Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply |
I believe in the principle of Due Process |
Many will recall this shoot ‘em up a few years back.
Link Luckily, I have enough willpower to control the driving ambition that rages within me. When you had the votes, we did things your way. Now, we have the votes and you will be doing things our way. This lesson in political reality from Lyndon B. Johnson "Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible." - Justice Janice Rogers Brown | ||
|
Gracie Allen is my personal savior! |
Meanwhile the local cable company news channel says Reyna, the prosecutor, may be facing unrelated federal bribery charges. | |||
|
Member |
Police armed with shotguns don't how to separate crowd control? Set up a line and separate each group a distance from the other. Disarm each biker one at a time. Police there could some training in crowd control by the Pennsylvania State Police. ********* "Some people are alive today because it's against the law to kill them". | |||
|
Student of Weapons Craft |
Police were nearby, but not on the premise. The owner of the restaurant would not allow them to be on the property. The violence started fast and spun out very fast. There was gunfire before the police had a chance to get there and break it up. | |||
|
Member |
I have never heard the background on why this shoot 'em up happened in the first place. When it occurred, I was told this was all about "Road Tax". Various biker gangs wanted a piece of the tax charged to drug runners by the gangs to use IH 35. If you pay the tax, the bikers guaranteed security through their territory. If you don't pay the tax, you're on your own. “Elections have consequences, and at the end of the day, I won.” – Barack Hussein Obama, January 23, 2009 | |||
|
Member |
The Bandidos have been ruthless in expanding their dominance of criminal enterprise for many years. Intimidation and violence are their stock. Whatever the spark that day, It's ultimately about the money and the territory. CMSGT USAF (Retired) Chief of Police (Retired) | |||
|
Info Guru |
I can tell you that they would never get a guilty verdict from me if they had no direct evidence that the person broke a law. Just being present is an asinine reason to charge someone with a crime. I've never seen any BLM or Antifa thugs charged with this. “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” - John Adams | |||
|
Armed and Gregarious |
WTH? There is no limbo. The other defendants will dispose of their cases in the normal manner. The government and the defense will certainly consider this outcome, when deciding how they want to proceed, but it's not controlling on those other cases. Whether or not Carrizal is re-tried will be up to the prosecutor. No "limbo" at all. ___________________________________________ "He was never hindered by any dogma, except the Constitution." - Ty Ross speaking of his grandfather General Barry Goldwater "War is the remedy that our enemies have chosen, and I say let us give them all they want." - William Tecumseh Sherman | |||
|
Armed and Gregarious |
If there were actually no evidence a person committed a crime, I would expect you, or any other juror to vote to acquit. However, "claiming" there is no evidence, is not the same as there being no evidence. In this case at least some of the jurors believed the government met it's burden, and not only had evidence of a crime, but also had evidence that proved it beyond a reasonable doubt. Obviously, some other jurors disagreed. ___________________________________________ "He was never hindered by any dogma, except the Constitution." - Ty Ross speaking of his grandfather General Barry Goldwater "War is the remedy that our enemies have chosen, and I say let us give them all they want." - William Tecumseh Sherman | |||
|
Info Guru |
I'm pretty sure they had some evidence in that case - the comment came from the attorneys for some of the other 150 who were charged even though there was no video evidence or eyewitness testimony saying that they participated in shooting or hitting anyone. They are being charged for being present as a 'show of force' for their side. “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” - John Adams | |||
|
I believe in the principle of Due Process |
You ought to read the indictment, and the statute defining the crime before you reach a verdict. I’ve not found the indictment(s) online, but the news stories talk about a first degree felony “engaging in organized crime activity.” Shooting and hitting someone is disorganized criminal activity. Luckily, I have enough willpower to control the driving ambition that rages within me. When you had the votes, we did things your way. Now, we have the votes and you will be doing things our way. This lesson in political reality from Lyndon B. Johnson "Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible." - Justice Janice Rogers Brown | |||
|
I believe in the principle of Due Process |
Here is the statute:
Luckily, I have enough willpower to control the driving ambition that rages within me. When you had the votes, we did things your way. Now, we have the votes and you will be doing things our way. This lesson in political reality from Lyndon B. Johnson "Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible." - Justice Janice Rogers Brown | |||
|
I believe in the principle of Due Process |
Here is the definition:
Luckily, I have enough willpower to control the driving ambition that rages within me. When you had the votes, we did things your way. Now, we have the votes and you will be doing things our way. This lesson in political reality from Lyndon B. Johnson "Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible." - Justice Janice Rogers Brown | |||
|
Armed and Gregarious |
Sorry, but "shooting and hitting someone," most certainly can be organized criminal activity. I'm at a loss as to why you would make that claim, only allowing for it to be "disorganized," since your very next post shows the statute, that includes "aggravated assault," as one of the offenses that constitutes "organized criminal activity" in Texas. Further, I didn't "reach a verdict," merely pointed out that claims by one of the parties, are only that, and nothing more. If you want the statute for Aggravated Assault in Texas, here it is: http://www.statutes.legis.stat...ocs/PE/htm/PE.22.htm ___________________________________________ "He was never hindered by any dogma, except the Constitution." - Ty Ross speaking of his grandfather General Barry Goldwater "War is the remedy that our enemies have chosen, and I say let us give them all they want." - William Tecumseh Sherman | |||
|
I believe in the principle of Due Process |
You must be totally devoid of any trace of a sense of humor. Jeepers! Besides that, my response was directed at BamaJeepster, not you. Luckily, I have enough willpower to control the driving ambition that rages within me. When you had the votes, we did things your way. Now, we have the votes and you will be doing things our way. This lesson in political reality from Lyndon B. Johnson "Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible." - Justice Janice Rogers Brown | |||
|
Info Guru |
I get the statute and the thought behind it, but if the prosecutor gets up there and some guy claims that he was standing at the bar and watched the fight and the prosecutor has no video evidence or eyewitnesses who can testify that the guy participated in the fight, I'm sorry but I'm not gonna find him guilty. Call it jury nullification or whatever, but that is nonsense. No better than the overzealous prosecutor here in the South who will occasionally want to prosecute a homeowner who takes out a thug trying to break in. Not gonna vote to convict him; no way, no how - don't care what the statute says. I think the reason they say this leaves the other cases in limbo is because this guy is the leader. If they can't prove that he (and the group) was there to commit a crime, then these other cases have no chance because they can't be convicted of 'conspiracy to commit a crime' if the prosecutor cannot prove that they were there to commit a crime. “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” - John Adams | |||
|
I believe in the principle of Due Process |
If it is just “some guy” standing at the bar when the fight breaks out, no problem. If, on the other hand, the guys at the bar are wearing gang regalia, and the reason for being there was the fight, guns, knives, sticks and stones, etc., just being there can be a crime. Aren’t you of those guys who want judges to enforce the laws as written, not what they would prefer? Luckily, I have enough willpower to control the driving ambition that rages within me. When you had the votes, we did things your way. Now, we have the votes and you will be doing things our way. This lesson in political reality from Lyndon B. Johnson "Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible." - Justice Janice Rogers Brown | |||
|
Info Guru |
Sure, if they can prove that he had guns, knives, sticks and stones and was there specifically to confront and fight another gang, then sure - he should be convicted. This first case does not bode well for the prosecution being able to prove what their intention was. What if they were just looking for a place to drink and the other gang was already there and a fight broke out? If you can't prove that their intention was to go and confront them, you can't prove conspiracy on the part of any of the other participants. And if you have no direct evidence against the individuals in the chaos, you really don't have a case. We'll see how it plays out, of course. “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” - John Adams | |||
|
Little ray of sunshine |
Is the engaging in criminal activity the only charge? That is, I think, the sort of thing you charge someone with in connection with a more traditional charge, like selling drugs, or when you can't actually prove the "real" charge. I didn't know Casie Gotro was the defendant's lawyer. I have had a case with her. She seemed like a good lawyer. Congratulations to her - a mistrial is a good result for a defense lawyer, generally speaking. The fish is mute, expressionless. The fish doesn't think because the fish knows everything. | |||
|
Funny Man |
No different than the felony murder rule that hangs the getaway driver with murder even if they didn't participate. If you put on your little leather costume that matches your "brothers" little leather costume that happens to bear the name of a known outlaw biker gang you sort of lose all credibility trying to claim you were just hanging at the bar sipping your beer and dindonuffin. ______________________________ “I'd like to know why well-educated idiots keep apologizing for lazy and complaining people who think the world owes them a living.” ― John Wayne | |||
|
Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 |
Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |