Lovin’ On Baby Got Out of Hand – Make Willie Famous

IN A JOB INTERVIEW WITH VEGAS METRO COPS, WILLIE REYES ADMITTED RAPING A BABY GIRL – BUT THEY CAN’T PROSECUTE!

Las Vegas, Nv. – What happened here probably won’t stay here.

Though prosecutors, defense lawyers, legislators – even the Attorney General – are involved in the dialog, the 19th Century rule on corpus delicti – Latin for “body of the crime” – is standing firm in Sin City.

“Bow Tie” Stephen Stubbs, a legal badass who routinely terrorizes the muni courts in Boulder and Mesquite, is armed with the full facts, and he won’t budge, either.

Stephen Stubbs, criminal defense attorney with an opinion on rapists

The Bow Tie drew favorable ink from local scribes when he published a YouTube viddy that named Reyes in an account of just why the way the law is turned at present, authorities can’t haul him before a judge to be charged for the digital rap of a little girl who had not yet reached her first birthday – and can’t remember what happened to her.

Because she can’t testify, there is no “necessary witness” with personal knowledge of the offense available to offer testimony against Reyes, even though he voluntarily admitted in a job interview and in a polygraph examination that he is guilty.

The Nevada Legislature decided a legal change is not necessary, and Bow Tie lays that at the feet of public opinion, “because there is no compelling story” to tell the people otherwise.

The deal is this: “Corpus delicti. It’s an early 1800s law that says that a person cannot be convicted on confessions alone. He chose a victim that can’t testify and carefully raped her with his finger so that there was no trauma,” said Stephen Stubbs.

Thus his story compelling an eruption of the vox populi.

Numerous states have amended their rules of criminal procedure and evidence in order to allow prosecution for crimes against persons who are not able or available to testify.

So mote it be.

  • The Legendary

An excerpted page from the investigative report in the Willie Reyes case obtained by attorney Stephen “Bow Tie” Stubbs (click for full size)

 

 

 

 

 

“…the first time I’ve seen one of these…”

Vincent Sampson, 46, in Oct. 2016, surrendered his weapon when ordered to get on the ground at Midway Panther Stadium, Hewitt…

Waco – A former U.S. Army Sergeant who now commutes to Dallas daily from his home in Hewitt says he doesn’t remember the woman with the phone at the entry to the football stadium.

She testified in a jury trial for public intoxication about her alarm when she saw the gun in the waist band of Vinnie’s shorts as he walked his dog past her.

Following his acquittal for public intoxication, a member of the all-female six-woman jury cautioned him that she didn’t want to hear of any further trouble.

“My son goes to school there, too,” she told him. Sampson’s son was playing ball at an undergraduate game at the time of the confrontation over the weapon .

Every police officer queried following the resulting public uproar said that had he been in School Resource Officer Foley’s shoes, to a man, they would have shot Sampson.

The civil authorities found a resolution to the cultural contretemps.

Sgt. Sampson will keep his job as a civilian employee of the Defense Department; Judge Brad Cates waived the restriction on leaving McLennan County for the 15 months deferred adjudication he sentenced him to this week in County Court at Law No. 2. In addition to his fine of $1,600, Sampson will perform 10 hours of community service.

When the prosecutor recommended he should order Sampson to surrender his .380 semiauto handgun, Judge Cates demurred, saying he did not see that as  necessary.

He waived travel restrictions on his sentence. Sampsonwill be allowed to visit his home town of Boston and make a business trip to the west coast in his job as an Army logistics specialist who supervises the transportation of youthful troopers to their basic training duty stations following their induction into military service.

He recalls the nearly two years he spent supervising U.S. Army troopers in the NATO forces serving in the peace keeping mission of the civil war in Bosnia during the nineties – the Serbian “ethnic cleansing” of muslim citizens of Kosovo and Herzegovina.

“I brought home every one who went there with me,” Sampson told me.

Following his final honorable discharge from the Army, he worked at the VA call center in Waco, directing the inquiries of veterans seeking benefits and medical treatment.

The judge looked at his folder when his case was called and said, “This is the first one of these that I’ve seen.” 

Cody Cleveland, his 33 year-old lawyer, told Judge Cates, “My client is willing to comply with all the terms” of his sentence.

