Nope. ISTM that one function of the examining trial is to confirm that probable cause did indeed exist to arrest. Defendant wants to challenge probable cause and believes that a video would show that he did not conspire (which is all that anyone is charged with.)
I guess the “Nope” was the answer to “is wrong to try to force the police to hand over a copy?”
OK my bad, I looked at the article again and see that the subpoena is not to the police, but to a private party so, is “seeking records in a criminal case from a non-party” a bad thing?
“video would show that he did not conspire”
Wondering how the video could show he did not “conspire”?
“video would support Clendennen’s defense that he did not “participate in nor encourage any violence” at Twin Peaks.”
But for probable cause for conspiracy, he need not be alleged to have personally committed a criminal act.
Don’t blame me or the cops or the DA, that is the law under which he was charged.
Also note that the Cossacks and Scimitars need not have been previously listed as an organized criminal gang for the conspiracy charge. The requirement is three or more etc., not three or more from an organization on a specified list.
I have said before, I am no fan of RICO-type statutes, and deem they would not be necessary in a civilized free society in which there were no organized criminal gangs preying upon innocent citizens and society. The modus operandi of criminal gangs themselves made it seem necessary for legislation to reach persons inside the criminal organization and bring them to justice.
Not liking the law itself is one thing. Legitimately wondering how it might be applied to the events at Waco is another thing.
I am interested in any light which can be shed on the later.