DA’s Heap Of Trouble

WACO – In a sworn affidavit, former lead prosecutor Greg Davis of the McLennan County District Attorney’s Office details item for item the allegations he made as early as 2014 in a federal probe of official misconduct by elected Criminal DA Abel Reyna.

Davis met with FBI Special Agent Dan Burst to outline his concerns of factual allegations regarding favoritism shown political supporters in dropping serious cases; the extensive use of special prosecutors to soft soap cases that demanded their day in court; a pre-trial intervention program that is a transparent wash in serious offenses committed by repeat offenders, many of whom are charged with very serious assaultive or negligent offenses involving children; and the barefaced admission by present lead prosector Michael Jarrett that he and Reyna made the decision to arrest all present at the Twin Peaks gunfight based on their club affiliations with outlaw biker clubs, thereby derailing an investigation of multiple cases of capital murder and aggravated assault then in progress by the Waco Police.

The legal instrument released by the law offices of Robert Callahan and Chris King is relative to the Matthew Clendennen case defended by Dallas attorney F. Clinton Broden. It includes an attached journal of entries regarding the federal investigation noted by Davis during the time of the probe. Clendennen is a commercial lawn care company operator with a background of education at Baylor University and public service as a firefighter.

The subjects covered by the affidavit and others on the agenda will get a thorough airing at a pre-trial hearing to be held on November 20.

Police arrested Clendennen, who was then a member of the Scimitars, a support club for the Cossacks Motorcycle Club, considered an outlaw street gang by the FBI and the Texas DPS, for engaging in organized criminal activity following the deadly gunfight at Twin Peaks Restaurant on May 17, 2015. He faces trial next month in 54th Criminal District Court before a Visiting Judge, retired District Judge Doug Shaver of Harris County, and three special prosecutors from that jurisdiction selected by Judge Shaver following the bitterly disputed disqualification and recusal of Reyna of his volition and the voluntary recusal of 54the District Judge Matt Johnson, his former law partner.

Listen in to Texas Biker Radio at 8 p.m. on Friday, November 10, for a more thorough airing of this subject.

So mote it be.

  • The Legendary

 

‘And then, he lit the fuse to the dynamite…’

 

WACO – 54th Criminal District Court – The jury foreman told Judge Matt Johnson that some of the jurors are refusing to consider the evidence in the remaining two charges against Dallas Bandido Jake Carrizal they are to consider as to his guilt or innocence.

He is charged in conspiracy statutes, under the law of parties, for actions of persons he might not even know, but who were involved in what jurors must find is a criminal organization operating in collusion that led to the deaths of 9 and the wounding of 20 men.

They say they are hopelessly deadlocked.

The judge applied the Allen Charge, called the “dynamite charge,” in which a jury is instructed to continue their deliberations.

The charge stems from a 19th century Arkansas murder case decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1896.

If in their deliberations, jurors consider themselves hopelessly deadlocked, they may be charged to continue their efforts in words similar to this model Allen Charge found in a manual of jury instructions.

“As jurors, you have a duty to discuss the case with one another and to deliberate in an effort to reach a unanimous verdict if each of you can do so without violating your individual judgment and conscience. Each of you must decide the case for yourself, but only after you consider the evidence impartially with your fellow jurors. During your deliberations, you should not hesitate to reexamine your own views and change your opinion if you become persuaded that it is wrong. However, you should not change an honest belief as to the weight or effect of the evidence solely because of the opinions of your fellow jurors or for the mere purpose of returning a verdict.

“All of you are equally honest and conscientious jurors who have heard the same evidence. All of you share an equal desire to arrive at a verdict. Each of you should ask yourself whether you should question the correctness of your present position.”

Judge Matt Johnson urged the jurors to continue their deliberations in a similar written instruction hand delivered to them by the bailiff following a brief hearing.

In that hearing, defense counsel Casie Gotro objected to the entry of the Allen Charge. The judge overruled her objection.

Jurors have just completed the fourth hour of their deliberations on their second day considering the three charges as to the facts as they understand them.

The judge is the interpreter of the law; jurors are the fabled finders of fact referred to in statutory parlance as “a reasonable man,” time and again.

So mote it be.

  • The Legendary

‘You Stand Your Ground’

THE CHARGE – To the jury, an hour-long ordeal of repetitive phrases

Comes now, the State of Texas, and would humbly show unto We The People that there is a new way of establishing justice as it hands the case against an ‘outlaw’ biker who lives among his family and works at a steady career – a locomotive engineer named Jake Carrizal, who has learned to “be a man” with his father and his uncle and his brothers.

