Unsolved Mysteries Of Waco

The defense in the trial of Dallas Bandido Christopher Jacob “Jake” Carrizal may start its rebuttal of the accusations against him this week, When the defense finally gets its turn, three mysteries, one old and two new, might be solved.

The old mystery is why the security guards the Twin Peaks restaurant hired never showed up on May 17, 2015.

“If I owned a security guard business, and one of the largest, if not the largest restaurant and bar in town hired my company, I would definitely show up,” an attorney not associated with the criminal case said. I am pretty sure it would require a contract, per the Texas Occupations Code.”

The applicable law is the “Texas Occupations Code, Title 10. Occupations Related To Law Enforcement And Security. Chapter 1702. Private Security.

“Did the Twin Peaks simply not hire anyone,” the lawyer continued. “Did the Twin Peaks try to hire someone, but no one wanted the job? If they were hired, was there a contract? Did they back out at the last minute? Did someone tip them off about what was about to happen? Had they worked for the Twin Peaks before? If they had, did they get a visit from law enforcement seeking intelligence before hand? More often than not, the owner of manager of a security guard company is former law enforcement, and they are often in regular contact with local law enforcement officials.”

Why the guards, if they were hired, didn’t show up for the Confederation of Clubs meeting has been a mystery, at least to the public, for 30 months. There are five security services in Waco: G2 Security Solutions, Inc., Pro Security Group, Eagle Systems, Paladin investigation & Security and Centurion Security Group. The legwork should be simple. It would be shocking if the defense hasn’t done it

“I don’t know,” the lawyer said. “Just curious. It is just one of those things hanging out there, itching for an answer.”

Two more mysteries popped up just four days ago in a story by Emily Schmall of The Associated Press. Schmall is notably good at her job. She has been on top of this story from the beginning. She was the first to report that at least four of the Twin Peaks dead had been killed by police. Wednesday she reported that “A Waco policeman reported that he spoke to an FBI agent at the scene immediately after the shooting.”

And in the same story, Schmall wrote, “A senior official closely involved in federal prosecutions of the bikers insisted in an interview with the AP that federal investigators were not aware of the Twin Peaks meeting or of ‘any impending violence.’”

“In a conversation captured by her bodycam, Waco police officer Nicki Stone told a colleague after the shooting, ‘I really didn’t think it was going to end like this.’

“‘I thought that we were supposed to stay back and let them fight this out,’ she said.”

The defense has to wonder about the context of Stone’s statement. To whom was she talking? Another officer? A supervisor? Stone was a rookie in 2015. Most rookie cops are conscientious and female cops especially so. Stone wouldn’t have said that if that wasn’t exactly what she had understood her job to be.

This week, or early next week, the defense should provide answers to these questions.

When someone, such as you, is so upset when he sees his attempts to see his drug-dealing motorcycle gang brothers incarcerated for decades for the crimes they are so surely guilty of that he resorts to calls for violence, I know I have succeeded beyond my wildest dreams.

Who am I?

Over the years, I have been called:

Kid

Lefty (as in left-handed)

#83 (My football jersey number)

RA149536XX

141 (Airborne School number)

Sergeant

Candidate

054267XX

Sir

Lieutenant

Captain

Đội trưởng

Major

Colonel

Opposing Counsel

Learned Counsel

That SOB lawyer

Distinguished Graduate

Esquire

Bwana (in Tanzania)

Your Grace

... and all too often, I have been called late to breakfast.

And by the way, stock up on the Thorazine. Some would help now.... and you'll need a whole lot more when the verdicts come in.

Who am I?

I asked what your previous freepname was.

You failed to supply to this forum what your previous freepname was, handing us a laundry list of other titles you claim for yourself...

What was your previous 'handle' here? Answer that question, you retread.

This (below) which you wrote, makes little to no sense, as worded;

My attempts to see "my" brothers incarcerated...?

Once again you shot yourself in the lead-off foot (that would be your own foot). You've also missed me again, by more than merely a few miles.

None of the defendants are known to me. I'm not a member of any MC, as I have told you in previous conversations. Perhaps you may recall -- I had included mentioning that I'm not even a member of the AMA (American Motorcycle Association) having provided link to that outfit when I'd said so?

So why do you lie to me about myself? Do you really think I'm going to believe it? I'm known well enough around here it's highly doubtful anyone else (even the one who's more transparently a law enforcement officer, or else has history of being one, TG, aka "Princess Puddles") would believe you either, even though he'll pretend to as part of the same effort to sway public opinion the two of you are busy b.s.ing about. I just hope taxpayers are not footing the bill for your own and TG's own pathetic attempt to characterize each and all defendants as "drug dealers" and worse.

