Grand jury to start hearing Twin Peaks biker cases next week

-- 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? --

In principle, both sides are obliged to present truthful information. The state cherry picks and colors evidence that cuts against the accused/defendant, and the accused/defendant does the opposite. That's the "adversarial" feature.

It's unusual for both sides of that affair to be "fully honest," and it's common to find literal honesty that comes short of honesty, for example, "depends on what the meaning of 'is' is." Literally honest, but also deliberately misleading.

After the adversaries have trotted out their respective lines of BS, it is up to the finder of fact to figure out or reconstruct historical reality (with some degree of uncertainty, always), based on these known-biased presentations.

The legal principle I was pointing out was that it's not the state's role to defend the accused. The function of the state is not to get justice, nor is it to get to the truth. The role of the prosecutor is to get convictions; contrary to all the "prosecutorial ethics" tripe that is put out to camouflage reality.

FWIW, and I think this is obvious to any thinking person, the defense attorney is sometimes a bigger skunk than the prosecutor.

The actor's belief that the force was immediately necessary as described by this subsection is presumed to be reasonable if the actor:
(1) knew or had reason to believe that the person against whom the force was used:
(A) unlawfully and with force entered, or was attempting to enter unlawfully and with force, the actor's occupied habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment;
(B) unlawfully and with force removed, or was attempting to remove unlawfully and with force, the actor from the actor's habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment; or
(C) was committing or attempting to commit aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery;
(2) did not provoke the person against whom the force was used; and

(3) was not otherwise engaged in criminal activity, other than a Class C misdemeanor that is a violation of a law or ordinance regulating traffic at the time the force was used.

So what does paragraph (3) mean, since it is a requirement of the actor?

I already answered that. The answer is the difference between absence of presumption, and absence of justification (or something that renders the defense invalid, to use your vernacular).

Sec. 9.31. SELF-DEFENSE. (a) Except as provided in Subsection (b), a person is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary ... The actor's belief that the force was immediately necessary as described by this subsection is presumed to be reasonable if ...

Texas Penal Code Chapter 9

Part (a)(3) removes a presumption of reasonableness (when it exists, the presumption takes the question of reasonableness away from the jury); but does not remove justification.

I suspect undercover cops that were arrested or managed to avoid arrest by identifying themselves is why their mugshots are not released.

CI or undercover, possibly acting as agents provocateur.

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.

Yes, and it will be interesting if it can be determined that started the general fracas. If his shots sparked the police enfilade, he likely incited murder as well.

So you are saying the Texas law says that in an escalating fight, the fastest draw wins and can claim self defense?

-- So you are saying the Texas law says that in an escalating fight, the fastest draw wins and can claim self defense? --

No, that's not what I said, and that's not what Texas law says. Generally, the one who initiates or escalates use of force (either by use of force or credible threat) in not entitled to claim self defense.

Your belief that being engaged in a criminal act precludes self defense, especially when the underlying crime is conspiracy, is not what the law says. A person who was otherwise engaged in criminal activity loses the presumption that his use of force was reasonable.

Sometimes, in an escalating fight, the fastest draw wins and can claim self defense. If you shove somebody first (that is, if you use force without justification), and they threaten your life with an ax (escalation by the other guy), you are entitled to defend your life (even using deadly force), even though you started the fight by shoving. You aren't presumed to have acted reasonably in your use of deadly force, you have to prove it. You lost the presumption of acting reasonably, but not the right to self defense.

That section of code is pretty complex, but it says what it says; which is not the same thing that you claim it says.

From the story underneath the CNN video at http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/29/us/texas-biker-shootout-new-details/index.html

” A large group ran from the gunfire toward Waco police Officer George Vrail as he stepped out of his patrol car. He ordered them to the ground; some said they’d been hit. The shooter, they said, fled into the bathroom. “

...
Do you think they are talking about the shooter in the video? Were you able to identify the circle patch or little rectangular patch on the front of the shooter’s vest?

If he was arrested, his mug shot is not in the collection of 170 released online.

How do you know the shooter isn't one of the 170 mugs released online?

Why hasnâ€™t Reyna noticed this & tried to identify the man?

Again, where do you get the absurd notion that Waco police and the DA don't know the identity of that shooter in the video?

I suspect undercover cops that were arrested or managed to avoid arrest by identifying themselves is why their mugshots are not released.

We've been down this road before with that discredited dirt bag at AR, calling released ICVMC members under cover cops.

Screw him and you too if you subscribe to that brand of horse manure...and it sounds like you do.