And with that, the Court accepted his plea of guilty to the offense of carrying a firearm into a sporting event.

The events for which he answered were nothing so much as a cultural clash, a reaction by a woman who objected to what for Sampson had become a conditioned approach to surviving any given day during his overseas service.

Carrying weapons in a foreign nation where people ran for their lives on the streets of Sarajevo, dodging Serbian sniper fire, was nothing less than routine.

Their slow deaths from starvation in camps operated by their ethnic rivals was an accepted part of a civil war that raged in the power vacuum of the former Soviet satellite of Yugoslavia.

Sampson and his men guarded the mass graves of those who lost their lives to centuries of hate. He safeguarded the evidence of war crimes committed in the name of social justice. Along with service in Desert Storm, the operation that recovered the oil fields of Kuwait from the Iraqi forces of Saddam Hussein, that was Sampson’s war.

Attorney Cody Cleveland, (L), outside the court with Sgt. Sampson (R)

Prohibiting the possession of all weapons at schools and other venues amounts to nothing less than hanging a sign outside the doors to tell any psycho, “Come on in. Bring your guns. No one will oppose you here. You can slaughter the helpless at will.”

So mote it be.

  • The Legendary

Allege ‘Induced Child Psychopathology’; Judge Recuses Self In Hearing

Dog handler, McLennan Deputy Jos. Ballew, (L), with Lt. Chris Eubank

The parent is the primary case for the delusional belief system, and pathogenic parenting practices are the origin of the child’s delusional belief. This induced delusional belief in the child, created by the highly distorted pathogenic parenting practices of a narcissist/(borderline) parent, is resulting in the child’s expressed desire to terminate a relationship with a normal-range and affectionally available parent who could otherwise act as a protective psychological buffer to the pathogenic psychopathology of the narcissistic/(borderline) parent.Childress, Dr. C.A., “An Attachment-Based Model of Parental Alienation: Foundations,” Oaksong Press, Claremont, Ca., 2015.

Waco – Some disputes are exceptionally ugly.

When it comes to arguing a motion to modify parental custody of the children in a hotly disputed divorce, ugly beats all the pretty off the facts of young lives. In this case, the attorneys handling the matter for the mother whose children have been taken from her are alleging psychopathology induced by ill parental behavior.

Not to worry. There are professionals who actually sort these things out for a living.

And so, the parties to Ballew V. Ballew gathered in 414th Civil District Court on Wednesday afternoon, July 11 – 7-11 day – to hear the facts of the matter of just where the elementary school-age kids of Jos. and Brittany Ballew Raley will live.

When this dispute is settled by a judge’s order, it will be because of a discretionary ruling either to allow or disallow evidence and testimony regarding polygraph examination of the ex-wife of Deputy Jos. Ballew, Brittany Ballew Raley, and her husband, Andrew Raley, of Mt. Calm.

Their counsel, Dennis Fuller of Dallas, has ordered extensive polygraph testing of the couple; the test results the testimony of the experts who gave the tests will be able to show what is what with the allegations of complaint raised by the Waco law man.

Polygraph examination is a perfected art useful in determining if there are signs of deception present when a questioner asks detailed questions about a particular set of circumstances. The trick is to create a clearly anomalous pattern of bodily reactions through the repetition of neutrally worded, innocuous questions in sequence with those in which a question of substance regarding the primary inquiry might produce a reaction – blood pressure, respiration, galvanic skin response – at extreme variance with the established norm.

Question: What do you do when a trusted investigator is possibly telling one lie after another? Just how often is such a person – an intelligence operative, or a law enforcement officer, let’s say, examined as to signs of their veracity?

As a rule, you take that person to Court, especially when all this has an impact on the lives of people – little people, children.

That’s why it’s so exceptional to find polygraph examination under discussion in a court of law. Though officers of the Court make numerous decisions such as whether to present cases to Grand Juries, the probability of a witness being proven wrong, or just common sense plans to make the Court aware of any such factors based on polygraph results, those results are inadmissible as evidence.

T’is an anomaly within an anomaly, as it were. Direct testimony about matters in which the witness has personal knowledge is quite different, and there sat McLennan Sheriff’s Office Deputy Jos. Ballew at the respondent’s table, which made what was about to occur a matter of record – not hearsay, but direct evidence.

