Posted on 11/10/2015 6:51:16 PM PST by don-o
A Texas grand jury returned indictments Tuesday against 106 of the 177 people who were arrested after a shootout between cops and members of two motorcycle clubs left nine people dead at a Waco restaurant in May.
The McLennan County grand jury returned true bills accusing the 106 suspects of engaging in organized criminal activity, with the underlying offenses being murder and aggravated assault, District Attorney Abel Reyna said Tuesday night in Waco.
Charges against the 71 other suspects weren't presented Tuesday but will be "at a later time," Reyna said.
(Excerpt) Read more at nbcnews.com ...
John Wilson nailed it. Cookie cutter probable cause generates cookie cutter indictment. Shame on that Grand Jury for failing to demand individualized probable cause.
“...John Wilson, the president of the McLennan County Cossacks, and his son, Jacob Wilson, were both indicted Tuesday. Wilson said that he had “full confidence” neither he nor his son would be convicted and that he would refuse a plea bargain if offered....”
********************************************************************************
And THAT is the proper course of action to take...REFUSE to take any plea deals. Make Reyna actually PROVE his bogus charges.
And that association is assumed by the patches you have sewed on your clothing. This continues to boggle my mind.
If these conspiracy cases go to trial, would a defense attorney dare to venture into challenging that by planting into the jurors the ideas of how such criteria, applied to other groups, is a Pandora's Box?
Defendant need not do that. If it gets as far as jury instructions (even if it doesn't), the specificity of findings necessary to conclude a person conspired precludes conviction unless the jury practices jury nullification - and if that happens, the convict has a right to appeal.
Mere presence at the scene of an event, or mere similarity of conduct among various persons and the fact that they may have associated with each other, and may have assembled together and discussed common aims and interests, does not necessarily establish proof of the existence of a conspiracy. Also, a person who has no knowledge of a conspiracy, but who happens to act in a way which advances some object or purpose of a conspiracy, does not thereby become a conspirator. Source: Pattern Jury Instructions (Criminal Cases), Fifth Circuit, No. 2.21 (1990) (modified). Court's instruction in United States v. All Star, et al., Crim. No. H-88-29 (S.D. Tex. 1990), aff'd, 962 F.2d 465 (5th Cir. 1992) (modified).
Government's Proposed Jury Instructions (in an unrelated case)
They arrested every biker who was there.
Good thing a Waco det3ective was the grand jury foreman.
For you to find the defendant guilty of this crime, you must be convinced that the government has proved each of the following beyond a reasonable doubt:First: That the defendant and at least one other person made an agreement to commit the crime of _______ (describe) as charged in the indictment;
Second: That the defendant knew the unlawful purpose of the agreement and joined in it willfully, that is, with the intent to further the unlawful purpose; and
Third: That one of the conspirators during the existence of the conspiracy knowingly committed at least one of the overt acts described in the indictment, in order to accomplish some object or purpose of the conspiracy.
Pattern Jury Instructions - Fifth Circuit Library System
I realize this a federal pattern instruction, but the principles of conspiracy are everywhere the same. The exact wording in Texas pattern instruction likely departs from the above, but the state has to prove an agreement, which is more than proving association.
Excellent, as usual, Cboldt.
Is Abel Reyna in some sort of delusional denial of reality? He surely must know what you have shared.
Even the trolls should be able to understand this.
IIRC, that situation - Cop as Foremen - got later squared away. Read that they had a different Foreman for this GJ.
Note, he said “theory.” He posts more to show that the theory is shaky at best.
This will be difficult for the trolls to process - one trick ponies that they are.
Clearly you are part of organized crime. Stay out of Texas!
He got a Texas court to agree that the cookie cutter accusation contains probable cause, and that inference can be used to get there. Judges like the "sort it out at trial" approach, it's more work and income for the judges. Generally, they don't care if there is probable cause, in fact. They'll manufacture it if necessary.
Reyna has a similar motive that the judges do - once there is a legal event that can be made to look like arrest without probable cause (and absence of indictment in the 180 day window after accusation and arrest looks like that), it opens the barn door for civil rights claims against the government. That can't be allowed, and as usual, the judges and DA are on the same team.
An unsealed indictment has to be floating around somewhere. Still haven't found a link to one.
Reyna said the grand jury handed down indictments in all of the 106 cases presented. Of those, nine were sealed pending arrests.
106 bikers indicted in Waco, Texas, restaurant shootout - UPI.com - Updated Nov. 11, 2015 at 9:02 AM
The trolls don't process information. They assert conclusions, often based on bogus law. I would expect them to continue, and to use the presence of indictment as evidence or proof that they have been correct all along.
Sooner or later the Waco police will run out of motorcycle riders to kill. Then they will start killing the good people of Waco.
No, they didn't. In fact, they didn't even arrest every Bandido or Cossack who was there. Five member of a veteran's biker gang were arrested and unarrested the next day.
A few snippets of Texas DPS Lieutenant Schwartz testimony in Bergman's examining trial. "Q" is Broden, "A" is Schwartz ...
Q. Okay. What differentiates the Desgraciados' financial support with -- give me the name of a club that provides dues to the Bandidos who were not charged that day?Same witness below, "A" is still Schwartz ...A. I know specifically the Blue Spiders were not --
Q. Okay.
A. -- arrested that night.
Q. Was it your understanding that anybody that was a member of a group that supported the Bandidos or the Cossacks and were merely present at Twin Peaks that day, were arrested?A. No, sir, that's not correct.
Q. Okay. What distinguished between the people who were members of the groups who supported the Bandidos and Cossacks and were present that day that were not arrested and the people that supported the Bandidos and the Cossacks that day that were there that day that were arrested?
MR. JARRETT: Object to relevance in this case, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Well, I want to hear that. I want to know what it was.
THE WITNESS: My understanding, we secured a perimeter around the initial Twin Peaks area. The people that were inside the perimeter were basically at the front row seat of the incident. Those people were detained. There were hundreds of people that were associated with both clubs. Primarily the Bandidos that were outside the initial perimeter that did not go to jail.
Broden went on to name some names ...
Q. Well, were you familiar with Thomas Langley who was arrest -- who was at least detained that day with a jacket that read Support the Fat Mexicans?A. No, sir, I'm not.
Q. Were you familiar with a man name Robert McCoostin[phonetic] who was arrested that day being a member of The Klan and the support group for the Fat Mexicans?
A. No, sir, I'm not familiar with that.
Q. So you wouldn't have any explanation as to why these people were not arrested and Mr. Bergman was?
Similar question was put to Chavez, the police officer who swore out the accusation against most or all of the 177. "below, "A" is Chavez, "Q" is still Broden.
Q. (By Mr. Broden) Okay. Were other people present who -- at Twin Peaks that day who supported the Bandidos and/or the Cossacks by the clothing they wore who were not arrested?A. I believe early on there may have been some, yes, sir.
Q. And do they remain un-arrested today?
A. I believe so, yes, sir.
Q. Well, let me ask for the Judge's edification as much as mine; what distinguished between these other people we are talking about and Mr. Bergman?
A. I'm not sure.
Still no text of an indictment. Perhaps these are just as much "cookie cutter" as the complaints sworn out by Manuel Chavez.
Post of the day, at least.
So 106 heavily armed bikers attempted murder and there were only nine dead? Right.
Yup. Beware all Shriners!
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.