When the judge begins to read the charge, a bleach blonde from San Francisco blurbs out the key words and makes the audio feed pretty much meaningless.

So mote it be.

Essentially, it says in 57 pages what you could say in a phrase, that this man is culpable for the capital murders of 9, the aggravated assault of 20, and he must pay with the most productive years of life because he and his friends came to a political meeting where the madding crowd, directed by the police and an “entity,” which the secret police refuse to name other than to say it’s a “law enforcement-based entity,” directs in real time the actions of an uncounted, unnamed force of men with rifles who subdue a crowd of nearly 300 persons in a matter of seconds, take them all into custody, and carries out a political show trial that has lasted so far for 30 months – and we’re just getting started.

The one thing made clear by the state is this. If a person “fits the criteria” established by this “law enforcement-based entity,” then he is guilty of being an outlaw, one who has been placed beyond the protections and guarantees of the law. He has no rights. He is not even given the opportunity to defend himself, so they say…

THE CASE – is a heavily redacted, highly secretive jumble of information gleaned from official reports, confidential informants, and “expert” witnesses that has been doled out a piece at a time to a constantly stymied defense attorney struggling to keep abreast of the changes made willy nilly and on a day to day basis.

It’s a narrative studded with new revelations brought forth in direct examination by a prosecutor, the facts alleged nowhere to be found in the information lawfully turned over to the defendant, who has a right to confront the witnesses who appear against him.

They – the prosecution and the police – have turned all this into a struggle involving the safety and security of an unwitting public they deem so ignorant it’s their role to decide what is and is not good for them to know.

In short, the prosecution is constructed by and large by an ultra-tight control of information, information which is doled out in dribs and drabs and argued out of the presence of the jury, which is sequestered during the ensuing struggles that take up most of their day.

No doubt, resentment will stalk the corridors of their memory palace, forever and a day.

They are ordinary people, except for the fact that 5 of their number felt their security so threatened during the voir dire examination they requested a private interview with the judge, counsel, court reporter and the defendant.

These are the kind of persons who sincerely want to be on the jury, but they are frightened out of their wits someone will find out who they are, and the result? Go figure. Who knows what goes on in peoples’ minds, in the places they don’t like to talk about, the places they barely admit, even to themselves, actually exist?

THE DEFENSE – is provided by a woman in her prime with more nervous twitch than a thoroughbred mare, a colusa cayuse breed with a mean streak and the indomitable will to keep charging…

She explains to the jurors that there is no law against wearing items of apparel with distinct colors. This is America. She emphasizes the fact that due process of law means the state must prove a specific act of wrong – murder, let’s say, or assault – and she lets them know they have seen no evidence, heard no testimony that establishes any such act having been committed by the defendant, a man who was assaulted by a force of at least 70 other men who physically knocked him off his Harley-Davidson, waltzed him around a bloody parking lot where they tried to murder him, shot his father, and went on a murderous rampage he somehow survived because police sharpshooters put a stop to the “melee.”

She tells the jurors the world is better off because the defendant stood his ground, exhibited loyalty to family, displayed his courage for all the world to see, and now stands accused of numerous heinous acts he did not actually commit.

THE ACCUSED – is a giant, huge slabs of muscle overlaying a very large skeletal frame that towers over most people. He peers out at the world from behind horn-rimmed black-framed glasses affected by his brother Bandidos, those who wear glasses, in the fifties style of the Ray Ban Wayfarers the hipsters who roamed the post-war highways wore…

CHRISTOPHER JACOB CARRIZAL, 36, – awaits  the judgment of a panel of 12 persons who must decide if they want to continue living as citizens of a free republic, one in which the truth may be discovered with ease, where strict proof is demanded without the need for secrecy and cultural warfare played out on stages so carefully contrived for not just their perusal, but the world at large.

THE CIRCUS IS IN TOWN – Ladies and gentlemen, I give you 54th Criminal District Court Judge Matt Johnson; lead prosecutor Michael Jarrett of the Criminal District Attorney’s office, McLennan County, Texas; Casie Gotro, a Houston defense attorney skilled at the art of cross examination and making an appellate record in difficult cases with political agendas; and Christopher Jacob Carrizal, Bandido, of Dallas, Texas…

Let the games begin.

  • The Legendary

To Charge And Instruct The Jury – ‘Specific Intent’

Themis perched stage left, high above the proscenium arch, beckons

Casie (Gotro) tells me when she starts working on a case, the first place she starts is writing the jury charge, because that’s where you first understand the case. – Thomas Lane, co-counsel for the defense

Jerusalem-On-The-Brazos – A Titaness, Themis gestured in a gray day’s rainy chill on hump day, November 8, the daughter of Gaea, primordial mother of Earth’s natural order – and Uranus, seventh rock from the Sun, his constantly shifting magnetic poles blasted by Sol’s windy radiant and effusive energy.