Extraordinary.

What makes it more unusual is that in the dystopian world of law enforcement where everyone is under suspicion most of the time and supervisors rely on polygraph tests to see who’s lying, the McLennan County Sheriff’s Office is famous for not using the polygraph in its internal investigations.

Any number of experienced officers who have worked there will tell you. They just don’t use the box to pin their hands down on matters.

The truth is, one of the man’s daughters just does not want to live with him, and her younger sister has been hard-pressed to give forensic testimony to Child Protective Services examiners who placed the two girls under protection.

So Ballew’s ex-wife and her husband came to Court to fight back, armed with the facts, ready to present witnesses.

According to Detective Michael Miller of the Sheriff’s Office, the younger daughter made an outcry on September 17, 2017 alleging emotional abuse, sexual abuse, and physical abuse of both herself and her mother by her step father, Andrew Raley.

Det. Miller said she presented at the Child Advocacy Center that the girl was “very scared,” that she refused to come in the room out of fear, and that when she finally calmed down, she told a story about being shoved violently into a bed frame, an injury that left marks on her back. She also told of seeing her step father push her mother down some steps, something that left her in a cast on her foot and her hand due to broken bones.

She made an outcry regarding sexual abuse in privacy matters regarding bathing. He made a video of her remarks, he testified.

When Miller turned the investigation over to CPS Investigator James Hastings, he learned that the allegations made in mid-September were voiced again on Sept. 26 regarding ongoing violence and severe alcohol abuse by the couple. On November 30, said Hastings, the child renewed her complaint, alleging unprovoked attacks against her by Raley.

When Dennis Fuller cross-examined the witness, he pointed to earlier allegations of complaint made by the child.

He showed the witness and judge documents from 2011, 2012 and 2014.

“There is a pattern of Mr. Ballew filing complaints each time earlier allegations are determined to be unfounded,” Fuller argued.

Hastings said he is “totally unaware” of those reports, and has no personal knowledge of them. The judge ruled he cannot testify about that which is unknown to him.

Fuller said that he is able to correlate the outcry reports from the time when the couple’s divorce was in progress and later in 2017 with the release of findings of unfounded allegations.

During a break in the hearing, the judge and the plaintiffs’ lawyer suddenly realized they are old acquaintances who know one another socially through their older brothers. Once they determined that, Judge Vicki Menard had no other choice but to recuse herself halfway through the hearing when Betty Denton, Mr. Ballew’s counsel insisted.

She simultaneously released 14 sworn witnesses who are ready to testify on behalf of the beleaguered couple. Among their number are investigators, police officers, and polygraph and drug testing experts.

One of the district judges in the McLennan County jurisdiction will have to rule on the case, in which the relief of a temporary restraining order is sought to return Ballew’s daughters to their mother’s home.

It’s not an unusual situation.

It’s a problem so common as to result in a standing order agreed to by all the district judges in the jurisdiction of Six Shooter Junction. One may see by reading the document that it’s a situation governed by precise and exacting legal principles. 

Ballew’s career has been checkered by allegations of cruelty to drug detection dogs he handles on the job, as well as hunting dogs he uses to apprehend wild hogs in primitive hunting rituals.

One incident involved a Belgian Malinois named Ace whom both Ballew and Lt. Chris Eubanks allegedly taunted with a cap pistol to the extent that he attacked his handlers out of rage. 

The same dog later attacked another handler’s son when left alone with the child.

Officials released an official report holding that Ballew did in fact abuse the dog. 

In another incident, Ballew allegedly swung a hog hunting dog over his head and slammed it on the ground, injuring the animal in the presence of DPS agents. Both incidents resulted in extensive investigations, but no significant disciplinary action against the deputy.

Watch these columns for further developments in the custody dispute between Deputy Ballew and his ex-wife, Brittany.

Mad Marc’s Case In Twin Peaks Comedy Of Errors

Marcus Pilkington, shot at Twin Peaks, was the last to get out of jail, last to shake the million dollar bond, and he may be first to flip the bird at the silliest gangster prosecution on record – ever – anywhere!

