Posted on 06/25/2015 4:33:52 PM PDT by Prolixus
The city of Waco is seeking to quash a subpoena issued to the former Waco Twin Peaks franchise holder for video of the May 17 shootout that left nine bikers dead and 20 wounded.
Dallas attorney Clint Broden, who represents Matthew Alan Clendennen, a member of the Scimitars Motorcycle Club, obtained a subpoena after speaking with Patrick Keating, a Dallas attorney who represents the Twin Peaks franchisee.
Broden said he sought the video to help him prepare for an Aug. 10 examining trial set in Clendennen’s case in McLennan County Justice of the Peace W.H. “Pete” Peterson’s court.
The subpoena for the video was issued on Monday. On Thursday, Assistant City Attorney Judith Benton filed a motion asking 54th State District Judge Matt Johnson to throw out the subpoena, saying that Broden was trying to “circumvent the criminal discovery rules by seeking records in a criminal case from a non-party.”
“It is troubling that the city of Waco would go to such lengths to suppress this video,” Broden said in a release Thursday. “The Waco police have repeatedly given the public contradictory information about the events at Twin Peaks and have said that the video will support its current version of the facts, yet they have now taken this extraordinary measure to interfere with the subpoena process.”
Broden said 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 a.m. Friday.
“It is important to note that this video is the sole property of the Waco Twin Peaks franchisee and does not belong to the city of Waco, the Waco police nor McLennan County,” Broden said.
Benton said Thursday she was contacted by Twin Peaks representatives about the subpoena, prompting her motion to quash. Her motion claims Broden’s subpoena is contrary to the rules of discovery governing criminal cases.
“On its face, the subpoena at issue exceeds the scope of any legitimate purpose and is an obvious attempt to conduct pretrial discovery. Therefore, it should be quashed,” the motion says.
Broden says in a response to the city’s motion that the video would support Clendennen’s defense that he did not “participate in nor encourage any violence” at Twin Peaks.
“The video would therefore support Mr. Clendennen’s argument that there is no probable cause in his case and that he should not be held on restrictive bond conditions,” Broden’s motion argues.
The Tribune-Herald has filed a Public Information Act request seeking to obtain the video. The city of Waco has opposed that request, arguing that it is not subject to disclosure at this time because of the ongoing investigation. The matter has been sent to the Texas Attorney General’s Office for a ruling.
Doesn’t the prosecutor have an ethical; duty to pursue the truth?
One small point. The article says the “matter has been sent to the Attorney General for a ruling.” The AG cannot “rule,” he can only issue an opinion. Only a court can “rule.”
Not anymore, just ask the ladies in Bal’mer.
How about the Baltimore Six?
The Waco PD is trying very, very hard to keep these videos away from the public. I wonder why....
Brace for incoming with such an outrageous question as that.
The City of Waco better have one very high coverage liability insurance policy. This whole Twin Peaks matter stinks to the high heavens.
Just wait until you get a ruling/opinion on “ethical” from traitorous Humpty Dumbty Roberts.....
The matter sent to the Attorney General was the FOIA request from the paper.
I don’t understand what pretrial discovery would be? Can anybody explain that?
I don't understand your question. Do you have questions about discovery in general, criminal discovery, or something more specific?
I think I understand that “discovery” is a court date to present evidence, so by saying “pretrial discovery” as if it is something bad, it sounds like you have to wait until you are in court for discovery before you can discover the evidence.
“One small point. The article says the “matter has been sent to the Attorney General for a ruling.” The AG cannot “rule,” he can only issue an opinion. Only a court can “rule.””
The AG can make an ADMINISTRATIVE ruling. The court can over-rule the administrative ruling with a judicial ruling.
The Waco PD is trying very, very hard to keep these videos away from the public. I wonder why....
Brace for incoming with such an outrageous question as that.
That's if the trolls bother to read the article and the early comments.
“I don’t understand what pretrial discovery would be? Can anybody explain that?”
There will be a pre-trial hearing. At that time the defense attorney can ask for discovery.
I am not a lawyer but it seems that the defense lawyer wants to try the case in the pre-trial hearing.
“The video would therefore support Mr. Clendennen’s argument that there is no probable cause in his case and that he should not be held on restrictive bond conditions,” Broden’s motion argues.
“Examining Trials”
Obviously you have no idea what an examining trial is in Texas ...
The same JP that set the $1,000,000 bonds on 177. Can we spell recuse?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.