We soldiered on in the gathering gloom of the Fall’s first wintry afternoon, as the attorneys, both those committed to condemn Bandido Jake Carrizal and his defense, struggled with the melding of the statute, and its interpretation, as granted by the courts.

Precisely at the work day’s final hour, between 16:30 and the government’s most significant whisker stroke, 17:00, the third chair co-counselors serving both sides of the question stepped up to the Temple Barre and gave the Judge their summations as to the highest walk of the barrister’s craft – the Jury’s charge – in this croft of reason, the forge of the fate of an accused criminal offender, the court of original jurisdiction that heard the State v. Christopher Jacob Carrizal, a Bandido, accused by indictment of the specific offenses of 1), engaging in organized criminal activity; and 2), directing the activities of a criminal street gang.

Texas Penal Code – PENAL § 71.02. Engaging in Organized Criminal Activity (a) A person commits an offense if, with the intent to establish, maintain, or participate in a combination or in the profits of a combination or as a member of a criminal street gang, the person commits or conspires to commit one or more of the following:

(1) murder, capital murder, arson, aggravated robbery, robbery, burglary, theft, aggravated kidnapping, kidnapping, aggravated assault, aggravated sexual assault, sexual assault, continuous sexual abuse of young child or children, solicitation of a minor, forgery, deadly conduct, assault punishable as a Class A misdemeanor, burglary of a motor vehicle, or unauthorized use of a motor vehicle;

Texas Penal Code – PENAL § 71.023. Directing Activities of Criminal Street Gangs (a) A person commits an offense if the person, as part of the identifiable leadership of a criminal street gang, knowingly finances, directs, or supervises the commission of, or a conspiracy to commit, one or more of the following offenses by members of a criminal street gang:

(1) a felony offense that is listed in Section 3g(a)(1), Article 42.12, Code of Criminal Procedure ;

(2) a felony offense for which it is shown that a deadly weapon, as defined by Section 1.07 , was used or exhibited during the commission of the offense or during immediate flight from the commission of the offense;  or

(3) an offense that is punishable under Section 481.112(e) , 481.112(f) , 481.1121(b)(4) , 481.115(f) , or481.120(b)(6), Health and Safety Code .

<Text of (a) effective January 1, 2017>

(a) A person commits an offense if the person, as part of the identifiable leadership of a criminal street gang, knowingly finances, directs, or supervises the commission of, or a conspiracy to commit, one or more of the following offenses by members of a criminal street gang:

(1) a felony offense that is listed in Article 42A.054(a) (a)(1), Article 42.12, Code of Criminal Procedure ;

(2) a felony offense for which it is shown that a deadly weapon, as defined by Section 1.07 , was used or exhibited during the commission of the offense or during immediate flight from the commission of the offense;  or

(3) an offense that is punishable under Section 481.112(e) , 481.112(f) , 481.1121(b)(4) , 481.115(f) , or481.120(b)(6), Health and Safety Code .

(b) An offense under this section is a felony of the first degree punishable by imprisonment in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice for life or for any term of not more than 99 years or less than 25 years.

In the “roadmap” requested by Judge Matt Johnson, he identified two key areas of Count 2, in which the defense team desired a special instruction.

They are found in the statute at the Subsection wherein “(a) A person commits an offense if the person, as part of the identifiable leadership of a criminal street gang, knowingly finances, directs, or supervises the commission of, or a conspiracy to commit, one or more of the following offenses by members of a criminal street gang:”

At one point during the informal afternoon’s “visit” between counsel to meld the judge’s thinking with a suitable compromise between the Court, the prosecution, and the defense, Judge Johnson stood beside the bench with a pensive expression, and said, “In my research, I learned that committing increased the penalty by one level; conspiring does not.”

Defense counsel requested a special instruction for jurors to weigh the difference in their finding, “beyond a reasonable doubt,” and the associate counsel for the prosecution chose to oppose the amendment of the charge, saying that “There is so much push  back in the appeals courts” that he finds it unnecessary to so instruct the jurors.

The co-counsel for the defense allowed that he dared not allow the issue to get lost in the jurors’ deliberations, that there must be a mens rea – that is, the intention or knowledge of wrongdoing that constitutes part of a crime, as opposed to the action or conduct of the accused – required to establish specific intent, else the jurors may become confused.

When the stroke of the second hand reached quitting time, the Judge overruled the defense’s objection as to that alleged omission of clarifying language in the charge.

