Waco “Twin Peaks” Shooting Update – Police: “releasing video would compromise our investigation”…

Waco Police refuse to provide public any information about the Twin Peaks shooting citing, in general, “ongoing investigation”.  Video, autopsies, forensic and ballistic information will likely be withheld until the trials of the arrested, perhaps several years away.

Waco Shooting

(Excerpts Via Waco Tribune) One month after the deadly May 17 shootout at Twin Peaks prompted the unprecedented mass arrests of 177 bikers, officials are releasing limited information and say disclosure of certain evidence, including videos of the incident, would compromise their investigation.

[…] Residents have called for police to release all videos of the shooting to the public in order to clear up conflicting tales about the events that transpired before and during the bloody melee. Waco police have declined, citing concerns that doing so would adversely affect their investigation.

Local officials sent the videos to the FBI for analysis. Swanton said the videos include images from at least one squad car dash camera, Twin Peaks restaurant surveillance cameras and a surveillance camera from the neighboring Don Carlos Mexican restaurant.

[…]  Kelley Shannon, executive director for the Freedom of Information Foundation of Texas, said police records make up the majority of public information requests in the state. Likewise, the bulk of opinions sought from the AG’s office are from law enforcement agencies seeking to withhold information

[…]  “From my point of view, and many people in the public’s point of view, it should be released,” Shannon said of the Twin Peaks video. “But from the police’s point of view, sometimes they have internal information that’s part of their investigation where they feel like their whole case might be jeopardized by releasing it, so that’s why they argue that.

“Many of us feel like, release the information and let the public have at it, because it is part of the public record.”

The Attorney General’s Office has up to 45 business days to issue an opinion on whether the police department must release any videos from the shooting. Shannon said if the state office agrees that the videos should be made public, they could be available within 10 days of the decision.

[…] Waco Police Chief Brent Stroman said last week that three Waco officers fired a total of 12 shots from .223-caliber police-issued rifles during the shootout. All other shells found at the scene weren’t from law enforcement weapons, he said.

waco 28 supressor

waco 11 - 2

waco twin peaks from Don Carlos 2

So far, a total of 44 casings have been recovered, but Stroman said that total doesn’t include any casings that remained inside revolvers that were fired. He also disputed rumors that Waco police had officers assigned to the area in a sniper capacity.

[…] Prosecutors filed notices Tuesday of their intent to seize and forfeit a total of 27 vehicles, including 17 motorcycles, eight pickup trucks and two SUVs.

The documents allege the vehicles are contraband used during the commission of the melee which turned deadly.

Swanton said the vehicle forfeiture part of the investigation “has neared completion.”

A total of 130 motorcycles and 91 other vehicles were impounded from the scene on May 17, Chief Stroman has said, a number slightly above the original estimate.

As of Friday, police had released 91 motorcycles and 62 other vehicles to their registered owners in addition to releasing 20 motorcycles and 9 other vehicles to their lienholders after repossession orders were received.

waco 24 mugshots

[…]  As of midnight Thursday, 144 of the original 177 jailed bikers had been released on reduced bonds.

Each originally was jailed on a charge of engaging in organized criminal activity and held in lieu of a $1 million bond.

Housing all 177 of the bikers cost taxpayers about $8,000 a day.

Although bikers’ families said the move to reduce bonds was not made quickly enough, in some cases attorneys declined offers from judges to move up bond hearings because the lawyers said their schedules wouldn’t allow it.

Reduced bonds negotiated by prosecutors and defense attorneys range from $10,000 to $300,000.  (read full article)

Waco rally 1

Advertisements
This entry was posted in 2nd Amendment, 4th Amendment, 6th Amendment, Abusive Cops, Agitprop, Conspiracy ?, Police action, Professional Idiots, Uncategorized, Waco - Twin Peaks. Bookmark the permalink.

164 Responses to Waco “Twin Peaks” Shooting Update – Police: “releasing video would compromise our investigation”…

  1. auscitizenmom says:

    5+4+6=10
    5+4+6=35
    5+4+6=19
    Nope. It just isn’t adding up right. There is something really screwy going on, big time.

    Liked by 1 person

    • michellc says:

      All the time I see video released of police shootings, citizen shootings, robberies, etc., so it makes it hard for me to see how it can harm their investigation.

      The one biker’s attorney, I believe the one who gave the PC the other day has a press release that says a police officer lied to him. That he asked for his client’s phone to be released and was told they couldn’t do that because they had a warrant to search the phone, yet they didn’t have a warrant and actually didn’t get a warrant until almost a month after the arrests.
      That to me also seems like a constitutional violation to hold phones for a month without a warrant. We know the SC ruled police can’t search phones without a warrant and it’s kind of hard for me to believe they’ve had these phones for that long and nobody looked at them.

      Liked by 2 people

      • auscitizenmom says:

        I don’t know if somebody just screwed up royally or if there is something more nefarious afoot. A higher up wanted something taken care of and sent the word down and got all these police involved in something they really didn’t know about? Guess I have been watching too many Magnum, P.I.’s.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Jujube22 says:

        They want to look into the phones, see who called who and all that stuff so they can try to get a conspiracy charge. That’s the whole reason for keeping the phones. It’s not just for the videos.

        Like

        • wizzum says:

          And text messages

          Liked by 1 person

        • michellc says:

          Oh I’m sure they want to see their entire contact list, photos and the whole nine yards. The problem is they should have filed for warrants for the phones a long time ago, it doesn’t look good that they had them for a month before they even attempted to get warrants.

          I’m silly that way though and keep forgetting the Constitution is just an old piece of paper that gets in the way.

          Liked by 2 people

      • lovely says:

        Very early on the cell phones were listed as part of evidence that was going to be part of this case. I believe there were over 200 phones seized.

        I don’t believe for a minute that an attorney is surprised by his clients phone being considered evidence and therefore being combed for any and all evidence of going to TP
        to participate as a member of a criminal street gang.

        The vehicle forfeiture documents tell us as much.

        Like

        • Rojas says:

          Matthew Clendennen’s Attorneys made a mistake. He requested the cell phone and the police lied saying it had been seized pursuant to a search warrant.
          I expect he knows he’s in a knife fight now and there is no honor amongst thieves.

          Like

          • lovely says:

            Hi Rojas, I’m sorry but I don’t know what you mean by the police lied and said it had been seized pursuant to a search warrant?

            The phone had been seized and surely there would or has been a search warrant served so that the phone can be searched. so I am wondering where the lie is at?

            Like

            • Rojas says:

              Hello Lovely,
              This should explain my comment,

              “Broden explained that he had asked police for the return of his client’s mobile phone during a phone conversation with a Waco police detective on May 28, 2015 but was told that, at the time, the phone was being searched pursuant to a search warrant. Nevertheless, he has now learned that the warrant for Mr. Clendennen’s mobile phone was not obtained until June 12, 2015. “I was lied to by the Waco police,” said Broden.”

              http://www.justicenewsflash.com/2015/06/18/press-release-waco-pd-possibly-caught-lie-dallas-criminal-defense-lawyer_20150618134987.html

              Liked by 1 person

              • lovely says:

                Thank you Rojas, 🙂

                So Borden claims that Clendennen’s phone was illegally searched as no search warrant had been obtained when an officer told him the phone was being searched.

                Good for Borden is fighting for his client and if he can prove his assertion then the information from Clendennen’s phone if fruit of the forbidden tree and will not be allowed as evidence.

                I would allow for the possibility that when Borden requested the phone he was told by LE that it was evidence and would be searched pursuant to a search warrant. Either scenario is plausible in my mind.

                Like

        • pspsst says:

          Forfeiture of vehicles belonging to 27 bikers with “a past history of arrests” but none specific to the actual Twin Peaks event…….such as bullet matched to a gun. Out of 18 injured and 9 dead, not one match yet made in the forfeiture details.

          As for “criminal street gangs” that’s a panacea. Where that concept arises, from LEs or not, it’s plain misleading. Add sly party 3 to the Bandido and Cossack mix, the Police in unmarked cars with suppressors, along with a mixture of criminal street gang support groups and it’s become a whole lot of mass confusion on the part of everyone including the authorities — a recipe for disaster.

          Like

          • John Galt says:

            “Forfeiture of vehicles belonging to 27 bikers with “a past history of arrests”

            177 – 27 = 150

            Did they walk to Waco or are there 150 false arrests ?

            Like

            • annastinaa says:

              Wait a minute … as far as I could discern, of those 27 bikers (12 Cossacks, 15 Bandidos), 3 Cossacks had arrest records and they were for DUI, marijuana, unlawful carry of prohibited weapon, and aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, and 7 Bandidos had arrests and convictions, including the same charges as above plus many thefts, assault theft of vehicle,” dangerous drugs,” narcotic equipment, robbery, manufacture and delivery of controlled substances, and assault on a child.

              Like

            • annastinaa says:

              As far as I can discern, those 27 bikers (12 Cossacks, 15 Bandidos) whose vehicles were subject to forfeiture, only 11 of them had a past history of arrests (3 Cossacks, 8 Bandidos).

              Charges on the 3 Cossacks with arrest records includes: DUI, unlawful carry of prohibited weapon, marijuana, and aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.

              Of the 8 Bandidos with arrest records, charges also include: theft (lots of thefts), assault theft of vehicle, “dangerous drugs,” manufacture and delivery of controlled substances, robbery, narcotics equipment, and assault on a child.

              Like

          • Les says:

            In 2014, the Texas Department of Public Safety had listed the Bandidos Motorcycle Club as a “Tier 2″ threat, the same rating as the Crips, Bloods, and Aryan Brotherhood, but it did not evaluate the Cossacks.

            https://www.dps.texas.gov/director_staff/media_and_communications/2014/txGangThreatAssessment.pdf

            It is NOT misleading. Don’t call yourself an outlaw motorcycle gang if you don’t want to be labeled a criminal organization. And don’t run meth across the border, run prostitution rings, or fight pit bulls.

            It’s like the mob claiming to be the Italian Chamber of Commerce. Some of these guys aren’t choirboys. The ones who ARE choirboys should stay as far away from it as possible. Pretending to be cool by wearing a scary cut then whining when it bites you in the butt is ridiculous.

            Why do you have to be a gang to ride a Harley? You don’t. I feel sorry for everyone who watched Sons of Anarchy and wanted to be Jax, but common sense has to enter into it at some point.

