JOB ONE: ‘IF ELECTED’ A RE-EVALUATION OF TWIN PEAKS CASES – CASE BY CASE

Johnson vows to weed out loser cases, prosecute the assaultive

Waco – Which lever do you pull, which button to push when it comes to ridding a jurisdiction of a DA bent on criminally negligent practice?

Barry Johnson, a hometown barrister Texas “Monthly” labeled one of the state’s “super lawyers,” says he’s willing to answer the question, but it will take time, thought, intensive study.

After all, the situation is very rare.

But he’s got news for the motorcycle enthusiasts targeted by the Twin Peaks prosecutors and their boss, elected DA Abel Reyna.

“If elected, job one will be to assemble a staff of experts on probable cause, indictments, discovery – every aspect of criminal litigation. We will work to evaluate every single charge.

“The goal will be to eliminate the cases with no valid basis in fact.”

The way he says it, it makes one believe he means it.

He points to the 100 civil rights cases filed in Austin’s U.S. District Courts, the pending 154 criminal cases awaiting trial by jury, the face that the taxpayers ultimately will be left holding the bag to indemnify Abel Reyna, a man he says “made a horrible mistake” when he became a witness in each and every one of the indictments.

“That nullifies his ability to serve as prosecutor.”

It was Reyna’s decision to stop the police investigation and have a detective with no personal knowledge of the 177 “fill-in-the-blank” affidavits that do not cover the essential elements of a charge.

He recites the well-known “four corners” of the instrument prepared for a Magistrate’s signature in any criminal proceeding. 1) Venue and date, on or about; 2) name of the accused; 3) probable cause; 4) elements of the offense.

The affidavits presented to the Grand Jurors who indicted Twin Peaks defendants lack the elements of probable cause and the elements of the offense.

That is something that can be straightened out.

“Reyna has too much of a vested interest,” he declared.

Furthermore, a Court Of Inquiry scheduled for a future date to determine if Manuel Chavez engaged in perjury when he signed the affidavits and if Abel Reyna committed aggravated perjury “is probably the best way” to handle it.  When Reyna lied on the witness stand about the admonishment he claimed he gave Chavez to familiarize himself thoroughly with all the elements of the alleged offenses he committed a felony crime; Chavez committed a misdemeanor when he signed an oath stating he has personal knowledge of the offenses, something he later recanted.

When recalled to the witness stand, Chavez later denied any such conversation took place.

For starters, that’s his best thinking on how the mechanisms of the law will work to remove Reyna from the legal scene as anything other than a defendant.

In mentioning it, he praised Dallas lawyer F. Clinton Broden, who has successfully petitioned a Dallas District Judge for the inquiry on behalf of his client.

As to describing other means, he has to work on it.

“But there is one way the voters can act and get Reyna out of there,” he said. “Vote him out.”

We look forward to his video statement explaining the various legal procedures available. That one will take time.

We have plenty of that.

So mote it be.

  • The Legendary

FOR A GOOD TIME, CLICK HERE:

http://www.barryjohnsonforda.com/

 

5 thoughts on “JOB ONE: ‘IF ELECTED’ A RE-EVALUATION OF TWIN PEAKS CASES – CASE BY CASE”

  1. What about those not even indicted! Not even arrested at the scene (which is what the affidavit states!) hung out to dry this long due to there being no statute of limitations on the charges, yet charges aren’t dismissed bc Reyna is trying to cover his ass!-my experience.

    1. I reckon we’ll find out. I know he was happy when he learned Sons of Liberty will be helping with the campaign, and he is saying something that makes sense to me. Just like Double D said, they have the evidence, but they’re just not prosecuting the right people, the ones they can prove had something to do with capital murder and/or aggravated assault. Old Jake, they proved patch holders with 1% diamonds are agreed badasses, but they never came up with any direct evidence or testimony that connected him to an “actus reus,” or even an intention to go there to do some damage to the “Cocksacks,” as he called them in a text. He admitted he pulled a firearm and attempted to defend himself, something the prosecution said he had no right to do. Jurors obviously felt that was bogus. They heard what he had to say, and the majority refused to convict him based on the facts as presented. For all that, yes, I think Barry Johnson has a good point, but I just can’t understand why we have to elect him to get this job done. Surely, there is someone, some committee, some commission, or authority that has the legal wherewithal to just that. If the cops have the case on five for being involved in capital murder and can prove, and they have the case on nine for aggravated assault, then why can’t those folks be brought to trial for those alleged offenses? Why does the DA have the authority to prevent that? I don’t think he does. Seriously, I don’t. It’s going to take what it takes, and if they keep it up – well – let’s not go there. That’s not for talking, that’s for doing, and we all know that. This has to be the goofiest stunt I do believe I have ever seen from learned men, folks deemed to be rational and capable of discerning reality. I say we have no more time to waste. – Legendary Jim

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


four × = 4