Meanwhile, there are specific defendants that I've repeatedly pointed out to you that there is no evidence are "drug dealers", or that even the MC they were member of was a criminal gang under definitions provided for those under the article of code you continually cited. It is for this latter classification I've continually, consistently focused upon. Each time you just skipped right past it, lah-te-dah, as if nothing had been said that refutes your broadbrush contentions.

I've caused you to be flushed out more into the open, where everybody here can see what you are like, and what you may be -- which is a Federal law enforcement TROLL. Well, are you? A Federal agent, I mean...we know already about the TROLL part.

But what the hey, maybe your just a self-absorbed egotistical ass. You sure do play one of those on the internets, to a "T" (or would that in this instance, be capital "A"?).

And by the way, stock up on the Thorazine. Some would help now.... and you'll need a whole lot more when the verdicts come in.

For the umpteenth time, retread TROLL; that it is likely there will be convictions result from this, there's been little to no doubt.

What I'm interested in seeing is if the McLennan County DA's Office can prove that they were not perjuring themselves in instances of a significant percentage of the defendants, saying that there was evidence enough for conviction when they first put the charges in front of a grand jury.

It would be yourself who would be requiring medication when it dawned on you just how wrong you've been about this subject -- and wrong about people here who are not buying Reyna and Co.'s bullshit, Book of Waco way of doing business...

How many of the 177 persons initially arrested under identical charges do you think will eventually be convicted?

If it were as many as 17 separate, individual convictions that would still be less than 10% of the accused.

If only 15 convictions, that would less than 10% of those presently under indictment.

If doubling that last number, that's still less than one out of five that Reyna accused, telling a grand jury he had evidence sufficient to establish that each and every had taken part in some vast criminal conspiracy wherein they were of one accord to assault and even murder one another.

What of the four out of five, in that latter, possibly worse-case (for the defendants) and best case (for the prosecution) scenario? When those eventually walk free, among other things it will prove just how far off the mark of truth you've continually insisted upon being, and that Reyna was lying about four out of five that his Office had directed Waco PD to filed sworn affidavits against.

I know I have succeeded beyond my wildest dreams.

If repeatedly shooting yourself in the foot is one of your wildest dreams, doing so while prompting people to consider just how thin and tenuous the evidence is to support the charges as filed against a far greater number of those thus charged than it would fit, then by gum, you've succeeded.

Yeah, the guy is so heroic he won't even tell us his previous, (99% probability to have been anonymous) FR name that he went by.

Then signs off telling the forum here about having sexual relations with the wife...like, he's some sort of special in that way (nobody can f'em like The Hero of His Own Movie can f'em).

And a while back, he called me (among other things) "profane".

The legal doctrine regarding "unclean hands" comes to mind here, and is among reason why I called the man out for his wall-to-wall hypocrisy. He's no longer even a "mister" in my book.

In any "book" he's an internet blow-hard who runs around trying to intimidate people with words, and mind-games (as if he's something special in that, too) shallowly repeating his initial assertions (that had just been challenged, if not wrecked) always opening with insults (even to those whom had not dealt any towards himself -- myself not being one of those, of course, lol) and closing with a few more whacks to make himself feel all better, reassuring himself he's better than most everybody around here. What an Ass. Him, and Princess Puddles, the Dynamic Ass Duo. Here they are, to save the day! Imagine what their Superhero get-ups would look like...could their essence even be subject to capture by a costume designer? That's a realm I know far too little about (having no real interest in that sort of thing) but do suspect that even if I was a pro in that category, they'd both have me stumped.

#1: Read (slowly) TPC C 71 and you will realize your entire gasping emotional crybaby table poundings are legally wrong.

Emotional grasping crybaby? lol. When you couple that with "table pounding" you described yourself in this.

But you've still not told this forum what your previous freeper name was. What are you hiding, amigo?

I notice too you re-interviewed yourself, shifting one of the questions I'd presented to you, to "should" instead of will.

That's dodging the question(s). You just can not, and will not face the questions. Everyday it's some new excuse, with it being (according to you) somehow my fault that you're being deceitful.

...seen the havoc spread by organized street gangs like your friends,

There you go again, making things up, in order to put me in the middle of it. None of the accused are my friends, although young Americans like Matthew Clendennen, who's by and large just a family man, small-time businessman, landscape maintenance operator, I can have respect for. He went out and made it happen, supplying a service that brought "order" to chaos of building landscape growth. I read he was a former fireman too.

I must have hurt your feelings. Oh, boo-hoo for you who has brought unto his own self every word I've said publicly against your opinions, and yourself.

and the worse havoc spread by loudmouthed fools

You talk about "loudmouths". That's you again, too. Another rude keyboard commando come to FR to spew and stir up strife. You've stirred it up, and are now caught up in what you've made happen. It was the way you were running your mouth against people here on FR (insulting them, stirring up strife) that put you on my radar. You want to make others eat what you dish out? Eat some of it, yourself. Here, let me help if you're having trouble swallowing...

such as yourself who try to lecture others on the law,

Says the one who pounds the table with a lawbook, unopened but for a finger stuck on one page.

then their own experience with the law is restricted to slowly reading their own sentencing documents.

I'm getting old, and from the time I was but young man I've been known to be honest, unlike yourself who long has made a living telling distorted versions of truth (which often are even out-and-out lies) and is proud of being such a liar. The fix is in, and you just love being a part of the arranging of that kind of thing, don't you? As long as you get to intimidate others, and marinate yourself in rays of your own self-imagined magnificence. In that you kind-of remind me of the worst aspects of the sneering DA's assistants (like the one who tried to intimidate Paul Looney) and the worst of among the bikers too, who do also enjoy throwing their weight around to fullest extents they can get away with, regardless if it's lawful, moral, or ethical. As long as they can get their jollies, then they'll justify it any way they can (for as long as they can until somebody brings them up short). You're no better than those people. Your own sins are but sins of different stripe.

On The Other Hand

Sammy Hagar, from Marching To Mars

Still no previous freeper name...

BUT --You tell me;

The bottom line, you “respect” drug-dealing motorcycle gang scum.

The only one of the defendants whom I'd singled out, using the word "respect", was one young man in particular. I have no reason to believe that soul is anything like you describe. You are still pounding the table here with the same false accusations that you've dealt out indiscriminately to each and every defendant, and to many of us here on FR too, myself most particularly being as I've been the more consistent in opposing your shallow and highly biased opinions.

Then you say, on strength of the falsehood that I allegedly respect drug dealers;

My personal sense of ethics prohibits me from having any further communication with such lowlife, or their supporters.

Sense of ethics? YoU? That would to laugh at if it were not so pathetic. You're obviously confused about a lot of things. You have no ethics, not any that are genuine, at least not beyond some possibly narrow window where once upon a time, somewhere far away from FR, you may have taken a stand at some risk to yourself. Here on threads discussing the 'Waco bikers' issue is not one of those places.

Myself having little to no respect for the likes of your own opinions, and the way you've handled yourself on threads when discussing these matters does not equate to myself supporting those who are in fact "drug dealers". Although, even for those latter sort of persons, when the question at hand is not one of "respect" -- but is toward whether or not those who are thus accused should indeed be incarcerated, for as you said -- decades-- individual instances of guilt must be determined beyond broadly sweeping assertions that do run significant risk of folding in the not-so guilty with the more truly guilty.

I'm not a gang supporter (even if, or when --the gang wears blue, and carry badges -- or else: were effectively being used as unwitting puppets for Fed level manipulators who have blood of many dripping from their hands).

Face it. The real reasons you say you'll not respond to me, is that for the multiple instances of your having said things that are in error, having those errors pointed out publicly wounded your pride, which led you to try to "get back" at me, but each false accusation you formed kept blowing up in your own face, one way or another.

I’ll shed a tear for you.... and say a prayer for you as well.

Tears? ha. You'll shed tears for little 'ol me you say. And say (mumble? a "little"?) prayer...

Can you ever have a conversation, do you recall a single one of them --that you did not posture and pose, and tell some sort of [even one] little white-lie fib? ...or worse

And prayers for me, when instead of those, it would have been simple matter for you to have pulled in your horns, put those away, and stuck with facts, accepting that there are (or at the least, reasonably could be) mitigating factors that would serve to undermine your broad sweeps of all-encompassing accusation. You're the type who would turn away from the thirsty (as if you did not see them) and to the hungry say "be ye filled", straight afterwards going along your own self-absorbed "way" having not offered them a morsel (lest it have been laced first with just a wee mite bit of poison).

You say that you'll "pray for me", me who it is beneath yourself to communicate with?

How far do you think that'll get you with God? You think He will hear you, and somehow reward you, ratifying that self-imagined sense of magnificence (of and for your own self) that you've got going on?

Goodbye One-Trick. Ride your ridiculously crass, pathetic little stick-horse stead off into the sunset, imagining yourself victor of epic battles (that you've not yourself personally fought).

Quadrophenia

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.