            Like

            • annastinaa says:

              So what you’re saying is that even though it perfectly legal to wear a patch that says “Texas” while riding a Harleys on a public road anywhere in America, let alone Texas, and it is perfectly legal to join a club and name it whatever you please, that because a tiny handful of bullying criminal extortionists who belong to clubs (Bandidos, Mongols, Hells Angels, etc.) that assaults non-club members for doing what is perfectly legal …. then you deserve it, then you should forfeit your plain legal rights as an American because police can’t or won’t stop those who violently and forcefully deprive you of basic rights if you dare to legally ride a Harley in a certain public place wearing certain kind of legal clothing?

              What do we pay lawmen for? To catch criminals, or to arrest bikers based on what police “intel” tells them a piece of insignia theoretically broadcasts of their criminal intent?

              Liked by 2 people

            • pspsst says:

              Tier 2: Bandidos Outlaw Motorcycle Gang
              (U) Formed in the 1960s, the Bandidos Outlaw Motorcycle Gang (Bandidos OMG) conducts its illegal activities as covertly as possible and avoids high-profile activities such as drive-by shootings that many street gangs tend to commit. However, members are not covert about making their presence known by wearing the gang colors, insignia, and riding in large groups. They seek to turn public sentiment in their favor by organizing frequent charity runs. Bandidos are likely to focus on recruiting new members with no criminal history.

              Not all Tier 2’s are created equal. Methinks Texas LPD have fallen to the same media perpetuated myths in that they can’t seem to pin things on the Bandidos except to say it’s all underground, they suspiciously conduct charity events and recruit new members with no criminal history because……..they are “HIDING” something. Bandidos are left over legacy. Once on the list, you never get off that list.

              The Bloods (tier II) for example are noted to be violent and bloody.

              Liked by 1 person

  2. georgiafl says:

    The Prosecutor is the son of a TX Supreme Court Justice who prides himself on confiscating property of people who have been arrested. Cash and property are being confiscated by law enforcement all over the country. Something smells really bad.

    Liked by 2 people

    • georgiafl says:

      Cruz and Perry should get someone to investigate the Prosecutor’s financials.

      Liked by 2 people

      • georgiafl says:

        Abbot too.

        Liked by 1 person

        • patrickhenryrevisited says:

          If you wonder why you haven’t heard anything concerning this ‘incident’ from the three people you suggested………….

          Connect the dots.
          All five of them.

          Liked by 3 people

          • LadyRavenSDC says:

            “Connect the dots.” I totally agree patrickhenryrevisited. Nine people died on their watch and we have crickets?

            Liked by 2 people

            • patrickhenryrevisited says:

              Bigger might be bigger in Texas.
              And smaller can be bigger than bigger,
              There’s a small place ‘just up the road from me a piece.’
              You can ’bout see Waco from there too if you know in which direction to look.
              A lot of the biggest can be found there NOW and again.
              And if you happen to be invited to this place, it might get mentioned that you

              Don’t look that way…………..
              In a ‘friendly’ way, of course.

              Liked by 1 person

    • There used to be a lot of property forfeitures in Oregon, but I don’t see much any more. Not reported? Or not happening? Not sure, since I’m not in the loop any more. Should we do a little crowdsourcing? Each of us in various states could call our local LE people and ask. What do you say?.

      Like

    • Emily Litella says:

      Not exactly.

      DA Abel Reyna’s father, Felipe Reyna, was never a Texas Supreme Court Justice. He was a Justice on the Texas 10th Court of Appeals. Appointed in 2003 by Rick Perry; elected in 2004; defeated in the 2010 Republican Party primary by Al Scoggins. Felipe Reyna was the McLennan County DA 1977-1984.

      Not an Abel Reyna fan by any means. I just keep seeing this error repeated.

      Like

  3. Jujube22 says:

    Can anyone point out the location of the “brown Chevy Suburban” noted in this court filing? http://www.nbcdfw.com/investigations/Dallas-Bandido-Opened-Fire-in-Waco-Shootout-Police-308261651.html

    Like

      • bertdilbert says:

        It seems that the Banditios instigated and started it. Unlike Mr. “Bow Tie” assured us.

        Like

        • Rojas says:

          That’s not what I get from that. There are conflicting narratives..
          The officers recount from the video seems pretty consistent with Bowtie.
          Another narrative appear to be condensed from an interview with a Cossack at the hospital.

          Like

          • bertdilbert says:

            I am talking about a Bandito beating of a Cossack, followed by a Cossack beating of a Bandito. then Bandito’s moving meeting to Waco, Cossack territory.

            Followed by this.
            Nelson told the officers he was standing on the front patio of Twin Peaks while a prospect was standing in the parking lot watching over the motorcycles. Nelson told officers he saw two Bandidos drive into the parking lot, intentionally steering too close to the parked bikes. The first Bandido drove over the foot of the prospect, knocking him to the ground, according to the document.

            Like

            • Rojas says:

              It’s confusing and has to be viewed in macro. Several sources are cited with different points of view,. There are conflicting narratives.
              If you read only what the affiant alleged he viewed on video it is consistent with Bowties account. Pay particular attention to Page 8 paragraph 2.

              As far as Waco being Cossack territory that’s just silly, It’s like the Daughters of the Confederacy asking Watts to Observe Jeff Davis’s birthday because they bought a donut store there,

              Like

              • BobNoxious says:

                Rojas, just b/c you think calling Waco (or anytown) a “Cossack town” is silly doesn’t make it so; motorcycle gangs take territory very seriously and Waco is/was a “Cossock Town”.

                Like

                • Rojas says:

                  Bob United Clubs of Waco lists over 75 member clubs. They are members of the TCOCI.
                  http://unitedclubsofwaco.org/UCOW%20Members.htm
                  The Cossacks had 6 members total in the Waco chapter.

                  Do you have any objective evidence of this claim other than Bob says?

                  Like

                • pspsst says:

                  Reading the claims made by Waco PD regarding supposed “change of location” and Waco being a Cossack town, I get the feeling the LE dispenses “updates” for “our humble understanding”.

                  Like

                • pspsst says:

                  Was every Thursday not bikers’ night at TP too? It hardly seems a significant change of venue in addition to Waco not being a Cossack town.

                  Like

        • Jujube22 says:

          I want to know where that “brown chevy suburban” is located in the parking lot photos. Can anyone figure this one out?

          Liked by 1 person

  4. truthseeker says:

    demand the videos via discovery for the property seizure hearings….those will likely happen before any criminal trial.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. LadyRavenSDC says:
  6. John says:

    The ‘melee that turned deadly’ hmmm? Well, I wonder how many cops are going to prison for this one? NO biker that was shot or killed was shot by another biker…all who were shot or shot and killed were shot by cops….no cops were shot. So, no cops shot, no bikers shot any bikers….the blood bath here was nothing more than state sponsored murder….no different than Hitlers gestapo….truly no different. This is sick. Worse than ‘mass shootings’ by individual nutjobs because these people were killed under the color of authority and now they are trying to cover it up.

    Liked by 2 people

    • patrickhenryrevisited says:

      This ‘situation’ could be even worse than what you described.
      In Texas we have both ‘Castle’ and ‘Peaceable Journey’ laws.
      (If you are unfamiliar with them, you can get an overview here:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Texas).

      Then consider this scenario, keeping in mind that ‘the someone’ is lawfully armed:

      Someone is walking to their vehicle is assaulted.
      That person, in reasonable fear for their life employs lethal force in defense.
      That person is then:

      1.Killed by a law enforcement officer, with no other provocation or circumstance involved……. or
      2.Injured by a law enforcement officer, with no other provocation or circumstance involved……. or
      3. Is arrested and charged with a crime(s), with no other provocation or circumstance involved…….

      …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

      Now consider that you are a member of law enforcement that participated in any of the above described scenario

      …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

      Liked by 3 people

    • John – do we know this for sure, or is this somebody’s “educated guess?” Specifically that all who were shot or killed by shot by cops?

      Like

      • Les says:

        I’m sure this is based on 100% provable fact. I can tell by the Gestapo part.

        Many biker pages say all were killed by police, some biker pages say they were all shot in the back:

        ◦Daniel Raymond “Diesel” Boyett, 44, Cossack, shot in the head.
        ◦Wayne Lee “Sidetrack” Campbell, 43, Cossack, shot in the head and torso.
        ◦Richard Matthew “Chain” Jordan, III, 31, Cossack, shot in the head.
        ◦Richard Vincent “Bear” Kirschner, Jr., 47, Cossack, shot in unspecified place(s).
        ◦Jacob Lee Rhyne, 39, Cossack, shot in the neck.
        ◦Jesus Delgado Rodriguez, 65, unaffiliated, shot in the head and torso.
        ◦Charles Wayne “Dog” Russell, 46, Cossack, shot in the chest.
        ◦Manuel Issac Rodriguez, 40, Bandido, shot in unspecified place(s).
        ◦Matthew Mark Smith, 27, Scimitar, shot in the torso.

        I’m going to guess that “torso” means back in this instance. “Unspecified places” might also mean back. But I’m still guessing the police didn’t kill all nine of those folks. That crazy attorney said five were killed by police, other sources say four. I haven’t heard about the 18 injured (nobody cares, I guess, not as inflammatory).

        The police very well could have done all the killing, but I’ll wait for real evidence. Might be a long wait. I dislike the current trend of posting fantasy instead of fact. We see it with the FTP people and I see it in some here. Pot calling the kettle black…

        Like

        • pspsst says:

          Torso does not mean back. Torso means trunk of body. Which can be front or back. The torso can include upper shoulder region, chest, back, stomach, lower thoracic, etc. but basically not the neck and head, arms and legs. Instead of stating a few were injured in the shoulder, chest back, abdomen, lower thoracic, one groups the injuries as torso. Why assume torso means the back?

          Like

      • Greg Linden says:

        FWIW, at this point that’s my assesment of the situation; the cops did all the shooting and all the killing, the order came on high to arrest everyone on the scene to control the situation.The feds are most likely involved, and the local le were acting on their advisement. Whatever actually happened, Waco le are in full cover-up mode now, relying on obfuscation, delay and legal impediments in hopes the public will lose interest in time. My suggestion to the city government of Waco is to immediatly start budgeting for extensive lawsuit pay-outs for the forseeable future.

        Liked by 1 person

    • OP says:

      Early on they described the dead’s wounds…3 of the men had abdominal wounds which to me sounds more consistent with knifing or hand gun wounds. If bikers were shooting at each other they are aiming at the chest area…(mass)…

      I’m going to guess that 3 bikers had mess each other up pretty good…however we don’t know if a cop delivered a fatal kill shot or not…but three autopsies will be pretty interesting.

      Like

  7. lovely says:

    As to the turning over of the video I believe for the moment that the DA is stating that it is privileged.

    If there are crimes being committed captured on the tape(s) the defense is going to have a hell of a battle getting their hands on them as it can be argued that they are part of the prosecutors privileged evidence.

    The defense knows that the video exists, so the material tape will not be sprung on the defendant Perry Mason style which would not be allowed, but the contents of the video itself may well not be demanded by the court to be turned over as discovery.

    The DA has to follow the general provisions of discovery. That does not mean that they have to give the defendants everything that they have in their quiver. For example you can bet that there will be evidence farmed from the phones, but what that exact evidence will be won’t be known until a deal is being ironed out or a defendant is sitting in the witness stand.

    If all of the evidence the prosecutor had was automatically discovery demanded by law to be turned over to the defense, there would be no need for a defendant to ever get a court order for the prosecutor to do so.

    Like

    • patrickhenryrevisited says:

      Given the scope of prosecutorial duty in the Michael Morton Act, Senate Bill 1611, Effective date/ 1 01 2014……
      Each prosecutor is charged under Texas Code of Criminal Procedure art. 2.01 “not to convict, but to see that justice is done.They shall not suppress evidence or secrete witnesses capable of establishing the innocence of the accused.”

      Which ‘privilege’ are you suggesting the state will invoke.
      Statute, Article please

      Like

      • lovely says:

        The Michael Morton Act does much to remedy the misunderstandings outlined above by codifying the requirement that the prosecution must provide favorable evidence wherever it resides. This is whether it is contained in the prior statement of a witness or even in work product.

        https://www.goldsteinhilley.com/presentations-lectures/the-michael-morton-act/

        The Morton Act was drawn into law because exculpatory evidence was hidden and an innocent man went to jail for 25 years.

        I’m finding Texas defense attorney’s websites to be very helpful in navigating the law there.

        If the video was of a favorable nature for the defendants the prosecutor would be demanded by law to turn it over to the defense immediately in accordance with the Michael Morton Act. In fact the defense would not even have to ask for the video the DA would be the legal obligation to turn it over.

        I thought I mentioned Morton above, anyhow here is a bits more info about it that I have handy. even the defense attorney acknowledges that there is privileged information.

        Information need not be exculpatory under Morton but it does need to be “favorable to” the defendant.

        Since we do not obtain much in discovery, compared to civil litigants, we may not be certain that we are going to employ that strategy until the case plays out at trial.*

        The prosecution burden of proof is a high one and it should not be eased by requiring a roadmap produced by the defense through the pretrial disclosure of defense strategy, nor by requiring the release of privileged information just so the defense can obtain Brady evidence.6 Nor should the definition of Brady require prosecutors to exercise discretion regarding the merits or materiality of the evidence that they are being asked to disclose. If they would hate to tell us about it, it should be disclosed. Simply put, evidence favorable to the defendant should be produced. And it should be produced pretrial, when counsel can make meaningful use of it.

        Why would there even be a need for pre-trial discovery requests if legally (Morton) all the evidence that the State had in totality be perpetually required to be turned over to the define? It simply isn’t the case.

        ABA Policy on Brady

        The ABA CJS has formed a task force to reform federal criminal discovery in this and many other respects. Below you will see that the ABA and NACDL has already taken steps to reform Brady problems in all jurisdictions. 16

        ABA Resolution

        RESOLVED, That the American Bar Association urges federal, state, territorial and tribal governments to adopt disclosure rules requiring the prosecution to seek from its agents and to timely disclose to the defense before the commencement of trial all information known to the prosecution that tends to negate the guilt of the accuse, mitigate the offense charged or sentence, or impeach the prosecution’s witnesses or evidence,except when relieved of this responsibility by a protective order

        FURTHER RESOLVED, That the American Bar Association urges federal, state, territorial and tribal governments to adopt disclosure rules requiring the prosecution to make timely disclosure to the defense before a plea of guilty of all information, which may include impeachment evidence, known to the prosecution that tends to negate the guilt of the accused or mitigate the offense charged or sentence, except when relieved of this responsibility by a protective order

        Even with the Michael Morton Act in place, it is important to seek and make a record regarding the need for disclosure of Brady evidence without an order for disclosure and record made of what the state claimed it had or Michal Morton would not be free today. Always make a record of what you have requested, obtain an order reflecting what the court deems should be disclosed, and get the prosecution on record on what is has sought disclosed

        Up with a sick dog since 3:30 so I am going back to bed.

        Like

        • lovely says:

          Sorry for the typos, really tired.

          This should have obviously read;

          Why would there even be a need for pre-trial discovery requests if legally as some are claiming all the evidence that the State has in totality is required to be turned over to the defense immediately upon the prosecutor discovering it?

          Witholding evidence that is favorable to a defendant is misconduct. Withholding evidence that is privileged is not.

          Like

          • pspsst says:

            It’s not that complicated. The videos in Mike Brown case was released rapidly to dampen public mis-perception of LE conduct. The same issue would apply here. You could argue that the evidence is “not favorable to the defendants” but it doesn’t wash because there is strong need in the TP case here to correct any conceptions of misconduct by LE. Sharron (I forget her exact name) explicitly states this excuse of privilege is more often used to avoid discovery.

            Like

          • art tart says:

            lovely shared ~ “Simply put, evidence favorable to the defendant should be produced. And it should be produced pretrial, when counsel can make meaningful use of it.”

            lovely ~ Though I respect your legal opinion, I too share a healthy respect for the law, but not all Prosecutors are honest, especially when they too have a lot at stake when it’s a big Natioinal case & eyes are watching. Did you watch GZ’s trial? When treepers have watched Corey/BDLR try to hide exculpatory evidence from MOM/West/GZ only to be exposed in GZ’s trial, many treepers don’t share your confidence that exculpatory evidence is always shared by Prosecutors. Because it should be produced by the Prosecution doesn’t mean it is always produced as we watched. The burden is then put on the Defense to find out what the Prosecution has hidden, in GZ’s case, Corey/BDLR were exposed by a male employee that saw the exculpatory evidence, his attorney contacted MOM/West & MOM/West exposed Corey/BDLR. Corey promptly fired the employee, the employee promptly sued Corey.

            Corey tried it again in a case of a female employee that was fired from her office & the employee sued Corey & won a settlement. What was exposed by Corey’s own Attorney was more exculpatory evidence to the defense was Corey’s e-mails she had with held showing what the employee stated in the employee’s lawsuit, validating the employee. Again, Corey was exposed Nationally, the Judge bitch slapped Corey exposing her yet again. YET! Corey is corrupt/remains employed by the State of Fla.

            lovely ~ you are asking eveyone as you have done, to expect the Prosecution to respect the sharing of exculpatory evidence rules in every case which it has been proven time & again Prosecutors don’t always play by the rules. I don’t like this DA, I didn’t like the over charging, I’m glad most of the vehicles have been returned & not with held as was originally predicted.

            Liked by 3 people

            • lovely says:

              Hi Art,

              I agree with you whole heartedly about Corey (I am nowhere near as knowledgeable about the ins and outs of the Zimmerman case as the long time Treepers are) but I did know very early on it was a railroad and that the MSM and PTB were demonizing Zimmerman and sanctifying Trayvon. It was obvious that Zimmerman was protecting his own life.

              I am a long time disbeliever of the MSM. The MSM is a puppet. I have no use for their lies or agenda.

              The DA may be corrupt, the video may be favorable evidence for the defense. But given the eyewitness accounts which have come to light, I think it stretches the bands of logic to think that this didn’t start with biker on biker violence.

              If it did start with biker on biker violence then the DA has a legitimate case, 9 people are dead, not because of LE but because of bikers.

              If the video is not favorable to the defense then the DA has no obligation to share it with the defense at this time as it could compromise their case.

              I have done a lot of reading about Discovery and Texas Law and I can’t quote a statute or provide link but the DA does not have to turn the tape over to a third party at this point, especially if it is of evidentiary value.

              My guess is that the tape is not favorable to the defense. It is not favorable to the bikers who are on tape starting the fight, the bikers with guns, the bikers fighting and it is not favorable to the bikers who are not even on the tape because of the engaging in organized crime charge.

              Time will tell.

              Like

            • lovely says:

              many treepers don’t share your confidence that exculpatory evidence is always shared by Prosecutors

              This may be my failure to post clearly. I don’t have the confidence that exculpatory evidence is always shared by prosecutors. There are good, evil, moral, amoral and immoral within every walk of life. There are prosecutors driven by agenda and prosecutors driven by the law.

              I for one have not seen malicious intent on the part of LE or the prosecutors offices as of yet in this case. I have tried to make well reasoned counterpoints to some speculation that has been made by some posters.

              I will stick to the video tape(s) not being released by the PTB as an example where I can see a legitimate and legal reason for them not being released to the defendants and their attorneys or to a third party. I can also see the possibility exists that they are not releasing them for a nefarious reason. I think the evidence that we are privy to, indicates the former to be the more likely of the two scenarios to be true.

              My intent here, on this case in particular is to speak to the “unlawful, nefarious motives” that is being bandied about toward the LE/prosecutors involved in the TP melee by some posters. Not all prosecutors are bad and not all bikers are good, just as not all prosecutors are good and not all bikers are bad.

              Like

              • pspsst says:

                I for one have not seen malicious intent on the part of LE or the prosecutors offices as of yet in this case.

                Not malicious intent, but wrongful action – for some reason. By the same token, speculation has not been one way.

                We are trying to understand based on likely scenarios because the danger is Constitutional Rights and freedom to associate not be fearful of and be dominated by deliberate media speak, parsing of words, loopholes, and unfounded myths.

                Liked by 1 person

                • pspsst says:

                  We are trying to understand based on likely scenarios because the danger is loss of Constitutional Rights and freedom to associate, to not be fearful of and be dominated by deliberate media speak, parsing of words, loopholes, and unfounded myths.

                  Like

              • art tart says:

                lovely ~ I am always glad to read/respect what you share, you’re always informative. But, sometimes I come away w/a different view only because I’ve had different experiences w/corrupt DA’s, Corey/BDLR, Duke Lacrosse was the most horrific of abuse by Prosescutors that comes to mind. Treepers are now watching another case of appalling injustice, Mosby as being another corrupt SA as you have acknowledged. You have given LE/DA in the Waco case support thus far, some of us question motives by what we saw in other cases, it’s not to say you are not right, it’s just that many have questions/want more answers.

                My point was this/they are only questions:

                The case got off to a poor start w/the massive round up of so many bikers w/the million dollar bail for all. Nobody believed this was in fact justice, just as it proved to be, the bails have been lowered on almost all the bikers.
                Waco LE might had thought the seizure of all the bikes/suvs/trucks & the sale of most would likely pay their cost onthis case, we have see that isn’t the case.
                Is it possible the DA/LE doesn’t want the video released because parts of the video may not be favorable for LE & would be reported in the media? Although imo, much of the video may very well be detrimentile to the bikers, some may not be.
                This case got off to a poor start for many reasons. Swanton givin 3 interviews in a short span of time with changing information. Can you not see the distrust of many treepers that this reflected on the job LE & Detectives were doing?
                “oldiadguy” ask more than once, where is the Chief of Police? When the Chief of Police finally reared his head/Swanton was gone, the damage & distrust had already been done to investigators/detectives/LE & the Chief knew it imo as it has refected in some media articles.
                WHY was Swanton/Department so damn anxious to get ahead of the blowback on this case from the media by reporting inaccurate information several times? Swanton/Dept. had an agenda, the agenda was to get ahead in the media to tamp down the negative reporting, but due to their poor decision making to try to get ahead of it, it has put the dept. under scrutiny that many no longer trust them. I understand by your comments, you do trust them thus far. My point was, many others still don’t trust them/question them.

                Hopefully, there will be a change of venue, NO Gag Order as the Nation wants answers, & the Defense Attorneys will share w/the public the evidence.

                Liked by 3 people

                • art tart says:

                  lovely ~ I’m sorry, what a mess! I had numbered these so it would be easier to read, I forgotten wordpress doesn’t donumbers.

                  Like

                • lovely says:

                  Hi Art, I’ll get back to your above post later. On Mosby we can agree 100% I’ve posted my opposition to her unlawful and unprofessional actions. In my mind she is obviously withholding evidence favorable to the defense.

                  I have to copy and paste your post to respond to it because it was making me dizzy due to the formatting.

                  Like

                • lovely says:

                  Hi Art,

                  I think some of your questions were answered in my post below.

                  I can’t imagine that LE thought that the vehicle forfeitures profits that might come about because of this would gain them a profit, remember loads of bikers sought public attorneys. Not to mention all the other costs associated with this case.

                  There may be some footage that is unfavorable to LE on the tapes, that doesn’t necessarily mean that it is favorable to the defendants.

                  Swanton’s press conferences were bad. It was dumb for whoever put him out there to have him say anything other than “We have 9 dead, 18 in the hospital and multiple suspects, that is all the information I can give at this time.”

                  Swanton’s changing statements IMO are not the be all and end all. They are not good for the public trust and they made him appear to be shifty by some but neither are they evidence of a LE coverup.

                  Really 1000’s of weapons? And his assertion about the bikers all coming there to kill ? It was nonsense. I’m sure he regrets making those statements but again I haven’t seen enough for me to attribute them to nefarious reasons. Some of his comments were so ludicrous that it was obvious he was speaking emotionally rather than thoughtfully. Again bad reflection on Waco LE.

                  Can you not see the distrust of many treepers that this reflected on the job LE & Detectives were doing?

                  I understand the distrust that many Treepers are directing toward the process, I do not understand the distrust many have expressed toward the first responding LE and the the red boots guy.

                  Why did Swanton/department want to get ahead of the blowback from this case?

                  Public relations? Police are vilified every day by the MSM and on the internet. Did Swanton do a poor job, yes he did. Swanton as the spokesman for LE has a higher standard than the average “Joe” of getting it right because he was speaking in an official capacity.

                  I haven’t said I trust “them” thus far, especially if “them” is the “DA’s office”. I do trust the general story put forth by LE as to the cause of the melee, and that the Cossack and Bandidos have been “warming up” to what took place at TP. I do trust that the the video is damaging to the defense.

                  My trust may be misguided, time because of folks like the Treepers doggedly getting at the truth will tell.

                  Like

    • oldiadguy says:

      Lovely, would you please explain the term “privileged evidence.” I can not find the term with Bing searches and have never heard the term in my 38 years in law enforcement.

      “For example you can bet that there will be evidence farmed from the phones, but what that exact evidence will be won’t be known until a deal is being ironed out or a defendant is sitting in the witness stand.”

      FWIW In every administrative, civil, state (felony) and federal case I have been involved in during my career in LE, the prosecution has provided the defense with copies of everything. They have been provided with an evidence and witness list, copies of photos, diagrams, police reports, medical reports, witness statements, audio and video recordings.

      When new evidence was obtained, it was provided to the defense in a timely manner. If this was not done, the defense would not be able to mount any kind of defense against the charges.

      It is my understanding that filing a discovery motion is almost an automatic action on the part of the defense, like check marking a box.

      Liked by 2 people

      • lovely says:

        I’ll do some looking oldiadguy, I did read it somewhere but at this point I have read 100’s of articles, opinions, penal codes, evidentiary rules, discovery rules and so on.

        I am using the term “privileged evidence” in the way the video was represented by LE or the prosecutor (I’m sorry I can’t remember who it was right now), it was stated that at this time releasing the video would compromise the case.

        IMO that means that for as long as legally possible the prosecutor does not want the defense to see the tape because there is evidence on the tape that is demonstrably opposed to the what the bikers/attorneys have stated .

        Did you read the dense lawyers blog/article about the Michael Morton Act that I posted? It is very interesting in that the demand is that evidence favorable to defendants must be turned over immediately. Not all evidence need to be immediately turned over, so some evidence, especially evidence of damning value does not have to be immediately turned over so it is considered privileged because of its evidentiary value in the case.

        Like

        • Rojas says:

          Lovely I believe you have misinterpreted that article from the defense about the Michael Morton Act. You have misconstrued the article to the point of turning the clear meaning on its head.

          One of the reasons the MMA was passed is because certain Texas DAs were using unscrupulous negation tactics in the discovery process. They were playing hide the ball and lets make a deal forcing Defense attorneys to disclose witness lists and other trial strategies (Privileged information) as a condition of releasing exculpatory evidence.

          I suggest you read it again
          “The prosecution burden of proof is a high one and it should not be eased by requiring a roadmap produced by the defense through the pretrial disclosure of defense strategy, nor by requiring the release of privileged information just so the defense can obtain Brady evidence.”

          Like

      • art tart says:

        oldiadguy shared ~ “It is my understanding that filing a discovery motion is almost an automatic action on the part of the defense, like check marking a box.”

        It too is my understanding in the trials/cases I followed, especially when there are charges against Defendants & the Defense has filed Motions for the evidence.. The Defense wanted information from Mosby immediately, we understood Mosby didn’t have to turn over the evidence until the GJ came back w/charges, then Mosby has to produce. The Prosecution doesn’t get to decide when they want to release the evidence, Judge’s make Prosecutors turn the evidence over when they don’t. imo, Prosecutor’s Office should be charged by the Defense everytime they have file Motions repeagtedly for Prosecutors that won’t produce evidence. In Mosby’s case, the 6 Officers have no money & are getting screwed over by Mosby.

        Just as we see the same games played by Mosby now, we pray the Judge will slap her down for her incompetent answers to the Defense Motions.

        Liked by 2 people

      • lovely says:

        Hi oldiaguy, I have a response to you in moderation so it’s on the way 🙂

        Like

  8. Wow, this is weird – after looking at just a half dozen or so photos of bikers whose motorcycles had been confiscated, I could tell by photo only whether the person was a Cossack or a Bandido. And the Cossacks definitely looked meaner and badder than the other gang members.

    Like

    • lovely says:

      The forfeiture article is very interesting and informative.

      There is no record of Veillon (Cossack) being arrested though he was involved in the fight and Ray A. Nelson Jr., who was shot was not arrested either, yet they both had their vehicles seized.

      Curious.

      I imagine they both gave very detailed accounts of what happened which LE found credible. But they are not out of the woods, how do we know they are not out of the woods, their vehicles are now in forfeiture.

      What seems to be the underlying theme of every forfeiture?

      Prosecutors are looking to seize “so and so’s vehicle” because it was used to “transport himself . . . and/or transport weapons to the Twin Peaks Restaurant in Waco, TX to participate as a member of a criminal street gang” in the events of May 17

      Like

      • pspsst says:

        You mean the witnesses were bought. They made a deal with LEs to give a certain kind of testimony in favor of the ongoing narrative to blame Bandidos. That LEs kept the vehicles as forfeiture is evidence these two were involved and the least punishment exacted.

        Like

      • art tart says:

        lovely ~ I’m wondering if this is what the DA can actually prove by videos, or the defendants fingerprints on the bulk of the weapons & of course what they found when they searched..

        I thought it was interesting the defendant that owned the 2015 Harley that will be sold I assume because he paid cash & there was a clear title, & he was also one of the first to pay the 1 million dollar bail before bails were lowered.

        I bet he hauled butt home to document where he got the 10%, $ 100,000.00, of his million dollar bail as well as paying cash for his 2015 Harley. You have to wonder what his day job was.

        Like

        • bertdilbert says:

          Martinez, of Terrell, listed as the Dallas County Bandidos president,

          Like

        • Rojas says:

          There is a lienholder listed for the 2015 Harley.

          Like

          • art tart says:

            Rojas ~ If there is a lienholder for the 2015 Harley, then the lienholder gets the bike back, it can’t be sold w/a lien against it OR LE will have to pay off the lien holder with the proceeds. It will have to be auctioned for enough to cover the lien holder.

            Doesn’t make sense LE would fool w/that.

            Like

            • art tart says:

              In fact, look at how many bikes/SUV’strucks have gone back to lien holders, the 2015 Harley would not be an exception.

              Like

            • Rojas says:

              The vehicle is seized subject to the forfeiture proceeding lien holder or not.
              The lien holder is protected but they have to provide an affirmative defense.

              “The statutory safe harbor is an affirmative defense. You must plead “innocent owner” as an affirmative defense, meaning that you will have to take some responsibility for proving your status. You should also consider discussing with your lawyer filing a “motion to return” property or a motion to replevy, pre-trial, especially in the case of vehicles. Part of this part of the process is that you must be prepared to post the bond required in order to have possession of the property during the time when the forfeiture lawsuit is pending.”

              http://www.avvo.com/legal-guides/ugc/the-innocent-owner-defense-in-texas-asset-forfeiture-cases

              Like

        • lovely says:

          I have no idea what evidence the DA has. I think that they are confident in their evidence and I think this is a case that is going to have a lot of trails. Some of the arrested are already tied back to a biker fight between the Cossacks and the Bandidos.

