177 people did not kill 9 people.
That would be terrible efficiency.
That would be terrible efficiency.
Gunfight at the Twin Peaks [Staff Warning on page 47]
328,836 Views |
1928 Replies |
Last: 2 yr ago by rather be fishing
quote:This was the post it was in response to:quote:And absolutely no one in this thread has argued that the criminals responsible for the murder shouldn't be prosecuted and made to answer for their crime.quote:Strawman? 9 people died.quote:Seriously? Is there no limit to the straw-men you'll throw up? It's really hard to take you seriously when you continue to do this.quote:
Murder can't be allowed to stand.
It is a strawman because absolutlely no one has argued that "murder should be allowed to stand".
quote:
To be fair, dead people don't really care much about justice, and aren't worried about much.
Those still living under a tyrannical government that declares probable cause before searching for evidence DO have something to worry about.
The branches of government need to be pared and separated.
The strawman is your presumption anyone has suggested, or would tolerate, murder being ignored or tolerated. Guess I'll hafta just ignore all of your posts going forward. You really should take what Snow Monkey said to heart. Hard to believe anyone can be that obtuse.
BG read the post right above yours. That's what I was responding to.
Correct.
The claim that murder is worse than breaking constitutional rights is only opinion.
They are both illegal.
The claim that murder is worse than breaking constitutional rights is only opinion.
They are both illegal.
Sassanis beat me me, but yeah, no one on this thread thinks murders and accomplices to murder should walk. No one.
But murderers and accomplices to murder have rights under the law. So do people peripherally connected to them. So do innocent bystanders wearing Harley shirts. It is really becoming clear that law enforcement and the JP, with good intentions, seriously overreached in this case.
The Constitution isn't a list of helpful suggestions. It's the law, and it needs to be followed for the hard cases as well as the easy ones. And white trash bikers are entitled to it just as much as the rest of us.
But murderers and accomplices to murder have rights under the law. So do people peripherally connected to them. So do innocent bystanders wearing Harley shirts. It is really becoming clear that law enforcement and the JP, with good intentions, seriously overreached in this case.
The Constitution isn't a list of helpful suggestions. It's the law, and it needs to be followed for the hard cases as well as the easy ones. And white trash bikers are entitled to it just as much as the rest of us.
quote:Yet for some reason, Waco/McLennan decided not to file for civil forfeiture for all 177 people they arrested. If they had probable cause to arrest them, surely they had the evidence to meet the lower burden of a preponderance of evidence in the civil forfeiture proceeding.
They weren't charged with fighting, they were charged with participating in organized crime. "I support the Bandidos", funneling dirty money, setting an agenda to discuss territory, inviting another gang to get ambushed, etc.. All those thing are participating in organized crime whether one pulled a trigger or not.
At this point, it looks like this thread needs to be locked.
quote:What's the need?
At this point, it looks like this thread needs to be locked.
Edit to add: perhaps you "need" to refrain from clicking on it.
Good thing none of those bikers were wearing a keffiyeh.
The need? Because it's devolved into mostly just posters going at each other. Techno-Ag and PTBL are not going to be swayed, and neither are the others. So it's just one side going at the other.
That's just my opinion, BG. I'm going to keep following the thread regardless.
That's just my opinion, BG. I'm going to keep following the thread regardless.
quote:
Yet for some reason, Waco/McLennan decided not to file for civil forfeiture for all 177 people they arrested. If they had probable cause to arrest them, surely they had the evidence to meet the lower burden of a preponderance of evidence in the civil forfeiture proceeding.
Forfeiture requires that the vehicle or whatever be used in the commission of the crime. I doubt that is possible with every person arrested.
quote:quote:
Yet for some reason, Waco/McLennan decided not to file for civil forfeiture for all 177 people they arrested. If they had probable cause to arrest them, surely they had the evidence to meet the lower burden of a preponderance of evidence in the civil forfeiture proceeding.
Forfeiture requires that the vehicle or whatever be used in the commission of the crime. I doubt that is possible with every person arrested.
If they were in organized crime gangs and used that vehicle to arrive at a location they had conspired to assault and murder at as the probable cause affidavit says, then it was used in the commission of a crime.
Driving there and parking wasn't a crime. The crime started when the fight started. Using a vehicle to store the weapons that were used or intended to be used leads to the seizure. I think you both know that, though.
What they are charged with doesn't mean their vehicles were all used in the commission of the crime.
quote:Actually, if they used their vehicles to go to a place where they had conspired to commit assault or murder and that vehicle carried a weapon, then they could make the case. And there were 2-3x more knives and guns than people there.
What they are charged with doesn't mean their vehicles were all used in the commission of the crime.
If they went through my car, I'd have a couple knives, a box cutter, some zip ties and a tire iron. All pretty effective weapons.
I stopped reading the thread. And no one probably cares, but my co-worker was allowed to return to work, though it's relegated to remote until everything shakes out. He's still out his lost wages, but at least he didn't lose his job like some of the others.