In Count One, Judge Johnson’s opening statement, delivered in a conversational tone while standing under a knitted brow between the door to his chambers and the railing of the press box, was that “All the indictment was was for murder…”

Defense counsel was holding out for a jury finding that if Mr. Carrizal had not been proven to have an intent to profit by his alleged actions, then they must vote to acquit rather than to convict because there is no manner or method of the actus reus – that is, the way the murder was committed. 

When the judge retook the bench and instructed the Court Reporter, “We are back on the record out of the presence of the jury in Cause No. 2015-2263-C2, State V. Carrizal,” he overruled that defense objection to the language of the jury charge, as well.

Naturally, the ability of jurors to pay strict attention to the details of the law as interpreted by the Judge, the facts as presented by the prosecution, and the defense case for acquittal, will determine the temper and tone of their findings, and their verdict in each count.

In a final action, the judge granted both sides a full hour to present their jury summations, in which lead prosecutor Michael Jarrett asked for two warnings – the first that there are 25 minutes remaining in his allotted time, the second that he is at the five minute mark in the remainder of his summation of a final argument.

Ms. Gotro had requested a total of “Twenty-five minutes, call it a half-hour,” and said she would require a “five minute warning” that her time will expire within the next five minutes.

She smiled, turned on her heel, and smirked, as if at the irony of it all, as she returned to the task of helping her team pack up their legal materials and trial brief. It occurs to knowledgeable that her primary task throughout the trial and its pre-trial drama has been to preserve and perfect the record for appeals judges to pore over in deliberation of an area of the law new and subject to evolving interpretations in a rising tide of militarized police presence and the resulting militant prosecution of offenses thereby identified in reaction to perceived threats to the peace and dignity of We The People of the State.

The Judge estimated that it will require an hour of the Court’s time to read the charge to the jurors aloud in its entirety before the case is tendered to their deliberation.

So it goes.

So mote it be.

  • The Legendary

 

 

 

OUTLAWRY, TRANSPORT, AND WESTERN RIVERS’ DRAINAGE

DOUBLE D TELLS IT LIKE IT IS WHEN PROFILING IS UNDERWAY

Waco – Double D, back from a Western swing to his hometown in Washington State, pointed something of historical significance about the Twin Peaks criminal litigation unfolding before our eyes in the book-lined, paneled third-floor courtroom, the 54th Criminal District, Judge Matt Johnson, presiding.

No one – no one at all – has ever heard of a single case, much less 154 cases of capital murder and aggravated assault in connection with engagement in organized criminal activity, in which the defendants are prohibited from entering the jurisdiction in which they are charged unless they are scheduled to make an appearance in court, and only then, and for no other purpose at any time.

The consequences for getting caught?

Bail revocation is a dismal way to spend months – perhaps years – confined in a county lockup operated by a corrections corporation with multiple locations – cue the Nitty Gritty Dirty Band – THROUGHOUT THE SOUTH, from the Mississippi Delta to the drainage of the Atchafalaya River (shah-fly) in southwest Louisiana, the Brazos, the bayous, creeks and branches of the cotton land, and points south and east, high and low, soupy and upland, rural and more rural.

In each case, the LaSalle Corrections Corporation has an agreement with the County Commissioners, the state corrections departments, and the Federal Bureau of Prisons that allows the corporation to transfer inmates across state lines.

Section 20 of Article 1 of the Texas Constitution prohibits any person from being declared “out law” – that is, beyond the protection of the law, or being “transported” to another, foreign jurisdiction.

Something is seriously skewed, here, something carved in the stone, blasted by the sands of time. The hot sands. The sands of time.

Said the Double D, “In all the years I’ve been following criminal trials, I’ve never heard of anything like that. Ever.”

What?

“That our guy can’t go to the jurisdiction where he’s charged. Where he got busted.”

Defense counsel Casie stopped organizing folders of evidence, slapping photos in piles and inserting papers in plastic document holders in loose leaf folders, and said, “What?”

Double D repeated himself, the Go Go turned on her heel, did a dance step to the evidence table, cocked an eyebrow, reached for another stack of papers, and said, “I never heard of anything like that, either.”

Never?

“Ever.”

“In twenty years. Never.”

It’s even longer than that between constitutional conventions. True story. Look it up.

So mote it be.

– The Legendary

Self Defense Of A Third Person, Multiple Assaults

“CONTINUALLY ENGAGING” – “SELF DEFENSE,” “SINGLE INCIDENT”

Waco – Jurors seeking a breath of fresh air sometimes stand at the top of the steps, outside the doors almost never used that give on the third floor rotunda of the McLennan County Courthouse and a porch overlooking a set of steep granite steps to the sidewalk far below.