          I think that it is worth noticing that Martinez was one of only 3 defendants able to post the million dollar bond. It is also of interest that the prosecutor states flat out that Martinez is seen on the video shooting a gun.

          I am sure Marinez’s phone was one of the first searched.

          LE seems very confident in their assertions, they either have a treasure trove of evidence or they are corrupt. I am of the belief that they have a lot of evidence.

          Like

    • pspsst says:

      If true that Cossacks were not invited – as is the ongoing current meme – then they were the group that crashed the ‘party’. Since most of the dead are Cossacks, Bandidos are branded the killers instead of the police. I’ll have to check again, their faces too (lol per your observation), to see if there is higher ratio of Bandidos to Cossacks arrested.

      Who decided to hold the event in Waco and did a Cossack get roped into crashing the party? One of the Cossacks divulged that he was entreated by one of the now deceased Cossacks to attend the event. Major players in the Cossack MC are dead.

      I doubt these “street gang” memes at the event because Clennendan passed a polygraph stating he did not go there with intentions of capital murdering an opposing rival group. He is part of Scimitar, a support group of Cossack. The police being a third party in unmarked cars, SWAT like police appearing out of nowhere only adds to the confusion. I want to know why the LEs felt they needed to be all covert and hidden. Something is wrong.

      Like

      • annastinaa says:

        It seems to me that if group of any kind had any intent of holding an event to which folks could be invited or NOT invited, then they would hold it at a private residence or in a private rented hall or banquet room where they could legally turn people away who were uninvited. The very fact that this meeting was pre-publicized in posted flyers and held in a public restaurant, makes the whole idea of a club being “uninvited” just silly.

        Being there was any Harley rider’s legal right, regardless of club. It really seems to me like the cops are totally submissive to Bandidos’ illegal bullying of other Harley riders as those riders go about engaging in perfectly legal behavior.

        Like

          • annastinaa says:

            What a great link — thanks, it provides a lot of insight! I am surprised that she thinks the MSM is painting the Cossacks as “good guys.” The MSM is painting them as a criminal gang on a par with the Bandidos. Here’s the deal — any American who has a driver’s license has a right to wear whatever insignia he wants (short of impersonating a police officer) while riding a Harley on public streets anywhere he wants. Maybe the Bandidios beat-up and harassed Cossacks for doing that, maybe they didn’t, although police reports indicate that the only reason they even regard Cossacks as a “criminal gang” is because Bandidos are assaulting them.

            And as for this gal’s admission that not all Bandidos are “choir boys,” that is the understatement of the year, from what I hear among my lifelong biker friends. It is the lawman’s job to catch criminals engaging in illegal activity such as theft, robbery, and meth manufacture and sale. But it seems to me that other than “rumbling” at a time and place completely out of character for Bandidos or any other “serious” outlaw biker “gang,” the vast majority of people arrested here regardless of club affiliation or not, were engaged in perfectly legal activities.

            And the bottom line is that the idea of being “disinvited” to a public event at a public location, is dreck. Maybe intentions were that they weren’t supposed to come, but the fact that it was held in a public place means anyone and everyone had a right to be there. So no matter which side is making the claim, Cossacks, Bandidos, or law enforcement, the entire premise of whether or not the club was “invited” is silly. I think this whole thing was carefully choreographed and orchestrated by law enforcement and both clubs were double-crossed.

            Like

      • annastinaa says:

        Also a point that can be confirmed by seeing the Waco PD’s facebook page and news release — their presence was overt and plain. The Waco PD acknowledges that it had six marked police cars present at the Twin Peaks site before the altercation took place. Witnesses state that they drove past at least six marked police cars at the entrance to the parking lot when they arrived, and that the group of bikers (supposedly Bandido-affiliated) that came moments later who ran over the foot of a Cossack and thus supposedly started the fighting, came in the same way. The LEs were not covert or hidden by their own admission in the press release on their facebook website.

        Personally, I think there was a lot of double-crossing and a lot of manipulation by LEO of bikers from both clubs in this deal.

        Like

        • pspsst says:

          Both marked and unmarked LE cars were present. Witnesses parking at the larger parking lot of the shopping center further behind TP saw marked cars. Those between TP and DC claim they did not observe marked cars and yet the police and Swat with suppressors appeared it seems out of thin air yelling at them to get down. I don’t believe the LEs identified themselves properly with a warning to stop shooting first, when they began shouting to get down and “shoot first”/”return fire”. Therein lies the culpability within the video we are not allowed to see.

          Thanks for your valued input ! Lots of truth in your observations…

          Liked by 1 person

  9. Adversely affecting their predetermined outcome is more like it!

    Like

  10. SouthCentralPA says:

    Sorry, autocorrect … that should’ve been “compromise police INTEGRITY”

    Like

  11. LadyRavenSDC says:

    Amy White in a rant speaks to the general public (as per below) but more addresses the Cossacks – “…I seriously pray to God that them little Cossacks boys learn something from them old men while they was in jail cause these kids have got to learn, and there’s a lot of lesson in this world….. “…ya’all actin like children…”

    https://amyirenewhite.wordpress.com/2015/06/20/sometimes-my-rants-are-not-written/
    “…explain to me how, if they knew they were ridin into war and all this scary s*** was going on and they were going to have a fight at the confederation meeting, why would the banditos only show up with what, 20 people? And of them 20 people, ya know, half of thems on disability or social security. Now ya’ll kind of insultin them bandies in my opinion cause if they’s going to war, first of all, if there’d been inkling there’s any trouble going on, there would have been banditos lining the parking lot at twin peaks as security makin sure nothing went on and second of all, banditos would not send all their old men in there to get hurt……”

    Liked by 1 person

    • pspsst says:

      LE’s using metal detectors to find more guns hidden in dirt long after the event is over is a sign they’re buying time in the public purvey. The narrative is the bullets are not yet matched to the over 100 guns they confiscated from cars, so search we must for months, and who knows how far the bullets which killed Cossacks traveled to in Waco Kingdom and will never be recovered. But…..but…..we combed the areas for guns. Not bullets?

      Jesse Rodriguez had not armed himself and yet he is dead long ways away from the patio scene. A Cossack “rival” was guarding his body with American flag symbols holding down the tarp. Doesn’t seem rivalrous in that picture.

      Another Bandido was said to have shot a Cossack and then ran to his car to hide his gun. They had time to run to their cars to hide their gun. Why didn’t he just, you know, hide the gun………hide himself, more importantly, and drive away. He just murdered someone in a capital manner after all.

      Liked by 1 person

      • LadyRavenSDC says:

        Yes. And once again ya gotta say – it just doesn’t pass the smell test.
        Unfortunately, without sites like TCT keeping the story alive, the smell will dissipate much sooner than later.

        Liked by 2 people

        • pspsst says:

          Yes it must be communicated that WE THE PEOPLE are here to safeguard Constitutional right or it will be even worse. It retards the ambitions of evil-makers even if to give them a mighty migraine, a dose of their own trouble-making.

          Liked by 1 person

      • Emily Litella says:

        I don’t think the affidavit specifies that the Bandido in question (David Martinez) shot anyone; only that he is seen on video firing a gun. That’s not to say that he did not shoot anyone.

        At any rate, since his motorcycle is set on the forfeiture path, I am figuring the Suburban is not his vehicle.

        Like

      • Emily Litella says:

        I think the dead biker under the tarp in the photograph is not Jesse Martinez, but is a Cossack. Specifically, I think it is probably the body of Jake Rhyne, aka Rattle Can.

        The person sitting with the body looks to be Cossack Timothy Shayne Satterwhite. Satterwhite and Rhyne were “neighbors,” so to speak, with Rhyne being from Ranger and Satterwhite being from Gordon or Mingus.

        In addition to comparing the sitting Cossack in the photo with Satterwhite’s mugshot, I saw a comment on a Cossack Facebook page with that photo where the person commenting said it made their heart ache even more for “TS.”

        Makes even more sense to me in learning that Satterwhite was one of the Cossacks stabbed in the November 2013 incident in the parking lot at Logan’s Roadhouse in Abilene.

        Liked by 1 person

  12. BobNoxious says:

    A couple answers from the other day re: rules for government seizing bikes w/ liens as contraband:

    Swanton said many of the vehicles were not seized by the county for a variety of reasons, including that they had “an extremely high lien amount in relation to the value of the vehicle,”

    this seems to indicate that an innocent, valid lien holder has priority over state seizure claims.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Les says:

      Only if the bike wasn’t almost paid off. If the biker had one more payment, I suspect his bike was taken.

      Money shouldn’t be an aim of policing, just public safety. THAT offends the Constitution.

      Liked by 1 person

    • EclecticAK says:

      That just says the cops did not file for forfeiture on some vehicles because after they paid the leinholders off after the auction they wouldn’t have made any profit. The seizures are obviously purely motivated by profit (for the cops) …..

      Liked by 2 people

      • pspsst says:

        That was the carrot for their hidden presence. It may not have paid off too handsomely in the end.

        Like

      • bertdilbert says:

        A lien is for collateral for a loan. If a lien is not secure, it is worthless to the lender. All considered it might be worthwhile to place liens on their bikes as a preventive measure from asset forfeiture.

        Like

        • art tart says:

          bertdilbert ~ The collateral was the truck/bike/suv’s involved, that is what secured Lien holders. Everyone that has ever financed a house, bought a car & financed them, understands how collateral works. The property is the collateral just as we’ve seen all the properties go back to lien holders.

          bertdilbert shared ~ “If a lien is not secure, it is worthless to the lender.”

          You must be referring to credit credits/Home Depot/Lowes as I have never heard of a Lien when there is not collateral. Credit card companies/Home Depot/Lowe’s etc., verify employment in hopes that if the person they give the card has a job & the ability to pay them, they give them a card.

          Like

  13. BobNoxious says:

    UPDATE

    Trying this again; first, allow me to thank Rojas for locating a direct link to a Seizing-Forefeiture Notice and attached Affidavit- which will help us understand some more specifics about what the WACO is alleging in the case. A few local news outlets have run brief stories on the matter, but I’ll try to dog a little deeper in the hopes of helping anyone that may be interested.

    The first portion of the document is boilerplate legal pleading asking the court to enter a judgment that a certain bike contraband, and upon such finding order the forfeiture thereof to the State of Texas.

