Typical defense lawyer table-pounding BS.
McLennan County District Attorney Abel Reyna should be disqualified from prosecuting the Twin Peaks cases because
#1 He usurped police authority by charging the bikers en masse,(AS THE STATE MUST DUE WHEN CHARGING CONSPIRACY.)
#2 He has a financial interest in the outcome (AND THIS IS PROVED BY...?)
#3 He hopes the notoriety will springboard him into state office, (AND NOW THE DEFENSE LAWYERS ARE ABLE TO READ THE SA’S MIND?)
Any good 2d year law student could draft a better claim than this BS... and some motorcycle-gang drug dealing murders’ supporters here on FR will tell us it was a “brilliant legal move.”
(Notice they usually post daytime information later in the evening, as they have had a drink, or two, or three, or.....)
This is Automatic DQ. The Judge and the Prosecutor were Partners and still share revenues. This is unbelievable. That violates Judicial ethics per se. Why take briefs. This case stinks to high heavens. I see it as the greatest judicial folly in Texas history.
This whole thing appears from all reports to be a complete travesty. The jungle, prosecutor, and police all need to also be in jail.
The FRaliban is baaaack!!!!!!!
“McLennan County District Attorney Abel Reyna should be disqualified from prosecuting the Twin Peaks cases because he usurped police authority by charging the bikers en masse,”
So... The DA usurped the police by deciding who to prosecute. The police are the final decision makers?? LOL
He "declined" but was obviously over-ruled.
This is coming from Tommy Witherspoon (who is quite friendly to LE and "establishment" types) reporting facts too.
So here again, Strac6 right out of the gate spews the same trollish garbage.
To hell with that guy. He should be banned for attacking freepers. With that one and Princess weighing in, productive conversation regarding this particular subject matter is impossible. The pair of them not worthy to breath the same air as free Americans.
Thanks for the information
That case is not this case, Burks said. That hearing is not this hearing.
Then what's up with 155 identical, fill-in-the-blank-with-a-name indictments?
It's too late to now attempt to be differentiating between defendants, unless what we're hearing is the sound of confession coming from somewhere among the DA's Office that there should have been more of that from the beginning?
Burk was most likely not deliberately telegraphing that but it came through the line clear enough. Burk wants different sets of rules to apply depending upon what's most favorable to winning convictions. What the HELL happened to officers of the court being duty-bound to find and state [speak] truth?
The lack of differentiation being among defendants on the part of McLennan County DA's Office is very much the largest part of the issue at hand. There was not distinction and differentiation made between the numerous defendants -- but now prosecutor Burk want there to be??????????????????????????????
The laws are not on the books to "over-charge" and over-indict potential defendants in order to force some of them to agree to some lesser charge in exchange for cooperation. It's obvious enough that type of things in play. It comes out from the one on this thread calling himself a lawyer. That jackass thinks it's OK to twist the law into corkscrew shape (like the tails of swine but even twistier, come to think of it!)
As for difference among defendants in relationship to Reyna and Company, other than where there is element of pending civil suit (which results in persons named as defendants such as DA Reyna having personal financial interest in the outcome of the criminal trials) there is no other difference, other than what name was put in the cookie-cutter identical, template-form indictments.
Chapter 71 reads as enhancement statute anyhow, rather than primary charging document suitable for near-entirely indiscriminate mass arrests of parties having played distinctly differing roles (some as victims, some as perpetrators, others not fully one or the other). p> During course of the Carrizal trial (that ended in mistrial) Amanda Dillon also portrayed some number of the identically indicted as having been "peaceable". According to her, everything was (figuratively speaking) just peachy until the Bandidos from Dallas arrived.
The prosecutors play both sides of the fences and end up contradicting themselves. Am I the only who notices? (I doubt it). But the real question is -- how long (and how much) will the DA's Office be able to get away with the apparent contradictions?
I'm not go to hold my breath until 8th of December thinking Broden has this latest consolidated motion in the bag already (once in court almost anything can happen in regard to judgements) but whichever way it goes -- Judge Johnson should have voluntarily recused himself from this one, too for the same blasted reasons he was eventually brought to "seeing the light" and recused himself from presiding over the Clendennen case.
I get the impression Tommy Witherspoon understands that part of things well enough -- which (I assume) is why he wrote this latest article (that you posted here to open this FR thread) in the first place.
Have watched and followed from day one. This appears to be another FBI instigated setup to justify their existence and funding. Though some appear to be criminals the overwhelming majority appear to be innocent joes. Waco PD and DA were just stupid enough to be left holding the bag.
Have watched and followed from day one. This appears to be another FBI instigated setup to justify their existence and funding. Though some appear to be criminals the overwhelming majority appear to be innocent joes. Waco PD and DA were just stupid enough to be left holding the bag.