They stand and sit – as a group – taking the air, looking down at the square, on the square, in the square, hewn from the rock, high among the boughs of the pecan trees that stud the terraced lawn of the Victorian-era building, the people’s palace of justice.

For an estimated five weeks forecast by the officers of the Court, they have done everything as a group, waiting for their summons to the Courtroom, their arrival and departure to and from the building under tight security precautions, their midmorning and mid afternoon coffee and bathroom breaks, luncheon hours, removal for discussions by counselors and judge held outside their presence, all sequestered together until the end of the day when following their recess for the day, they are released at a remote and confidential location.

And now, for the jury that has sat so patiently through all the moments of the case of State of Texas v. Christopher Jacob Carrizal, Cause No. 2015 -2263 – C2, the end is in sight, the moment when the “People of the State of Texas” tender their case to the jury with instructions from the Honorable Judge of the 54th Criminal District Court, County of McLennan, State of  T – E – X – A – S, Matt Johnson.

“After the cross examination,” he told attorneys after the jurors had been recessed at 5 pm on Tuesday, November 8, he will read the jurors their instructions, a task he estimates will take the better part of an hour, to be enunciated in all its particulars, aloud, and with precision.

It is a group effort, to draft such a necessary document, requiring the assent of all parties, We The People of the State, the Defendant Jake Carrizal and his legal counsel, and the Honorable Judge of said Court.

This is the part of the story almost never told in courtroom dramas, television presentations, historical documentaries, and yet it is the most important element of the proceeding, the criminal trial by jury, the jury charge, the instructions by which they must render a verdict of guilt or innocence – and how they are to do that.

The indictment is not to be considered evidence, nor a presentment of guilt; the defendant’s utterances under oath or lack thereof may not be considered evidence of guilt.

In all cases, the burden of proof rests upon the State, according to the Code of Criminal Procedure.

And so, together, they reasoned, standing behind the tables laden with legal materials, before the bench, confronting the Judge, their discussion punctuated by nervous laughter at points made more intense by the late hour of the day as darkness fell on a chill autumn afternoon, the kind of gallows humor best taken in small doses, with a grain of salt, to make it more bearable in the nearly unbearable light of circumstances, the rapidly approaching finality of the moment.

These are the bare bones of what will be hammered and forged on a day very soon, after the cross examination is done and jurors are recessed for the rest of the day at the noon hour:

Said Judge Johnson:

Self defense of a third person will be a consideration due to the evidence of multiple assailants presented in pictures, the words of witnesses, and the testimony of the defendant so dramatically elicited by counsel for the defense, and the questions of the prosecutors acting on behalf of the People of the State.

This, along with the “standard instruction – burden of proof” will round out the jury’s instruction as to each of the three counts specified in the indictment, as particularized in each of 9 alleged capital murders and the alleged aggravated assault of each of 20 persons injured in the “melee” so often described by the media, the state, witnesses, and the defendant himself as he finally confronted the facts, faced his ultimate judges, the jurors, some of whom jotted down his words as he spoke in legal pads furnished by the state.

In cross examination, lead prosecutor Michael Jarrett led the defendant through the litany of the elements that must be proven.

He asked specifically about each of the elements that allegedly make the Cossacks Motorcycle Club, an organization that to this day claims no status as a 1% club, yet is considered a criminal street gang in the opinion of the U.S. Department of Justice and the Texas Department of Public Safety.

Do they wear distinctive signs or symbols that designate them as a group apart from the rest of society? Do they act in concert with one another to engage in illegal activities?

Are they a gang?

Carrizal answered with measured tones,

“I wouldn’t necessarily call them a gang,” he replied.

“Are they a club?

“Yes.”

And then the defense counsel Casie Gotro spoke to the judge during their informal “visit” off the record, out of the presence of the jury while the gallery, the bailiffs, the family of the defendant, their friends, and family members of the Cossacks, stood in their places among the hard-backed folding theater seats to listen respectfully as the parties chatted at the end of a long and emotionally draining day.

Ms. Gotro spoke of “so much charged conduct on this single incident.”

She spoke her study of case law, and she gave a citation of controlling opinion handed down by a Court in the Southwestern District of the nation, inscribed in the Third Series of the Reporter, that calls for a “special instruction” regarding the facts of “continually engaging” in the type of illegal activities allegedly so directed by an actor so charged under the statute, as well as “this single incident.”

The counsel for the state seemed to concur, as they stood in mute testimony to their rapt attention to the matter.

Judge Johnson spoke.