    Now, on to the Affidavit (keep mind the affidavit not necessarily 100% foolproof; however, for our purposes it provides the clearest thinking into how the police and prosecutors plan to charge to case (it’s HIGHLY advisable for those truly interested to read the entire affidavit to for your own opinion). What follows are my most important takeaways:

    In the months leading up the Waco Twin Peak Incident there has been an increasingly violent turf war b/c the Bandidos (and affiliates) and the Cossacaks (and affiliates) over the Cossacks “right” to wear a TEXAS bottom rocker patch w/out asking permission of it paying a monetary fee to the Bandidos (Texas’ largest OMG). This had led to several recent altercations, including:

    -11/2/2013: A Bandido Pres stabbed two Cossacks at a bar in Abilene, TX- one the Bandido’s stabbing victim’s name was Satterwhite (Cossack) and he was arrested at the Twin Peaks Incident for EOCA; the second Bandido victim, Corley, was also discovered at TwinPeak,-!: was arrested along w/ a 3 Cossack present at both events, Baxley.

    -3/22-2015: a group of Bandido(affiliates) jumped a lone Coassack at a gas station and stole his vest; later that day Cossacks relatilated by beating a Bandido and stealing his bike.

    3/28: acting on an intel tip officers went to local Waco Cossack leader’s shop and the Cossack leader admitted they were getting ready for battle and that’s why he kept a loaded AR-15 style rifle on hand. That local Cosscak leader was arrested at the Twin Peaks Incident.

    TBC for space considerations.

    https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/2106953/2015-2438-5-bikers.pdf

    Like

    • pspsst says:

      For my part, I’ve read it previously but will do so again later.

      We can read affidavits and background bios all we want, it does not diffuse the lack of exact evidentiary items linking to a “criminal street gang plot among 177″ at the specific event.

      I see as a preliminary that mostly stabbings not shootings occurred among the disagreeable 2 or 3, some as far back as 2013.

      The most recent you’ve listed involves theft of a biker’s vest and bike as retribution by one person with a Bandido affiliation. How does this suddenly translate into Bandido street gang plot at Twin Peaks?? and 177 are guilty?

      Liked by 4 people

    • art tart says:

      Bob Noxious ~ Thanks for you’re input, I’m someone that hasn’t read the links shared by you & Rojas but will be doing so this evening. This case has been a learning experience for me & I’m always happy to learn something new & read the links shared by everyone.

      This is so interesting seeing the forfeiture of so many bikes/suvs/trucks at one time. I’ve read about seizures in my town on drug arrests, moronic dealers selling drugs/riding around in pimped out cars & they have no means of legitimate employment, the Sherriff’s Office announcement of the sale of the properties/pictures is always good for a laugh. It’s a lot easier for seizure of drug dealers property I assume probably because they’re too lazy to legitimatley have day job.

      Like

    • Emily Litella says:

      I haven’t seen any indication that Corley himself was present in Waco other than his pickup being there. I’ve been keeping a list of those arrested (trying to figure out who is who) and the affidavit is the first time Corley’s name has shown up.

      Not to say he was not present in Waco at Twin Peaks, as the names of Nelson and Veillon had also never appeared until the affidavit.

      There was a Houston Chronicle article published yesterday by Dane Schiller titled “Life and Death in Waco: A Biker’s Story” that is from an extensive interview with Cossack Cody Ledbetter, one of those arrested who is the step-son of Daniel Boyett, one of the bikers killed at Twin Peaks.

      Of course it is from one person’s perspective, but compiled with other narratives it adds quite a bit to some of what probably transpired that day.

      Sorry I am not providing a link. I will work towards figuring out how to do that. The Chronicle article is not behind their paywall.

      Like

      • art tart says:

        hi Emily Litella ~ Treepers love detail people!

        Emily Litells’s link:

        Life and death in Waco: A biker’s story

        http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Life-and-death-in-Waco-A-biker-s-story-6339392.php

        ET ~ The great thing about the treehouse, it’s about sharing.

        To post a link (1) copy the link from the article you want to share w/treepers, then paste it in your “reply” area here w/your comment.

        If you want to copy the name of the article, go back to your link, copy the title, then come back to “paste” within your “reply area w/your previous link like I did in this comment.

        Like

        • art tart says:

          If you don’t know how to copy & paste, just ask us.

          Like

        • Emily Litella says:

          Thank you, art.

          It appears that the Chronicle article is now behind their paywall (urgh) but it was not prior to today. I do have a copy of it so I will endeavor to select details from it and paraphrase what I can.

          Like

          • art tart says:

            Emily ~ isn’t that crazy. I was able to access it when I listed the link, hate we can’t get to it now hours later.. I have the same trouble w/the Baltimore Case of Mosby & the 6 LE Officiers. Everytime I follow a link there, they want me to subscribe.

            Like

            • Emily Litella says:

              Who can figure the logic used on what and when behind the paywalls?

              Good news for those who use Twitter. The full article can be accessed by going through the link provided by the author @daneschiller

              I’m not even going to attempt a direct link to his tweet at this time. Old dog. New tricks.

              It is going to take some time to get an adequate summary done because the article is extensive and contains a good amount of detail.

              Like

                • Emily Litella says:

                  Good deal and thank you.

                  I am going to hold off on a summary for now since there is a viable link. Better for folks interested in Ledbetter’s account to read the article themselves.

                  Like

                • Emily Litella says:

                  http://m.chron.com/news/houston-texas/texas/article/Bandidos-claim-Waco-police-spreading-lies-6343095.php

                  New this morning from the Chronicle:

                  “A former member of the Cossacks, who was at Twin Peaks during the fight, has told the Chronicle that the violence was started not by the Bandidos, but by a member of a smaller gang known as a support group.”

                  If I am understanding that “clarification” correctly, it was not a Bandido chapter President who was the alleged foot-runner-over. I am still reading Ledbetter’s tale that a verbal altercation took place between Big O and a “leader.”

                  Pretty clear to me that Ledbetter and/or his attorney might have had more to gain by keeping mute with the press.

                  We’ll see what shakes loose today.

                  Like

                • Emily Litella says:

                  Left this portion out of today’s clarification:

                  “He said that a member of the support group rode a motorcycle over the foot of a fledgling Cossack member, and that an argument quickly shifted from a fistfight to a gunfight.”

                  Like

                • LadyRavenSDC says:

                  Emily Litella – this is a response left on this thread yesterday, day before?

                  EclecticAK commented –
                  This whole “foot run over” meme is ridiculous. Do you have any idea how HARD that is to do with a motorcycle? The apparently freshly arrived Bandidos group was apparently riding mostly “dressers” (large touring bikes) from the scene photos. These bikes have/had mostly wide handlebars, windshield/fairings, hard-mount saddlebags and engine guard/crashbars. The tires (5 to 7 inches wide) are on the centerline of the vehicles. About the only way to “run over someone’s foot” is if they lay down and stick their leg out…..

                  Like

                • Emily Litella says:

                  Lady Raven SDC,

                  Yes, I can see issue with an actual foot-being-run-over occurrence. Easier said than done as that observation lines out.

                  I have read a number of conflicting accounts. Some say that it happened; others say it did not.

                  Video recordings will hopefully clear up this piece of what in the heck happened.

                  Like

                • LadyRavenSDC says:

                  Videos should clear up a whole lot but it does not look like they will be forthcoming any time soon.

                  Like

                • pspsst says:

                  Net, net. According to this witness, whose testimony would have to be cross-examined carefully to separate “knoll grass” type memes from Cossacks, is son of an attending biker who was killed:

                  He states Cossacks wearing Texas rocker was long accepted by Bandidos and not the problem nor was there a collective street gang type plot to murder each other at the event.

                  What they did have was an agreement for Cossacks and Bandidos to get together at the event and discuss how to go forward amicably. Cossacks were invited and welcomed, hence quite a few Scimitars and Cossacks arrived early and were lunching. To wit, Clennendan was one of those lunching.

                  The dispute, according to this witness, centers around a new Cossack who had not even received a nickname yet who purposely blocked the way for an arriving Bandido. He goes on to claim that a Bandido “Big O” shot Cossack “Chains”. Wierd those names. Big O shoots Chains.

                  There’s more to decipher.

                  Liked by 1 person

                • Emily Litella says:

                  An important point here.

                  Ledbetter does not claim that Big O shot Chain. Absolutely not.

                  Big O is a Cossack Nomad named Owen Reeves. Chain was Richard “Richie” Jordan, also a Cossack. Chain was Big O’s step-son.

                  I know this from looking around many, many public Facebook posts in my natural curiosity trying to discern what in the heck happened in Waco. I have also pulled information from every possible source in the internets trying to learn what happened and who the players are.

                  Ledbetter’s account is that Jordan was shot by a biker from the arriving Bandido contingent who stepped into the verbal fray between Big O and the foot-running-over “leader” being “disrespected.” Ergh.

                  Taking some details from the forfeiture documents and reported statements from a Bandido’s bond reduction hearing has Ledbetter pointing a fairly specific finger as to who shot Chain/Jordan (and, by Ledbetter’s narrative, who fired the first shot.)

                  Liked by 1 person

                • pspsst says:

                  Right, there was no name given to the Bandido in question, only names given for Cossacks since Ledbetter is himself only familiar with the Cossacks bikers. Only that the novice Cossack got into a dispute, and “Big O” along with “Diesel” (father of Ledbetter) and himself jumped the patio fence and came to his assist saying they would pick up the discussion after lunch.

                  We need to hear the other side.

                  Like

                • Emily Litella says:

                  This is a reply to your “need to hear the other side” post. For some reason I don’t have a reply arrow for that post, but anyhoo, ask and ye shall….

                  Forgive no linkie…still working on that. Hands very full today.

                  Attorney Stephen Stubbs has put out a press release on behalf of the Bandidos.

                  The release is posted on the Biker Lives Matter Facebook page, Amy Irene White’s blog and kcentv.com

                  The first portion of the press release is essentially critical of Waco PD for the issue of selectively released information and a call on Waco PD to release video recordings.

                  Specifically mentioned in the release to be “true and correct”:

                  The Bandidos were at Twin Peaks to attend COC&I and nothing else;

                  The Bandidos have no knowledge of any other meeting. The Bandidos are aware of other clubs (read Cossacks) claiming plans to meet with Bandidos (at Twin Peaks) is not true;

                  All weapons in possession of Bandidos were legally owned;

                  Bandidos were not the aggressors, did not start the fight, did not strike first, were not the first to pull weapons, were not the first to use weapons;

                  Majority of the Bandidos took cover and all involvement by members of the Bandidos was in self-defense in accordance with Texas law.

