Posted on 11/05/2015 6:03:23 PM PST by Elderberry
McLennan County grand jury headed by an Iraq War combat veteran will begin hearing evidence next week in cases related to the May 17 Twin Peaks melee in which nine bikers were killed and 177 were jailed, according to courthouse sources.
The 12-person panel, summoned in a specially-called meeting, will assemble Tuesday morning, and prosecutors will begin presenting evidence from the Twin Peaks incident, the sources who spoke on condition of anonymity said.
Grand juries in McLennan County routinely meet twice a month on Wednesdays. However, because Wednesday is Veterans Day, the grand jury was asked to meet Tuesday.
If the grand jury wasn’t going to meet until the next regular meeting on Nov. 18, that would be more than six months after the bikers were arrested and possibly set off a flurry of motions from attorneys seeking relief for their clients.
The Code of Criminal Procedure allows defendants who remain in jail 90 days and who are not indicted the right to ask for personal recognizance bonds or reduced bonds that they can make. Most of the bikers had been freed within the 90 days, so the issue only applied in a few cases.
However, attorneys for defendants not indicted within 180 days can file motions asking that all charges be dismissed and that all bond conditions be removed, including curfews, ankle monitors and travel and association restrictions.
That does not preclude prosecutors from indicting defendants at the next grand jury session or subsequent meetings.
McLennan County District Attorney Abel Reyna and his first assistant, Michael Jarrett, did not return messages seeking comment Thursday.
Attorneys for bikers have been critical of McLennan County officials over the way most every aspect of the case has been handled so far, including the mass arrests of the bikers on identical arrest warrant affidavits, the initial setting of $1 million bonds for each of them and the fact that a Waco police detective was randomly selected as a grand jury member and appointed foreman by a judge.
The grand jury over which the detective presided has since run its course and was replaced by the current grand jury, which includes a combat veteran as foreman and a Waco attorney as a member.
The new grand jury was seated Oct. 14. Prosecutors subpoenaed the president of the Bandidos motorcycle group’s Austin chapter to appear before the new grand jury but settled for his records from a motorcycle confederation instead.
Prosecutors sought documents from Jimmy Graves, a Bandido who also heads the Texas Confederation of Clubs and Independents, a coalition of motorcycle groups, according to Bill Smith, an attorney for the confederation.
Smith and Graves worked out an agreement with Jarrett to provide the documents requested in the subpoena, and he was not required to go before the grand jury.
"The prosecutor wanted documents about the Confederation of Clubs and Independents, how it was organized, what it is, minutes from meetings, things like that," Smith said. "Those were given to the prosecutor, and there was no need to testify."
Graves was on his way to Waco on May 17 but got caught in traffic on the way up from Austin and was not at Twin Peaks when the violence erupted, Smith said.
"The Confederation of Clubs and Independents abhors violence. It is a grassroots organization that has as its mission political, social, safety and awareness issues for motorcyclists and others on the road," Smith told the Tribune-Herald last month. "Since this all took place at a COC&I meeting, I'm sure they just want to know a little bit more about the COC&I and its function and what role, if any, it played in all of this. I have been to COC&I meetings throughout the country and there have never been any physical confrontations or even any verbal confrontations. Everyone is welcome."
Re: justice for the dead and their families
...
I guess it means what level of justice each family is willing to or forced to finally accept. The criminal justice system itself does not encompass all possibilities.
According to biker testimony of who shot whom, one or more of the dead bikers were also shooters.
Say my family member was killed by a biker who is also dead, so can’t be charged with murder.
Will the legal system inform the family who killed their loved one, even if that person is dead and can’t be charged? I would think that type of understanding or closure would be important to a family.
So if the shooter is dead, is anyone else responsible or accountable? In the sense of a true conspiracy, that some leaders told at least some of their gang members to go to Waco, such that those specifically informed individual bikers called to Waco knew they might not be coming back alive? Don-o do you or cboldt believe that would a legitimate application of the conspiracy charge? Not a rhetorical question, even though it would be hard to prove. Say that leader did not himself throw a punch or shoot anyone. Heck, maybe he wasn’t there when the fighting broke out . . .
The families will find out who was shot by LE and it will be evaluated to be a justified shooting or not.
Regardless, the person is dead. Say that dead biker, shot by LE instead of by another biker, went to Waco accepting that he might not come back alive. Is the leader who told him to ride to Waco accountable in any way? Or does the family just get to find out who shot him?
Now, some families might take some comfort that although their loved ones died, this terrible tragedy and unnecessary loss of life, should never happen again. I hope they would receive at least that comfort. Sadly, I don’t see many people saying that biker loyalty to gang above family is even a problem, much less that it might have played a part in the shoot out.
If it was a “set up” by the feds or incompetence on the part of LE, there are people who are willing to get to the truth. Even then, individual bikers made individual decisions and they are not all innocent.
” civil suits that will be filed against governmental entities”
...