Snow Monkey Ambassador
Joined:
Oct 22, 2001
Posts:
21,963
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Comments like the one above are why I wish this thread would get locked or moved.
quote:Time will tell. I will say that I have been in the hill country riding solo and pulled in to a gas station and filled up. Went inside to cool off and get a soda and before I was able to leave, over 100 bikes pulled in. Were they average bikers? Violent gangs? As I went back out to ride off, I took a bunch of **** from several of them. Seems they were of the general opinion that I was too big of a guy to be riding such a small bike, and they thought wearing full leathers in that heat was stupid.
I was riding an RS250 Aprilia 2 stroke sport bike. I turned to them, said at least I ride a bike that has a kick starter and not a button, and then reached down, folded out the kick starter, and started it with my hand. Cracked those ****ers up. Lots of them were wearing colors. Nobody drew weapons. Got a nice 2nd gear wheelie heading up the road. Yes, I am part of the problem.
My opinion? The law WAY overstepped its' boundaries in Waco and that is already becoming obvious with what has happened since the 'event'.
I may be stupid, but so far, it has served me well.
The bottom line is that we all have our opinions and a little mutual respect among Aggies would be welcome.
A kick starter on a 103 would be more of a trampoline.
quote:Cannot blue star this enough!
The bottom line is that we all have our opinions and a little mutual respect among Aggies would be welcome.
http://www.wacotrib.com/news/courts_and_trials/waco-officials-seek-to-quash-subpoena-issued-for-twin-peaks/article_dc6605b7-4401-5cec-9ae5-21cf2315620c.html?photo=1
quote:
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.
quote:
"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.
quote:I've never heard such an argument. Of course, defense lawyers conduct pre-trial discovery! It is our duty!
"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.
So the city of Waco is trying to prefvent the defense from doing it's duty?
Aren't defense attorneys legally obligated to do pre trial discovery? Not just refute the city or states case?
Aren't defense attorneys legally obligated to do pre trial discovery? Not just refute the city or states case?
quote:Yes. That is why this argument makes no sense. And, the State is required to give the defense all evidence in its possession.
So the city of Waco is trying to prevent the defense from doing it's duty?
Aren't defense attorneys legally obligated to do pre trial discovery? Not just refute the city or states case?
Unless we have the accused and defense reversed!
quote:quote:Yes. That is why this argument makes no sense. And, the State is required to give the defense all evidence in its possession.
So the city of Waco is trying to prevent the defense from doing it's duty?
Aren't defense attorneys legally obligated to do pre trial discovery? Not just refute the city or states case?
Thanks, Marissa
quote:
If they had probable cause to arrest them, surely they had the evidence to meet the lower burden of a preponderance of evidence in the civil
forfeiture proceeding.
Probable cause and preponderance of evidence are really 2 completely different things. You can't compare the two any more than you can compare ice cream and NASA rockets. One talks about a standard for arrest and the other talks about a standard for a jury finding (or fact finder) and deals exclusively with facts. The latter is AFTER both sides have put on their case and cross-examined the other one. Probable cause CAN exist in the mind of one and only one individual. Even cases where a court would later rule (by law) that there was insufficient probable cause, prior arrests may still be legal if the officer behaved reasonably.
I have a question for some of the juris doctorate types? What is the legal precedence with evidence that contains sensitive information that could endanger somebody's life? For example, if one of the videos contained footage of an undercover operative or an informant, or if it contained classified military information.
*Im not saying that's the case here, just curious.
*Im not saying that's the case here, just curious.
Sounds like the city of Waco has opened yet another federal lawsuit against itself for trying to withhold evidence from the defense.
This makes me think even those guilty will end up walking free due to te dumbass actions of over zealous police and prosecutors/JPs.
This makes me think even those guilty will end up walking free due to te dumbass actions of over zealous police and prosecutors/JPs.
quote:Or ... Waco PD know what it's doing ....
Sounds like the city of Waco has opened yet another federal lawsuit against itself for trying to withhold evidence from the defense.
This makes me think even those guilty will end up walking free due to te dumbass actions of over zealous police and prosecutors/JPs.
quote:quote:Yet for some reason, Waco/McLennan decided not to file for civil forfeiture for all 177 people they arrested. If they had probable cause to arrest them, surely they had the evidence to meet the lower burden of a preponderance of evidence in the civil forfeiture proceeding.
They weren't charged with fighting, they were charged with participating in organized crime. "I support the Bandidos", funneling dirty money, setting an agenda to discuss territory, inviting another gang to get ambushed, etc.. All those thing are participating in organized crime whether one pulled a trigger or not.
It looks like they said they did but they didn't due to the amount still owed to the banks on the vehicles by the people they arrested. Something about it being too much to justify or something.. I'm sure almost everything they're trying to seize was paid off or really close to being paid off so they would have to dick with 100-some-odd lien holders too in all this mess...
Featured Stories
See All
19:50
4h ago
3.0k
Donors can now earn priority points by giving to Texas Aggies United
by Texas Aggies United
A&M's approach remains the same with NMSU coming to Aggieland
by Olin Buchanan
61:40
5h ago
1.6k
Keys to the Game: No. 23 Texas A&M vs. No. 21 Ohio State
by Luke Evangelist
6:01
3h ago
665
ConfidentAg
Michigan to Offer 5 Star LSU QB Commit 8 Figure Deal
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
47