Replies

HOW MANY YEARS HAS THIS BEEN GOING ON NOW???

Two years...five months...and three days...

Trying to be reasonable, maybe the prosecution should have been spotted 4, or 5 months to get their act together after the initial warrants for arrest were obtained?

But once indictments came down prosecution no longer had excuse for delay (but Book of Waco operates "differently" than other locales). Just ask Paul Looney. One of his client's hearings was rescheduled in ex parte hearing in judge's chambers (between a magistrate and an Assistant DA) outside of his presence. I'm led to think that's not how the laws indicate those sort of things are to supposed to happen. The prosecution's sole convenience (lacking agreement of the accused) is not without limits, and even then those limits have been stretched in regards to proceedings considered more kosher than 'Book of Waco' ways of skinning the targeted subjects.

I mean, they're going to charge a man with being complicit in the murders of 10* -- woopsy! -- 9 persons (two at least of whom the DA knows full well were shot and killed by LEO's), well then, they better be ready johnny-on-the-spot to back that up. That's the way it should go lacking agreement on part of the accused to waive their right to speedy trial -- which very many do "waive" and so therefor prosecutors get used to being able to delay things as long as they need. Take that away from them (or even try) and they get huffy. Well -- am I supposed to care?

If the DA's Office was not in position to proceed, or was unwilling to proceed against some, or even any of the defendants, they should not have filed the indictments against those defendants. It's pretty much that simple.

But no, the prosecution wanted to have that (potential life sentences) hanging over a whole bunch of people's heads so they could extort [limited] "confessions" in exchange for the accused point fingers at somebody else. That's a formula that could bring out the worst (not the truth, not 'unvarnished truth') but could bring out ANYTHING they thought would get themselves off the hook.

One of Looney's clients, which I think does have a court date now, has suffered having two previous set trial dates having been unilaterally yanked away from him...one of those dates was given to the guy presently, as of this writing being tried [Carrizal]. That change came only AFTER Assistant DA Amanda Dillon attended the trial of Howard Wayne Baker, in Fort Worth. I know this because I saw her there with my own eyes. She took copious notes. The template of "expert witness" testimony to build the impression within the minds of jurors that Bandidos (and other MC's too) are all criminal "gangs" she must have obtained from there. Why else, 10, to 12 days after that trial ended, a trial date that been set for Paul Looney's remaining client was unilaterally taken away and imposed upon Carrizal? As a possibly helpful hint here -- Howard Wayne Baker was characterized as having been "president" of Fort Worth chapter of Bandidos MC. Carrizal had been supposedly (according to what the McLennan County DA claims) vice- president of the Dallas chapter of Bandidos MC at the time of the blow-up at Twin Peaks, on May 17, 2015.

Looney has stated that he has filed FOUR demands for speedy trial for his client Cody Ledbetter, and I think Broden has about that many (or more) motions of that nature on record for his client, Matthew Clendennen.

Check out this recent one; https://www.dropbox.com/s/np4jsp3ysajfuhi/opposecontinuance.pdf?dl=0 which opposes DA's motion for "continuance" ("continuance" meaning yet more delay for Clendennan having his named cleared, but the DA wanting to put that off 'cuz hey -- they be busy. right?)

and this...

https://www.dropbox.com/s/96gj7u56hlb5a5t/show%20cause.pdf?dl=0 which is filing for show of cause why the State (in this respect, the DA's Office) should not be found in contempt and fined for failing to follow a Judge's order to ..."provide the defense council a "realistic" exhibit and witness list by Oct. 17, 2015".

It looks to me like the McClennan County DA's Office was so used to getting their way in most all "things" that they've neglected the very Constitution(s), and laws that empowers them to bring persons to trial in the first place.