At least one family has also filed a civil suit against TP.
There is more than enough blame to go around.
I think in this instance the huge number of suspects and quantities of evidence made it a very difficult case to piece together. I wouldn't be surprised to see very few murder charges filed even if it turns out most of the bikers were shot by other bikers. Very difficult to prove charges beyond a reasonable doubt in that kind of situation.
“very few murder charges”
...
I agree, which is the impetus for my wondering about how the families will get justice or at least some closure based on an understanding of how their loved ones died.
In the CNN Twin Peaks surveillance video combo that was leaked last week & reported on CNN, I noticed that the clear, close view of a person dressed as a ‘biker’ that shoots his pistol and smoke can be seen coming from it is missing from the collection of Waco PD mugshots of the arrestees released a couple days after the crime. The man is visible in several other video fragments CNN aired(firing his pistol, hiding his pistol, running to a bathroom & surrendering with his arms in the air to M-16 toting Waco PD entering TP. If he was arrested, his mug shot is not in the collection of 170 released online.
Someone on the GJ should question this. How can a GJ vote to indict someone seen firing a pistol in a restaurant who has no mug shot? Why hasn’t Reyna noticed this & tried to identify the man?
BTW, the two ‘bikers’ seen with bloody eye lids are also missing mugshots. Not sure of the status of the wounded biker being held up.
I suspect undercover cops that were arrested or managed to avoid arrest by identifying themselves is why their mugshots are not released. This fellow that shot the pistol shot it in the vicinity of the dead biker near the door & registration tent, making him a strong murder candidate.
Welcome to FreeRepublic, interesting first post.
He pointed a gun at me and I believed he was going to shoot so I shot him. Valid defense.
Yes indeed, it is a very good observations. I will attempt to add my small two bits shortly. The devil is in the details, and the more scrutiny of the videos and other statements, the better.
“is missing from the collection of Waco PD mugshots”
I agree as I have also not been able to identify him from the mugshots and so far, from pictures of the victims.
“How can a GJ vote to indict someone seen firing a pistol in a restaurant who has no mug shot? Why hasn’t Reyna noticed this & tried to identify the man?”
VERY good question! Some at the scene managed to get away. Well, the bikers who were there know who the Patio shooter was, but we don’t.
“Not sure of the status of the wounded biker being held up; he appears to be close to death.”
A very poignant part of the video, and no, I have not been able to identify him either. Again, others know but we don’t.
“He pointed a gun at me and I believed he was going to shoot so I shot him. Valid defense.”
...
There is that, too.
But some who shot back (like some who shot “first”) are dead.
Very few are likely to be indicted for murder.
Without knowing much about Texas law, I would still assume that if the prosecution can make some sort of conspiracy, or gang related mayhem charge stick, that it would nullify a self defense claim. Otherwise a mugger could claim defense against a victim that resists.
I am highly skeptical of the idea that a UC officer would ignite this fight from either side of this gathering. Way too much risk. CI’s are another issue entirely. There are plenty of them that take reward money and still participate in criminal activities.
That's not a good assumption. Self defense, especially use of deadly force in self defense, is fairly complicated. Being shown to have conspired, without more, doesn't cut off the defense.
Your mugger example is a non sequitur - the mugger is the actor, so any conspiratorial predicate on the mugger's part is irrelevant. The mugger's claim to self defense is taken away by the mugger's use of force, or immediate and credible threat to use force.
In the grand jury room, they will see what the sate chooses to present. This is deliberately a one-sided presentation because our legal system is adversarial. It is the state against the accused.
It is up to the accused to produce exculpatory evidence to the petit (trial) jury, although the state is obliged to produce exculpatory evidence that it has, to the defendant. That is all post-grand-jury.
Grand jurors also bring their own personal knowledge and baggage into the grand jury room.
I doubt the questions you ask about the shooter come up, if the shooter is being protected by the state. If the state wants to indict the shooter, it can. It is irrelevant if the shooter was arrested in May, or not. He can be arrested for the shooting later, and if the shooting resulted in a death (murder), there is no statute of limitations.
The way I read that, if they find something related to the fight greater than a class C misdemeanor, the claim of self defense would be invalid.
We agree. I was simply illustrating the basic principle of self defense. Proving conspiracy usually takes a great deal of investigative work and an informant.
It appears to me that the burden to present the truth of the Waco Twin Peaks shooting & massacre falls on the shoulders of the defense attorneys for the accused indicted by the Grand Jury. Am I correct in that assessment?
Best wishes
mr milch
That's not what the section you cited actually says. I assume I don't need to blockquote the part you paraphrased so you can read exactly what it says, but at bottom, the legal structure created is "presumed to be reasonable," which is not the same as "valid [only] if."
You will further notice that section 9.31 of Texas Penal code has a part (b), which begins, "The use of force against another is not justified ..." If the law actually had the effect that you read into it, the predicate that you think invalidates self defense would be recited under part (b).
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.