Six Shooter – When the high power barristers hit the 54th Criminal District Court bright and early Friday morning, July 27, they’ll be carrying a torch Waco lawyer Robert Callahan lit while looking law in the black and white statutes.

Curse the glare!

Callahan is the ex-prosector who got his walking papers on January 1, 2011, Abel “Mighty Mouse” Reyna’s first day as the Elected Criminal District Attorney of McLennan County.

Reyna had no place for Callahan, and Callahan was a prime mover in the high tide that washed Reyna out to sea on election day, 2016, in a 60-40 split when home town trouble shooter Barry Johnson beat the socks off the Mouse in a very uneven match of wits, will and the wherewithal to navigate the rocks and shoals of the Texas Constitution amid allegations of big bricks of cocaine missing from the evidence locker, dismissal of cases for political contributors, and a laundry list of ethics violations including aggravated perjury from the witness stand at a disqualification hearing aimed at his ouster as prosecutor.

On that day in history, Mouse was taken to task for being the author of the affidavit he then commanded a Waco police detective to sign – when the man had no personal knowledge of what the hell had happened at the crime scene. Manuel Chavez testified he had been in a distant part of the city, investigating a case of rape.

He said, “I never saw him (Reyna) that night,” when F. Clinton Broden asked if it was true that the DA had urged him to familiarize himself with the facts of the Twin Peaks investigation before signing the complaint that he – Reyna – drafted with the help of Asst. DA Mark Parker and lead prosecutor Michael Jarrett.

Recalled to the witness stand, Reyna repeated his earlier falsehood with an elaborate answer about how he taken pains to make sure Chavez was thoroughly briefed on the allegations he was asked to swear to on his oath, as his personal knowledge.

And though he was not disqualified in the hearing of August 8, 2016, he recused himself numerous times to keep from being called as a witness regarding an FBI probe of his alleged off color dealings.

It helps to know your stuff when you carry out a full frontal assault on our Constitution.

And Houston lawyers Paul Looney and Mark Thiessen don’t falter when they hand out the credit for their strategy in this – ah – shall we say – embarrassing display of a lack of legal savvy.

Quite simply, said Mr. Callahan, the indictments for rioting returned by a Grand Jury as a superseding count to the original complaint of two counts of engaging in organized criminal activity  that took a back seat to what the lawyers laughingly called the “lesser-included” offenses of murder and aggravated assault, are as useless as Sam Goldwyn’s famous verbal agreement.

They aren’t worth the paper they’re written on.

All 155 original indictments have been dismissed except the remaining 25, who have been charged with riot, murder and riot, tampering with physical evidence, and unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon.

Problem.

Callahan can’t help but look like a kitty cat with cream on his whiskers when he points it out to the general public – the body politic, the hoi polloi, WE THE PEOPLE.

“The problem with the re-indictments is that the DA’s office re-indicted filed cases without dismissing the original indictment.

“The correct method of filing the riot charge, for instance, would have been to indict it as a new case with a new cause number.”

The deal is, the Code of Criminal Procedure, a Title of the Constitution of the State of Texas, does not allow Grand Jurors to return superseding indictments tacked onto previous charges.

It’s just not done that way, said Mr. Callahan. Why? Because it is written that if you think up more offenses and present them to the Grand Jury, you must file new cases under new cause numbers.

There is no such thing as a superseding indictment – at least, not in the Texas Criminal District Courts – because anything else, such as a superseding indictment from Alice and her pals in Wonderland – is a bad dream from an opium pipe, a mushroom pie, or a crystalline delusion hoovered up from the marching powder produced in a jungle lab.

Tut tut.

“We are heavily indebted to Robert Callahan, a prominent Waco criminal attorney who came up with the idea and provided me with initial research,” said Pilkington’s lead counsel, Paul Looney.

“We are of the opinion that the second indictment was unlawfully obtained and cannot now be lawfully obtained,” he fairly trumpeted in a legal alarum filed way back in early June.

“Just when it was beginning to look like the McLennan County District Attorney’s office had discarded the  ‘Book of Waco’ and chosen to follow the Code of Criminal Procedure, we found that they are still making their own rules and have now made an inexcusable blunder.”

What blunder would that be?

