Posted on 07/06/2015 11:08:21 AM PDT by don-o
Attorneys for Don Carlos Mexican Restaurant in Waco are seeking to block a subpoena that would require restaurant officials to turn over security camera videos from the May 17 shootout in advance of a biker’s examining trial.
Attorney Clint Broden, who represents Hewitt biker Matthew Clendennen, subpoenaed the video from Don Carlos, whose business is adjacent to the former Twin Peaks restaurant, where nine bikers were killed and 20 others were wounded.
Bret Griffin, a Houston attorney who represents Don Carlos, said in a motion to quash the subpoena that Broden is on a “fishing expedition for non-party’s surveillance footage and is threatening the non-party with orders of contempt and arrest. Such conduct is improper and must be stopped.”
Justice of the Peace W.H. “Pete” Peterson has scheduled an examining trial in Clendennen’s case for Aug. 10. Those seeking examining trials hope to prove there is insufficient evidence to indict them.
Peterson has not set other hearings in the case, including one to consider the motion to quash the subpoena.
Griffin alleges in the motion to quash that the subpoena will unduly burden Don Carlos’ officials, whom he said would have to review hundreds of hours of surveillance footage from 16 different positions in order to comply.
Also, he alleges, the manager of the Waco Don Carlos is no longer in possession of the hard drives containing the surveillance because Waco police officials took them as part of their ongoing investigation.
The motion suggests Broden ask prosecutors to turn over the video.
“Finally, this surveillance footage is evidence in an ongoing criminal investigation and in an unrelated civil proceeding to which a gag order has been placed,” the motion to quash says. “To require a non-party to disseminate this information would be unfair and prejudicial and potentially be in conflict with the gag order.”
If the subpoena is not quashed, Don Carlos officials ask the video to be placed under a protective order, barring its public release.
In a response to the motion to quash, Broden called Don Carlos’ arguments “gobbledygook.”
He notes that 54th State District Judge Matt Johnson last week ordered Twin Peaks to comply with an almost identical subpoena on a Twin Peaks franchisee. The judge placed the video under a protective order, preventing Broden from releasing it publicly.
“Twin Peaks has offered transparency to the citizens of McLennan County while, at the same time, recognizing the importance of due process rights of those charged with criminal offenses by agreeing to produce its surveillance videos pursuant to a subpoena,” Broden’s response says.
“On the other hand, Don Carlos seeks to keep McLennan County citizens in the dark and to deny citizens an opportunity to fully prepare their defense. Thus, it should hardly surprise Don Carlos that McLennan County citizens might choose not to patronize a restaurant that acts with such disdain toward public transparency and basic constitutional rights.”
Don Carlos is suing Twin Peaks in Dallas for loss of business as a result of the May 17 shootout.
as a member of a criminal street gang, commit or conspire to commit murder, capital murder, or aggravated assault, against the laws of the State.50 or so complaints, 3.7Mb pdf file
Ah, I see, but still, that “or” seems important, though. It’s a lot easier to prove that someone conspired to engage in assault than murder.
Why thank you. m’aam. I DO make an effort.
I was asked by a well known FReeper to keep the Waco 5/17 active on the board. He called it the most important story in America.
And I cannot shake the feeling that, whether intended or not, some dangerous business is being done in Texas.
You keep digging don-o.
I want the truth, I can try to keep all the LEO jock sniffers off your back.
If the truth was good Waco would have told us in 5 days.
Someone is lying and we need to know.
How so? Conspiracy involves making some sort of plan in advance. To my way of thinking, getting evidence of the planning is the hard part.
I do agree that based on sheer numbers, there are probably more plans to beat somebody up than to kill them; and people conspiring to kill might be circumspect about who they KNOW they are telling - but police investigations of this sort are done in a clandestine fashion. Wiretaps, informants, etc.
Anyway, I'll give you the point, it's easier to prove conspiracy to engage in assault. I see no evidence attaching to any individual. It's all guilt by association. At some point in the legal process, the government is going to run into a judge who will not accept "evidence by association."
This is a pretty obvious and glaring violation of due process.
It seems obvious to me that the "authorities" goal is to allow interest to die down and conceal damning evidence, to the greatest degree possible, knowing full well the public has the attention span of a goldfish, then slide this putrid mess through the bowels of the rotten "justice" system while as few folks are looking as possible. They know they're gonna get slammed, they're just attempting to minimize the exposure.
Your efforts are adding greatly to the transparency, such as it is, that MAY wind up shedding some light upon this whole stinking mess.
But given what we know, there isn't a need to wait for a trial or some other judicial process, to have a reliable handle on whether or not due process has been violated for many if not most of the incarcerations.
Strawman? What strawman?
I’ve been legitimately won over by Finny’s impeccable logic and now believe that arresting someone is a fundamental violation of their civil rights.
Amen, don-o. I am so grateful to you and to JJ F for keeping this issue as much front-and-center as possible. God bless and keep you and yours.
Are there any other kind?
Exactly.
If there were 16 cameras, and the period of interest is two hours, that's 32 hours of video to review, not hundreds. And how many of the 16 cameras were pointed at Twin Peaks?
And, in any case, you wouldn't want to "burden" the restaurant management with the task of doing the reviewing. That task should be entrusted to the defense's experts.
Assault rifles aren’t high power rifles, in the general vernacular.
I appreciate the info, don-o.
I am stuck on waiting for trial, and that fact along with my general bias in favor of Texas law enforcement first and all the BS and name calling falling to a far second, is not the preferred starting point on these threads, so I have not imposed them often.
However, these factors remain non-negotiable for me.
I don’t disagree with most of what you say.
One relatively minor caveat.
When massive numbers of people are engaged in a fracas, it is generally quite impossible to determine which individuals committed which crimes.
So does everybody walk? That would seem to encourage people to get together in large numbers to commit crimes.
My comments otherwise were in general aimed at the shootings and arrests themselves. IOW, what happened that day.
It does seem that the cops, prosecutors and judges have mishandled the situation, though to be fair I’m not sure it would have been possible to do it “by the book” in this situation.
Also, if I walk around in a uniform intended to intimidate others by proclaiming that I’m dangerous and an “outlaw,” I really shouldn’t be surprised if others treat me accordingly. Does doing so remove my civil rights? Of course not, but I can assure you it will definitely impact other people’s presumption of my innocence. Whether it should or not.
By definition you are correct. So apart from the pictures of officers with ‘assault rifles’ what ‘high powered rifles’ were used?
... except that they weren't at Waco. The VAST MAJORITY were very far away from where the fracas went down.
“Anyway, I’ll give you the point, it’s easier to prove conspiracy to engage in assault. I see no evidence attaching to any individual. It’s all guilt by association. At some point in the legal process, the government is going to run into a judge who will not accept “evidence by association.””
Usually, in cases like this, the hard part is not convincing a judge that the case is legitimate, but convincing a jury to convict people who weren’t directly involved on the conspiracy charges.
Thank you for your civil reply. I have been personally influenced also by the lack of interest on the part of conservative media, who has issues as well on this story, but is not yet trying to make a living entirely off the premature speculation and BS of it. If you know what I mean. This tells me there isn’t all that much THERE, there, that media wants to be seen taking to the bank just yet, or hanging their hat on.
I suppose some legal wrangling is to be expected in any case concerning the procedural paths you mentioned, but the story is not broadly catching on except for the flogging of it here and there on the internet.
I have a .22 that’s pretty pathetic and won’t do much damage to an old refrigerator even up close. I also have a Remington 700 SPS chambered in .308 that I’ve used to kill coyotes at 300+ yards.
Meaning I know the difference.
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.