client)?

As TOMMY WITHERSPOON [click for email address] noted at the ending of Waco Tribune article Biker’s attorney files emergency appeal of gag order

"If the 10th Court denies the petition, Clendennen then has the option of filing similar pleadings with the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals in Austin."

I guess Broden already has filed a response? I hope this bites Renya in the b-hind. I really do. Then the criminal courts might have to deal with accepting jurors who are either -- entirely out of the loop, uniformed about current events, or accept only those along with people who will lie and say they've never seen any coverage. This will admittedly, likely make things more difficult for both prosecution & defense teams, but that's the breaks?

I do hope I'm not confusing the issue, for that's not my aim.

Intended to convey;

"Then the criminal courts might have to deal with accepting jurors who OTHER THAN only those who are either -- entirely out of the loop, or are liars who say they are uniformed about the case, etc...