He said that there will be a “charge conference,” on the record, “after cross examination ending at noon,” on the final day of the trial of the case in chief, before the deliberations of the jury begins.

They will be recessed, allowed to go home and relax, and the conference will take place outside their presence, in open court.

This is so important to a public exposed to the near radioactive conditions of a newly militarized police force, mobilized nationwide by a reinvigorated federal government acting in concert with state governments, using the services of local police forces and the corrections facilities of counties ordered by federal court mandates to erect new and better jails to comply with state standards dictated in the verdicts federal civil rights lawsuits settled in U.S. District Courts across entire tiers of states, coast to coast.

As to the allegations of Count 1, the jurors will be instructed to find if a murder took place, and further, was it the murder of a specific person, a human being, who then and there was deprived of his life through the actions of the defendant, who acted in concert in a combination with two or more persons factually proven to have been operating as a criminal street gang as defined in the statute.

As to the allegations of Count 2, the finding they will be instructed to deliberate will be, did the defendant direct the activities of persons – two or more – who acted together in combination to commit an aggravated assault upon the following persons named in the indictment.

The instructions will be crafted so that “Half can say murder was committed ‘knowingly and willingly,’ and half can say there was a murder.”

The result, he explained, will be the same when the foreman of the jury checks off the finding of the jury, either unanimous or partial, guilty or not guilty, in each of the allegations of complaint contained in the criminal lawsuit lodged against Mr. Carrizal.

The three possible findings are: a unanimous verdict of acquittal; a unanimous verdict of guilt; or a partial verdict of either in what must be determined to be a deadlocked difference of opinion, in which case the Court must declare a mistrial in each of the several allegations.

Case law calls for a special instruction of “specific intent,” according to defense counsel, that the Bandidos Motorcycle Club did then and there engage in “one of the acts” to be considered by the jurors as a specific allegation.

“Y’all just give me a road map,” said Judge Matt Johnson, from his seat at the bench, as he added the remark, “to start with.”

So mote it be.

  • The Legendary

 

 

 

Waco Gang Cop’s Notes, Records Under Control of City, State Lawyers

“Военная история мира” – photo evidence there are Cossacks in the world who wear distinctive dress and routinely associate to commit dirty deeds, done dirt cheap…

The place: Waco, McLennan County Courthouse 54th Criminal District Court in the case of State v. Christopher Jacob Carrizal, Bandido.

The time: Monday morning, November 6, 2017, about “9-ish,” in the presence of the jury, going on 11 hundred hours.

Associate defense counsel is arguing a motion for a directed verdict on the grounds that the State is alleging the defendant took part in the overt act of murdering all 9 victims by shooting them with a gun.

“We contend that…there is no overt act that Mr Carrizal committed murder. We have received no notice that he participated in the act of murder.”

Counsel is explaining to the Court that “by not claiming an overt act they are claiming Mr Carrizal by conspiring committed murder.” A case decided previously defined such a prosecution fatally flawed and reversed the verdict.

State’s attorney is claiming the allegation of directing a criminal street gang is in itself an overt act.

Said Judge Johnson, “I think the indictment speaks for itself…The motion for a directed verdict is denied.” Many criminal defense attorneys agree with the judge’s opinion. It’s the truth, it’s natural, everything is satisfactual, etc., when it comes to this law.

When our legal consultant, a well-known on-air personality, called this a writ of hocus pocus, it set off widespread panic and the pitter patter of little feet racing to the law library at Jerusalem-On-The-Brazos.

Jurors are just now making their first appearance in court for the day, having been in recess since the middle of the previous week in a proceeding which began on October 9.

Defense counsel is addressing the jurors. She is saying “I’ll be honest with you, it’s been hard to defend this case.”

Jurors have been instructed to disregard a comment that there were 258 persons present on the grounds that Ms Gotro is testifying as to a fact.

She asked, “Would you like to hear from one of the police officers who has not testified?”

Defense counsel called Waco police detective Jeff Rogers, the department’s sole gang intelligence officer. He just testified that Boozefighters are a large motorcycle club, but he does not know any of them. He also said he is familiar with the Ghost Riders.

Casie Gotro asked why he did not apply the same principles to the Boozefighters as he applied to Bandidos.

He testified there is to his knowledge no criminal activity by Boozefighters.

Cossack Mark White, upon his booking at McLennan County Jail, May 17, 2015, for engaging in organized criminal activity at Twin Peaks

“I don’t really know what their point was,” he said of the Cossacks. He is now testifying about a conversation he had with Cossack Mark White.

He is unable to give the specific date he spoke with Mark White because his notes are in the possession of the Waco City Legal Department.