                  There is more in the release.

                  Liked by 1 person

                • pspsst says:

                  Inconsistency found

                  The biker then whipped out a handgun, pressed it to Chain’s chest and pulled the trigger.

                  Biker is Bandido or Bandido support, “Chain” is Cossack.

                  Yet,

                  ◦Richard Matthew “Chain” Jordan, III, 31, Cossack, shot in the head.

                  Like

                • Emily Litella says:

                  Yep. Noticed that myself. Will be interesting to learn how much of Ledbetter’s story is what he directly witnessed himself and his positioning in relation to the others. His initial statements to law enforcement will also be of interest.

                  Some of his story suggests to me that he may not have directly seen everything he related to the reporter.

                  Physical evidence, including video recordings, should be determinate in the face of conflicting testimonies.

                  IF it comes down to all sides being willing to testify.

                  Now I’m wondering if the ghosts of the Chagra brothers will appear on the legal horizon. There’s a not-so-obscure historic Texas Bandido reference.

                  Like

          • geoffb5 says:

            If you run Firefox or Palemoon you can add this toolbar which will make adding HTML easier to comments, just make sure to set the bar to HTML not BBcode or Wikicode. Also if a link goes behind a pay-wall pasting it, the link, into Google will often result in a readable link as the top one.

            Like

  14. BobNoxious says:

    UPDATE CONTINUED

    Computer froze dang it; try this again.

    4/23/2015- WACO PD officers arrest Mark White for unlawfully carrying a weapon after they observed him appearing to be viewing TP’s from a distance, on a regular Thurs Bike Night; he seemed especially interested in Waco PD activity around TPs that night. He was wearing Cossacks gear and admitted to formerly riding with Los Caballeros (a group present that night at TP), but was now a Cossack. White was arrested on May 17 @ the TPs Shootout.

    Very Important

    After the March 22 assaults b/ Bandidos & Cossacks, the decision was to move the TCOC&I Region 1 meeting from its usual spot in the Austin area to Waco, TX. SANDRA & MICHAEL LYNCH were CONTACTED BY THE BANDIDOS to set up the May Region 1 meeting IN WACO!

    -Cossacks were upset w/ Bandidos encroaching on their territory, so they decided to make a stand at Twin Peaks, in addition to threatening some of the Bandido affiliate clubs leading up to the meeting.

    -it is rare for TCOC&I bikers to attended a regional event outside of their region; however, as a show of force & way of saying “Waco is no Cossack town” Bandidos, affiliates and other TCOC&I members from outside Region 1 were present at Twin Peaks in Waco.

    OK, this is taking longer than I expected. I’ll still try to tie it together and try to answer any questions you all might have.

    A few thoughts/takeaway:

    It’s very clear that both Bandidos and Cossacks (and both groups’ affiliates) are responsible for what happened- and although this might offend some, that includes Sandra Lynch as she made the decision to move the event to Waco, in coordination w/ Bandido leadership; and a strong case could me made that she did it knowing something bad (not this bad) would likely occur.

    Back later; leave any questions below.

    Liked by 2 people

    • art tart says:

      Bob Noxious ~ Good information shared. imo only, I always have a problem when a DA tryies to prove what someone might know,think/feel, example you gave was Sandra Lynch. That, imo, may not be so easy for the DA to prove, he may well argue it, because of all the clubs that were invited + Sandra’s Defense Attorney will claim “The DA doesn’t know what was in Sandra’s mind/thoughts.” How many times have we heard Defense Attorney’s claim this in other trials, I have heard it plenty.. It’s seems like speculation imo.

      It just seems imo, if the Cossacks weren’t looking for trouble, they shouldn’t have gone. It was an open meeting & a lot of Banditios were attending as well as their affiliates & for other groups to join.

      It seems the argument could be made that the Cossacks had no intention to join the event Sandra Lynch was putting on, so why go there except to make trouble w/Banditios & affilates, because they were pi$sed off at the Banditios?

      Like

      • bertdilbert says:

        They were advertising the event and the Cossacks had a legal right to be there.

        I have my doubts about a few altercations between the two clubs qualifies them as a criminal organization. IMO LE would have to show that they exist to fight with each other and that prior assaults were not just side issues. If all LE has is altercations between the two gangs as evidence, I do not think they will be able to make their case.

        Liked by 1 person

        • art tart says:

          Hi bertdilbert ~ I didn’t say that the Cossacks didn’t have a legal right to attend, of course they did, but the question was WHY would they want to attend since they weren’t interested in joining except to make trouble..

          I too have my doubts that the cases can be made except for a few that will likely be caught on video shooting another biker.

          Like

          • bertdilbert says:

            By the same token, I have seen people open carry a weapon, actually U tube is filled with videos of people carrying weapons in public, to express their right to do so. In doing so, they fully expect to be challenged by the cops. While they have a right, I would not recommend it.

            We do not know if the event could have been pulled off without incident, as the Banditos started it outside in the parking lot. Why would the president of the Bandito’s run over somebodies foot in the parking lot if they were not looking for trouble? Banditos were the first to take it to the physical level, and yes a vehicle is a weapon. If this bears out to be true then the Cossacks were operating on self defense.

            Like

      • BobNoxious says:

        I’m not sure I understand you’re question; but the way I read the affidavit they are not having to read Sandra Lynch’s mind at all- she seems to have told law enforcement officers that she and her husband were contacted by Bandidos leadership and told to move May’s TCOC&I Region 1 meeting to Waco.

        When considering the evidence in a case, a jury is permitted to draw reasonable inferences based on the testimony, exhibits, etc.

        So, given what we know about the ongoing violence b/w the two groups, that Sandra at least consulted w/ with Bandido leadership about moving the Region 1 meeting to Waco and that many Bandidos and affiliates from outside Region 1 showed up in Waco, one could reasonably infer that the decision to move the meeting to Waco was done as a way of sending a message to the Cossacks.

        Like

        • art tart says:

          Bob Noxious ~ I knew Sandra had stated the “Banditioes had contacted her about moving the meeting to Waco,” I guess I didn’t put as much weight into it as you did. The Banditoes are a big club, all clubs were invited, the Banditoes may have wanted to recruit from the Waco area. Could a jury member not infer that was the Banditoes objective? We don’t know.

          My question was: How could Sandra know the Cossacks would attend since they weren’t interested in joining?

          Your response (paraphrased,) Sandra would know of the ongoing friction between Cossacks/Bandititoes, but did Sandra admit that directly to LE? We know the Cossacks weren’t interested in joining. What if others in the Waco region wanted to join Bandidtoes, some of the many that weren’t affilated w/either Banditoes/Cossacks but wanted more information about Banditoes?

          Bob Noxious shared ~ “one could reasonably infer that the decision to move the meeting to Waco was done as a way of sending a message to the Cossacks.”

          BN ~ even if it could be inferred, which I agree w/you it could by laymen, that still doesn’t mean a jury would “infer” it. I’ve seen Casey Anthony walk, OJ walk, when most American’s saw/believed the evidence against both murderers imo, yet neither set of jurors even used common sense. “inferring” by a jury doesn’t always work when they don’t even have common sense.

          Like

          • BobNoxious says:

            Well, of course nobody can get inside the mind of each jury panel. I never meant to imply such (although I thought the Antony jury got it right- in the sense that the state failed to prove its case (failed miserably, IMO)).

            All I’m saying is evidence exists (including evidence we have not seen ) that will allow a prosecutor to make a strong case that the decision to move the TCOC&I meeting to Waco was made in consultation w/ Bandido leaders for the purpose of making a show on Cossack home turf.

            Waco is one of the few Texas cities w/ no Bandidos chapter- so holding a Bandidos information meeting/recruiting event in Waco would be very provocative towards the Cossacks, and the Bandidos would know it.

            The bottom line is this from a prosecutors POV: Setting up any type of Bandido event Waco, in spite of the ongoing violence b/w Cosscaks and Bandidos, would be done for the purpose of inciting Cossacks and would almost assuredly lead to more violence.

            That doesn’t make the Cossacks innocent and the Bandidos the aggressors- are the contrary- they are both wrong and have issue behaving like grownups. I’m just trying to give you an idea of how the prosecutor views these facts and how he’ll use them in charging this case.

            Like

    • oldiadguy says:

      Bob,

      Here is some more information about the incident from Yahoo News.

      “We have been made aware in the last few months of rival biker gangs — rival criminal biker gangs — being here and causing issues,” Waco police Sgt. Patrick Swanton told reporters outside the sports bar turned crime scene last month. “We have attempted to work with the local management of Twin Peaks to get that cut back, to no avail.”

      “If Twin Peaks was a powder keg leading up the deadly brawl — there’s apparently not much of paper trail to prove it.”

      “A police dispatch log shows officers averaged less than one call a month to Twin Peaks between the restaurant’s opening in August and the May 17 shooting.”

      More interesting information about those attempts to stop the meeting.

      “Yahoo News requested copies of all written communication — letters, emails, texts, etc. — between police and the Waco restaurant or Twin Peaks’ corporate office in 2015. The Department responded that no such records exist.”

      “I know our officers had visited with (Twin Peaks managers),” Swanton told Yahoo News on Wednesday. “I do know our SAFE Unit (Support, Abatement, Forfeiture and Enforcement) that works with problem clubs had also visited with them, but I do not know to what extent.”

      Problem business?

      “Law enforcement often recruits the assistance of state liquor authorities in cracking down on balky businesses. But the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission had received no complaints or reports of violations at Twin Peaks prior to the shooting, said agency spokesman Chris Porter.”

      One of my favorite Swanton quotes.

      “This criminal element came here to kill people. They didn’t come here to drink beer and eat barbecue,” Swanton told a reporter at the scene. “If police are asking for assistance and you don’t listen, bad things can happen.”

      But releasing the video could prejudice the jury pool?

      “Research by the AP found that 117 of those arrested had never been convicted of a crime in Texas.”

      http://news.yahoo.com/waco-police-rarely-dispatched-to-twin-peaks-prior-to-biker-shootout-records-reveal-015135212.html

      Like

  15. Rojas says:

    Some background
    Why does the Dominant club control who wears back patches?
    Written By Chuck (Witnesstoo), Bikers For Christ, Elder.