But some who shot back (like some who shot “first”) are dead.

Very few are likely to be indicted for murder.
*********************************************************************************
Do WE (i.e., the public) KNOW that among the dead were some who were “shooters”? The ONLY person I’ve seen “dropped” in a video (that has been posted on FR) was of an apparently unarmed man who appeared to have been shot in the back as he ran away. The “dropped” (and presumed by me to be dead)) individual is the same one that much later in the video had an LEO person come by and drop something next to the unmoving body. The “something” that was dropped may well have been a “throw down” IMHO.

I'll study the leaked Twin Peaks visuals in depth today & will get back to you with a response. The more eyes that examine the released visuals, the more good, solid info can be collectively obtained. The person CNN’s reporter stated was running for the bathroom is, in my opinion, the same person that shot his pistol & is later shown ditching it I the restaurant.
Just among my friends, there's a lot of different opinions of why the man shot the pistol; some believe he was trying to break up the fight out in the parking lot, some think he's a hitman for either of the rival biker clubs, some say he's running for his life & fired in desperation.
CNN let a good story slip through its fingers by not checking the mugshots against the video of the shooter CNN aired. If arrested, how & why that man's mugshot vanished is an intriguing mystery. If LEO was trying to hide his presence as a shooter during the crime, why didn't they destroy the video?
I'll check the logos for bikes & items associated with them too. In a different view of the shooter firing his pistol taken further back that the closer one, the shooter runs to a small swing gate from the vicinity of the parking lot & registration tent, opens the small gate with his left hand, stretches out his right arm & fires one shot before moving off camera behind a wall to the viewer's right. This happens just as 4 ‘Cossacks’ climb over the TP patio rail & crawl on the floor, moving left to right. There doesn't appear to be anyone chasing the shooter into TP,; he enters solo & immediately points his pistol & fires 1 round. The smoke is very visible in the closer to the shooter video angle.
Two heavy set bikers outside the patio drop down to the ground like heavy sacks of potatoes just as the shooter fires his round. That's why I'd nominate the shooter as a possible murderer; 2 bikers bodies are visible from the air covered with sheets in this same area the two bikers fell.
As people globally become aware of this shooter (the only one visible in crime scene video thus far)why he did what we see him doing becomes a tantalizing mystery. His explanation for his actions needs to be heard by the public trying to make sense of this horrific loss of & wounding of life at Waco's TP. The cops need to find & talk to the man imho, not pretend he wasn't there participating in the slaughter.

“How do you know the shooter isn't one of the 170 mugs released online?”

I made screen grabs from the clearest leaked TP videos that captured the shooter at his closest point to the camera & compared them to each & every of the biker mugshots released online, including the two women & dark races. I could not find a match. If you believe there is a match for the leaked TP shooter in the online mugshots, please post your match candidate & let everyone take a look at it & read what they think. I'm not above being in error.

“Again, where do you get the absurd notion that Waco police and the DA don't know the identity of that shooter in the video?”

I have no doubt the commanders of that LEO operation know the identities of a lot of operatives. They can't afford to endanger their lives by pointing them out in videos. To be honest with you, I didn't expect ANY video to come out simply because UI & CI run the risk of being killed if their covers are ‘blown’. Their effectiveness in future operations is also at risk. In the DPS report that came out a few weeks back it was disclosed by the report's author that undercover cops were inside TP but were moved outside the restaurant. The shooter than runs into TP & fires the pistol ran into the restaurant's patio area from the direction of the outside parking lot & sidewalk.

As far as your problem with AG, you need to take whatever your beef is with him up with him at his cyber space house. This is a different house with a different owner.

“Do WE (i.e., the public) KNOW that among the dead were some who were “shooters”?”

...

H-A, after following these threads since the beginning, I know I am not the only one who is frustrated at not knowing what the DA and any number of bikers do know. Amazing, isn’t it, that after all these months, we are still motivated to make sense of it all, when the information that is known, is not known to us. We are left with clues and hearsay and conjecture. Yet we still try to piece it all together. We feel we have to piece it together, and share our bits of observations with others on FR.

The families may be like us, wondering. Maybe they know more than we do, because of what they were told by those who were there, their circle of acquaintances. But they still need and deserve closure via an official accounting of how those nine died, at whose hands, etc.

So please, take my previous comments in that light.

As far as we the Public know anything, it is “hearsay” at best.

Say 4 or 5 were killed by bikers, and 4 or 5 were killed by LE. Even if only one of the killed was also one who killed, the odds are, there are not going to be many bikers accused of murder by the Grand Jury, as I see it.