Why?

Oh, that’s straight forward enough. You see, two Assistant United States Attorneys participated in a lengthy hearing in chambers to explain the FBI’s redaction of a report about the conversation, along with an Assistant Attorney General of the State of Texas who uttered the cryptic remark, “The Department (of Public Safety) will not waive the privilege (to keep the identities of confidential informants off the record).

Lawyers are under a “verbal order” not to disclose the information, all of which was uttered in open court out of the presence of the jury.

Defense counsel questioned the detective if looking over his notes would help him refresh his memory.

He mumbled something that sounded like it was uttered over a speaker in a speeding Chicago Transit Authority passenger compartment in The Loop. Phonetically, it sounded like “Gabba-wampus-do-wazzat-choca-boola…”

The recording was made the “end of April, first of May,” he volunteered.

There is extensive colloquy between the lawyers and judge over he detective’s handwritten notes.

Said Judge Johnson, “Do you mean to tell me that all the lawyers have no copy of his handwritten notes?”

Defense counsel requested a continuance to study the matter more fully, since the “intelligence had only a few days previously been received when the judge ruled it has evidentiary value of guilt or innocence in the case against Bandido Jake Carrizal, once the president of the Dallas Chapter of Bandidos Motorcycle Club.

Exasperated, Johnson said, “We’re not going to take a break!”

Rogers says Mark White was arrested on a night in March, 2015, at a location near Twin Peaks Restaurant in the Central Texas Marketplace shopping center on a “bike night” at the restaurant for unlawful carry of a weapon and a bandana with a lock tied to it. This is what led to the interview.

Rogers said he has received “many phone calls” from officers about “altercations” between Bandidos and Cossacks.

Asked by defense counsel under direct examination why he thinks he was not called by the State of Texas to testify against Bandido Jake Carrizal, Detective Rogers uttered an unintelligible mumble reminiscent of the garbled diction of William Casey, famed World War II OSS operative who went on to fame and glory as the Director of Central Intelligence during the administration of “The Gipper,” who once asked in a fabled piece of Grade B movie dialog from a hospital bed where he was recovering from a vindictive and unnecessary  amputation of his legs by a psychotic doctor, “Where’s the rest of me?”

All of these events in Hollywood occurred during the previous century.

Casey, it should be mentioned, was an intelligence professional who often wore three hats, so to speak. Nice work, if you can get it.   

During that month, they beat on each others’ heads with hammers at locations in Gordon, Texas, on I-20, and at Lorena, Texas, near the 322 mile marker on I-35. 

The judge ruled the mention of these happenings by defense counsel not relevant upon the objection of state’s counsel. 

Jurors are at rapt attention as Rogers reluctantly recalls the details of interviews “I did not personally set up.” He is unable to recall just who attended the interviews.

“That was not my interview.”

Rogers said “I know my own weaknesses, and my weakness is taking notes. I don’t take good notes.”

Defense counsel is having trouble phrasing questions about conflict over wearing a bottom rocker that says Texas.

He is now speaking of an interview with Mark Robbins, a mechanic for Waco Cossacks President John Wilson, proprietor of Legend Cycles.

Rogers contacted DPS agents about conflict over the bottom rockers.

He determined that Mark White would attend the COC meeting on Sunday, May 17, 2015. He took the facts about a case in which White is the defendant to DA Abel Reyna he following Monday, but denied he made any recommendations about how the case would be handled.

The judge ruled hat Rogers will be allowed to testify about intelligence he developed in his duties. One item Rogers testified about is that “to the best of my knowledge,” Bandidos were allegedly “extorting” money from Cossacks and others if they were to be allowed  to ride on the streets of Waco.

Photos of alleged gang activity entered into evidence were transmitted through Rogers’ personal e-mail account, a practice he uses “occasionally,” though he “tries not to.”

Jurors appear very skeptical of Detective Rogers’ performance as a defense witness. – Legendary – the ubiquitous “buried lead” so typical of the journalistic style of The Legendary Jim Parks, scribbler

The Backside of Bill Casey, posing in cruciform attitude for the television cameras upon his debut as the Reagan Administration’s nominee to fill the post of Director of Central Intelligence. 

‘I’m Flying Blind, Too’

CASIE GOTRO
“Why is he even on the witness stand?” – an innocent bystander
 
Waco – Jurors listening to the testimony of Detective Jeffrey Rogers are visibly underwhelmed, some of them ashen-faced, with his non-starter behavior.
 
As the Waco police’s only gang intelligence officer, he is a mumbling, bumbling man with a shaved head who cannot remember – anything. 
 