    The bottom line is that there is a whole subculture of our society that has paid the price, and continues to pay the price for the “lifestyle” that some want to live and that some want to emulate. It is their world and it is no different than any other subculture that has ever existed in history …

    http://www.rcvsmc.net/id17.html

    Liked by 1 person

    • annastinaa says:

      The bottom line is that evidently, at least 150 people were arrested and held on excessive bail for the crime of belonging to a demographic (motorcycle riders) and being at a widely publicized open political meeting of a type held every six weeks to discuss legislation affecting motorcycles and their riders.

      Like

  16. LadyRavenSDC says:

    To the group at large – in particular annastinaa. The subject was – were “they” invited or not. I posted a link with comment – “I think this puts to rest any questions of invited or uninvited.” – and then had to leave for a while and did not check it before departing. Sloppy work. Huge apologies!
    If you will – https://motorcycleprofilingproject.wordpress.com/2015/06/16/the-waco-interview-authorities-dont-want-you-to-hear/

    Liked by 1 person

    • auscitizenmom says:

      ??

      Like

    • annastinaa says:

      That is a fabulous link — I hope everyone on this board clicks to the one above from LadyRaven, the Motorcycle Profiling Project. Flat out stated officially from an official (David Deveraux) in the Confederation of Clubs and Independents, a “loosely fit political organization among motor cycle clubs” that are nationwide, that the meeting was — like all the meetings of CoCIs in nearly every state in the union that have been going on for 20-plus years without incident — open to anyone on a motorcycle.

      It was one of meetings held about every six weeks, a “complete mish-mash” of clubs, Military Vets organizations, charities aka mom and pop clubs, Christian organizations, all kinds — as well as anyone who just rides independent of any club. They were all “invited.”

      “There’s no discrimination in terms of what type of club,” says Deveraux, “the point of the meeting is for folks who want to be politically involved in discussing current legislation, issues that affect motorcyclists, helmet laws, safety issues. That’s what the meetings are confined to … that’s the whole purpose for this gathering, for motorcycle clubs to meet and discuss this. It’s not a discussion between clubs. It is purely political in nature.”

      “Political” in that these meetings are for discussing biker’s rights, protecting them from over-regulation or other legal manipulation.

      Remember that on 9-11, 2013, headlines accompanying streams of Harleys, many festooned with all kinds of American flags — told us that “thousands of bikers converged on Washington, D.C.,” the general tone one of being angry about the current administration’s terrorist policies, among other things.

      Digging a little deeper, I’ve found that they were understating it a tad — crowd counts estimated 800,000 to 1.2 million bikers thundering through DC that day. Yes, there were thousands. There were hundreds of thousands — there were many hundreds of thousands, around a million. So who knows how many times the “thousands” we heard or read about in the MSM, were a thousand times more in reality?

      I think I see method in this madness at Waco, sad to see it succeeded so well. Mission accomplished — the lives of 150 innocent people at least have been permanently and severely harmed, financially, socially, legally, in all ways, and for the foreseeable future, they are pretty much destroyed in material terms at least even if they are found completely innocent. It’s too late. It was too late the instant it happened.

      Liked by 2 people

  17. EclecticAK says:

    This whole “foot run over” meme is ridiculous. Do you have any idea how HARD that is to do with a motorcycle? The apparently freshly arrived Bandidos group was apparently riding mostly “dressers” (large touring bikes) from the scene photos. These bikes have/had mostly wide handlebars, windshield/fairings, hard-mount saddlebags and engine guard/crashbars. The tires (5 to 7 inches wide) are on the centerline of the vehicles. About the only way to “run over someone’s foot” is if they lay down and stick their leg out…..

    Liked by 3 people

  18. lovely says:

    In response to Pspsst answer to me above about malicious intent v. wrongful action

    We will have to agree to disagree.

    Malicious intent has been espoused by many here. Especially it has been attributed to LE who were present at TP. And the chap in the red boots. Eh?

    I believe that LE on the scene was in an extremely difficult situation, there was a biker brawl, I have yet to read or hear an eyewitness from the Cossacks, Scimitars or Bandidos claim that this started in any other way. So we had multiple armed men, gun fire, knives drawn, and fist fights taking place in a public space between men who LE knew to be antagonistic to the point of violence toward each other in the past.

    What option did LE have? Just let the melee play out? It sounds like LE was very efficient and disciplined. Again keep in mind bikers somehow ended up behind LE protected by LE. There can not be a logical argument made that LE was shooting bikers willy nilly.

    I have repeatedly said we are a nation of laws not men, simply put I am a Constitutionalist. Some bikers broke the law at TP, participants were charged under penal code 71.02 EOCA. I have put forth in a load of posts why I think this is a valid charge.

    I can’t remember the exact number of bikers who were let go at TP after questioning, but it was not an insignificant number.

    As to the judge Peterson’s asinine statement about sending a message, that is unconstitutional. I do fear over zealous ideologues and I am aware that our country is trying to be stolen from us by all branches of the government. If an attorney can prove that Peterson set the charges and the bond solely to send a message then Peterson should be tossed off the bench and all the charges dismissed, killers walk because of an unconstitutional charge.

    It is what it is, but I don’t think, to send a message is going to be the legal reason the arrests, charges and bonds were made and set.

    Given the content of the charging document and the content of the forfeiture documents I think there is legal cause for the EOCA charge. That said the court can and never should cast the Constitution aside for expediency of process.

    I think that if any argument can be made that civil-rights were violated, it would be that “expediency” trumped the Constitution and that can not and should not stand. The “expediency” counter argument will be that the EOCA charge meant that there was/is pre existing evidence/intelligence that allowed for the “expediency” of the charges. << That is all more complicated than I briefly stated, but in a nutshell that IMO is going to be the legal argument/justification on both sides.

    The forfeiture document lists six encounters involving recent violence the Cosacks and Bandidos, that is legally significant.

    There are many here who don’t believe that the Cossacks or the Bandidos meet the criteria for a criminal organization. That will be a matter of a courts opinion, and I suspect they will find that legally the organizations meet that standard, the Feds have already stated that the Bandidos meet the legal threshold to be categorized as a criminal organization.

    Now for the love of all that is rational please do not tell me that I am placing blind trust in the government, I have never said that, nor am I doing that, things are not always “either or,” I am speaking only to this direct issue and the evidence and knowledge that I have of this direct case, an ongoing feud between two clubs, a fight between those two clubs where 9 men died and at least 18 others were injured.

    As to the MSM I don’t think they know what to do with this case as they desire both the white bikers, especially those wearing SS patches and American flags on their jackets/cuts to be burned at the stake and they also desire LE to be burned at the stake. It is a case that has the MSM in a quandary.

    If you use the liberal tactic of misrepresenting my words I will not respond to you.

    Like

    • lovely says:

      Should read:

      That said the court can’t and never should cast the Constitution aside for expediency of process.

      Like

    • pspsst says:

      I’m pretty sure I meant wrongful action when I wondered about UC going wrong, or about the red boots guy photographed like an actor with cap on looking the other way like a bad Hollywood Take 1 stance while the camera is directly in front of him. Are these malicious or wrongful? You tell me.

      Wrongful rolls the culpability upwards toward a political advisor and schemer who does possess malicious intent. Wrongful also means the LEs present were used or given false information and therefore behaved wrongly stepping on the rights of innocents.

      But then again, now that you mention maliciousness, it is a possibility if the intent was forfeiture. If so, this forfeiture was brandied as a carrot to motivate LE action by political influencers and maliciousness toward bikers in general is not mutually exclusive of wrongful action. But predominantly I would say most are saying there is something else at work and we need to roll up to the responsible party who started this fiasco, and I hope holding LEs responsible for wrongful action will do so.

      Liked by 1 person

    • pspsst says:

      If you use the liberal tactic of misrepresenting my words I will not respond to you

      Who misrepresented the “malicious” action of LEs?

      Liked by 1 person

  19. EclecticAK says:

    https://amyirenewhite.wordpress.com/2015/06/22/the-eye-witness-testimonies-that-implicate-the-waco-police-department/ Just how many times do we have to hear similar stories from different eyewitnesses and released detainees before we start beleiving them?

    Liked by 1 person

  20. Josh says:

    Were I an attorney trying to make a point I’d have a much larger diagram. Regardless, I found this interesting:
    Attorney Stephen Stubbs- Twin Peaks/Waco, TX Incident and Common Sense

    I’m just now getting to this thread. I’ve got sooooo much catching up to do!

    Liked by 1 person

    • lovely says:

      The little wily Stubbs showed his hand when he said, what is corroborated 100%, is explanation of event that the Bandidos have told to him. Words and lawyers are always interesting bed mates.

      I am pleased to hear an attorney talk about the self defense aspect of this case, unfortunately for his clients if the EOCA sticks and especially if there are any texts or emails any communications between the Bandidos about a possible confrontation with the Cossacks over the Texas Rockers or any of the recent incidents between the Cossacks/Bandidos, I think his clients are going to still find themselves behind the 8 ball.

      I have said, I think from day one that the number of Bandidos who showed up compared to the number of Bandidos that registration shows would normally attend such a meeting is going to be very interesting and Mr. Stubbs just confirmed my suspicions.

      Though I am certain the Cossack’s attorney has an entirely different take on the reason behind the low number of attending Bandidos.

      Like

  21. liberty2828 says:

    City of Waco Moves to Block Subpoena for Twin Peaks Restaurant Surveillance Video

    WACO — An attorney for a man charged in the May 17th Twin Peaks shootings filed a subpoena to get surveillance video from the Waco restaurant during the shootings.

    F. Clinton Broden, who represents Matthew Alan Clendennen, sent a press release late Thursday stating that the City of Waco moved to quash or block the subpoena.

    According to the press release, the subpoena was served on Patrick Keating, an attorney with Haynes & Boone in Dallas and the attorney for the Waco Twin Peaks franchisee. Mr. Keating had previously agreed to accept service of the subpoena on behalf of his client and to produce the video in compliance with the subpoena by 9:00 am on June 26, 2015.

    The City of Waco moved to quash the subpoena Thursday afternoon. According to Broden’s press release, the only party that can move to quash a subpoena is the party to whom the subpoena is issued, in this case the Waco Twin Peaks franchisee.

    http://www.kcentv.com/story/29410760/bikers-subpoena-quashed

    Like

  22. CARLOS ORDONES says:

    THIIS IS AMERICA AND THOSE PUBLIC WORKERS CALLED POLICE HAVE TO SHOW THE VIDEOS.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s