I have based my observations on “hearsay”: things that bikers have said over these past months. You can take it as less that that, as hypothetical or conjecture. My point was, how the families get closure, and sadly, they are likely to not get much closure from the Grand Jury proceedings. How many will be charged with murder? What is your guess?

Just a couple snippets of “hearsay” but there are some others.

E.g. “Ledbetter saw at least one Cossack, nicknamed Side Track, fire back at the rival bikers, but he was quickly killed.”
So Side-Track (Campbell), shooter and killed.

“Seven Cossacks died, and one Bandido, a guy nicknamed Candy Man, who was charging and firing at police, according to Ledbetter.”
So Candyman (Manuel Rodriguez), shooter and killed. He may or may not have been the one who shot Diesel (Boyett) and Dog (Russell).

Etc. More than one source of biker testimony, all previously posted on FR, state that the first three to die (Chain, Diesel, and Dog) were killed by Bandidos or affiliates.

H-A at the moment I am not going to quote other biker sources. I don’t have the heart for it at the moment. Everything I have seen, you and everyone else who has followed this from the beginning has also seen, and searching with biker names brings it all back up.

There are two points.

One is that, everything we are struggling to piece together and understand, is actually known; but just not by us.

Two, the families deserve closure, and I don’t foresee much of that coming from the Grand Jury proceedings.

H-A, this is not about FReepers vs FReepers. There is nothing to win by FReepers vs Freepers. We all want the actual TRUTH. Much of that TRUTH is actually known, but not by us.

Respectfully and etc.

I appreciate your detailed observations from the video. You have gleaned more detail from the video than I have been able to. Please keep us informed. The mystery shooter is not really a mystery to those on the scene, but he is to us. And of course, we want to know who he is, and what he did in the video sequences you have described.

I made screen grabs from the clearest leaked TP videos that captured the shooter at his closest point to the camera & compared them to each & every of the biker mugshots released online, including the two women & dark races. I could not find a match.

Lol...and you think that is sufficient enough investigation to jump to the conclusion that the shooter is an undercover police?

A classic example of one reason why this evidence should NOT be placed into the public domain prior to completion of the official investigation.

-btw I conducted the same investigation you described above and found three possible matches, including one very possible match with additional evidence to corroborate.

Go figure...

Let me guess, you picked the 3 women. Post your matches & give the members a chance to comment on your investigation. DPS has released info that undercovers were both inside & outside TP before, during & outside the shooting. You can't make them disappear by trolling. DPS authorities placed them there. They were placed there in the middle of a C of C & I meeting for a reason. Most people associate undercovers with sting operations. Sting operations usually involve some sort of bait offered by the UC or UI. Drugs, illegal weapons & ammo make good bait. So does a bait vehicle loaded with either or both for sale. If that's what the troller is trying to divert attention from, people all over the world are looking at this case & drawing their own conclusions, regardless of what plays out in Court. Supposed stockpiling of illegal weapons is what Waco I (Davidians) was all about. I believe Waco II is a continuation of I.

For everyone else, I need a bit more time to analyze the shooter's ‘logo’ on his shirt. Allow me to fudge a bit here: it appears to me that the shooter is wearing a black vest on top of a sleeveless black shirt that has a yellow or white logo opposite the heart side of his chest. The logo resembles a killer whale leaping out of the ocean. Sea World didn't give me a match, nor did Harley Davidson.
On the heart side of the vest is a yellow rectangular logo.

I cannot read the wording.

The back of the vest appears to show the Cossacks logo in the lower center of the jacket. Noticing that the vest is ‘stripped down’ from the patches visible on Cossack vests on those higher up their chain of command, I believe this shooter is dressed as a Cossack ‘prospect’.

In the closer video of the shooter, I noticed what appears to be a ‘Cossack’ claps his hands as the shooter runs past him & out a door. The ‘Cossack’ follows him out the door.

CNN has superior visual editing & analysis equipment than we peons have. The manner in which they focused on the shooter in several different scenes suggests to me that they CNN has more video than they released & are studying it, perhaps for a future broadcast.

I encourage all interested in the case to take advantage of the leaked videos, view them & study them & share your observations. Remember the 1st released leaked video was the Don Carlos video that shows a biker shot dead & laying across the curb for a long time before cops move his body off camera. It also shows what appears to be a thrown down gun placed by a LEO near the rear of the small white car the biker’s body had been laying near along with other pertinent information about the case. Don't let anonymous trollers throw FP off.

Don’t expect anything except a rubberstamp to what the police did.