He didn’t review his notes before appearing on the witness stand. He is very, very opposed to giving anyone any information about much of anything. 
 
Just before the lunch break, defense counsel Casie Gotro asked him for a very simple piece of information about the events of May 17, 2015, she responded to a monosyllabic mumble from the detective, then rephrased her question, and said, “If you don’t mind. I’m flying blind, too.”
 
The jurors sat stone-faced, as if nothing was said. The moment passed. 
 
He described the moments between the time when the Bandidos rode into a sea of Cossacks jumping the rail of the patio at the restaurant, spoiling for a fight, as, “Just like that.” Then he snapped his fingers.
 
“Push, shove, hit, gunfire – that fast…”
After lunch, the man in the blue shirt, Keith Stefka, is seen on the projected screen standing at the door to Don Carlos.
“Would you say this man right there where he is standing, has a bird’s eye view of the scene?”
Answer from Rogers, “Yes, I do.”
Would you say, did you see that man tap his head three times?”
Answer, “No, I didn’t.”
Does Rogers have an opinion about the difference between a gang and a club?
Yeah, he does.
The Bandidos didn’t bring their old ladies. They pulled in and when they did, they’d been disrespected because the Cossacks took over a parking lot that was reserved for them.
Jake Carrizal had a meeting. Rogers knows because someone called him and said so.
There was a COC meeting scheduled for the Dallas area.
“So he intentionally rides to Waco for another meeting, and when he pulls into the parking lot, it sparks off, and there’s violence.
Did he develop any intelligence that specifically indicated that Jake Carrizal goes around and commits crimes?
Rogers has an answer for that, too. It’s by definition a criminal street gang, the Bandidos. “Three or more persons who have a defining symbol or sign who continually meet to engage in criminal activity.”
From there, he bogs down, saying, “I don’t know what you want. I answered the question.”
From there, the prosecutor jumps in, saying “Membership in the gang is the crime. The case law is very specific,” said Jarrett.
The judge overrules, saying, “I don’t think that’s the proper question.”
Rogers answers, saying that is the answer.
All agree.
Why does Rogers think the Bandidos came to Waco?
“To cause problems.’
Did he know the City of Waco had declared the month of May “Motorcycle Awareness Month.”
“No, I didn’t know that.”
And so it goes.
Maybe there’s a reason the prosecution didn’t call this man as a witness during their case in chief. Could be.
So mote it be.
– The Legendary

THE REAL DEAL – FROM THE APPLE – NATIONWIDE

SOMEWHERE IN TEXAS – FOR REAL AND UP FRONT, RIGHT NOW…

Waco – Step aside. this is the word, and the word is corruption! We mean business, and we don’t mean maybe. 

Read, absorb, understand, for it is written. Read and understand what is written. Thou shalt not kil; thou shalt not steal; thou shalt not lie…

This is the word. It’s the official record and all you have to give up is respect for that which is written. I give you this on my sacred honor as a loyal Scribe, to read, absorb, and understand.

There is more – much more – to follow.

I am sincere.

I am.

  • The Legendary

[Mangani] Where were you, dear colleague between 3:00 and 7:00 p.m. the day of Augusta Terzi’s murder?
[Homicide Division Chief] Excellency, gentlemen, I was there because I killed her.

[Homicide Division Chief] [Repentant and tearful] Excellency. I’m sorry to have inconvenienced so many important people.

The View From Don Carlos’ Camera 2

CLICK IMAGE FOR FULL SIZE

Waco – The view from the Don Carlos parking lot includes many images of persons not directly involved with the gunfight or the man in the blue shirt.

If you will look at the top upper left hand corner of the images supplied, you will see an object behind the left rear wheel of a white car. In many of the images there is a Waco Police officer and a man wearing colors who is placed under arrest, then released.

THE OBJECT IS A FIREARM PLACED THERE BY A COP. ANOTHER COP COMES ALONG AND MARKS IT WITH AN EVIDENCE CONE.

THE COP WHO HANDCUFFS THE CLUB MEMBER QUESTIONS HIM, THEN LATER RELEASES HIM.

Our correspondent Darlene Kramer reviewed the entire camera surveillance footage and gleaned these still images. If you download them and watch them in order, you will see what we are talking about.

On Monday, the defense rolls out its case for acquittal. Do these people so depicted have names? Have they been subpoenaed? If so, when will they testify? About what? That’s a good reason to keep watching, isn’t it?

“It ain’t over ’til it’s over,” said Yogi Berra of the New York Yankees and the New York Mets. “Amen,” saith We The People.

Click here to download the Zip file 15 of pictures from the video.