Said Callahan, “They could have had the two charges running parallel. Now, instead, the second indictment is of no legal import at all and is voidable, which means the riot statute of limitations has run on all the new indictments and they are stuck with the ‘engaging’ charges they initially used.”

To read Marcus Pilkington’s Motion to Quash the superseding indictment one need only click here. 

Only one such case received the scrutiny of a jury.

Eleven of the twelve chosen to judge Dallas Bandido Jake Carrizal for that offense finally told Judge Matt Johnson they didn’t need to hear any more evidence. As far as they were concerned, during five weeks of droning testimony of “gang experts” who talked about conditions in California and Colorado, and movies and television shows about “outlaw motorcycle gangs,” the State had failed to present any evidence that Mr. Carrizal engaged in anything other than self defense when he and a dozen guys headed for a political meeting rode into a double ambush from members of the Cossacks Motorcycle Club and a hail of bullets from the assault rifles of  Waco Police and Department of Public Safety agents – 14 in all firing military weapons equipped with suppressors and sophisticated holographic sights.

Three Waco cops fired the rounds that killed four of the nine who lost their lives in the “melee,” according to an evidence technician from the Southwest Institute of Forensic Sciences; the remaining eleven rifles were never tested, but surely the thousands of rounds fired must have found their mark in some of the 23 hospitalized with gunshot wounds.

Though ballistics tests were performed on firearms seized from those arrested, no evidence or testimony was presented.

That pesky Code of Criminal Procedure reared its ugly head – once again.

When a Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives agent took the witness stand during the Carrizal trial, he gave elaborate testimony as to his bona fides as an expert witness.

Under cross examination by defense counsel Casie Gotro, yet another defense counsel who hails from the Domed City, the agent finally admitted he would be testifying about ballistics reports prepared by Waco Police evidence technicians.

He sat there and repeatedly answered that the reports were prepared by “experts,” and Ms. Gotro would repeat her question, as to just who did those tests, from what law enforcement agency?

Finally, the old boy gave up the ghost and said, “Waco Police Department.”

“Your honor, I would object as to hearsay testimony by this witness,” she declared.

Judge Matt Johnson reacted just as quickly.

“Sustained. Call your next witness,” he told the prosecution.

There is something written – that is, carved in granite – about how a witness offering testimony must have personal knowledge of the subject matter about which he is offering as his personal testimony.

If you answer questions form a prosecutor about technical reports prepared by another person from another agency, you are engaging in hearsay testimony, and that is not allowed by – you guessed it – the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure.

Mighty Mouse and Michael Jarrett both looked very, very disappointed as they took the massive mounds of printed material they had laid on the evidence table before the bench and stuffed them into the plastic tote bins stacked chin high that they had only minutes previously two-wheeled in from the DA’s office.

We The People could only remark in silence as to the way events just became curiouser and curiouser – as time goes by.

Paul Looney invited all who suffered a re-indictment that was illegally and unconstitutionally obtained to take advantage of the truth uncovered by Robert Callahan’s legal scholarship.

They are listed below.

So mote it be.

  • The Legendary

Robert Callahan, barrister, of Callahan & King, Attorneys

Twin Peaks case re-indicted are:

1.     Ray Allen – murder and riot

2.     Jeff Battey – murder and riot

3.     Mitchell Bradford – two counts of riot

 4.     Richard Cantu – riot

5.     Aaron Carpenter – riot

6.     Jake Carrizal – riot

7.     Nathan Champeau – two counts of riot

8.     Roy Covey – tampering with or fabricating physical evidence

9.     William Flowers – two counts of riot

10. John Guerrero – riot

11. Jeremy King – unlawful possession of firearm by felon

12. Richard Lockhart – riot

13. Rich Luther – tampering with physical evidence

14. David Martinez – riot

15. Wesley McAlister – two counts of riot

16. Tom Mendez – riot

17. Marshall Mitchell – riot

18. Jerry Pierson – riot

19. Marcus Pilkington – riot

20. Jacob Reese – two counts of riot

21. Owen Reeves – two counts of riot/habitual

22. Timothy Satterwhite – two counts riot/enhanced/unlawful possession firearm by felon

23. Kyle Smith – two counts riot/tampering with evidence

24. Glenn Walker – murder and riot

25. Reginald Weathers – riot