TexasCHLforum.com

SA_Steve wrote:http://gritsforbreakfast.blogspot.com/2 ... ny-in.html

why-wont-authorities-say?

cb1000rider wrote:

philip964 wrote: This is from a news site however it is written like an editorial. It is primarily concerned with the lack of progress in releasing information to the public, such as how many of the people killed, were killed with police bullets. He makes the point that if it was zero, he suspects we would know that. It seems to remind me that we never heard in Columbine of any of the bullet forensics being released.

He points to gag orders, etc.

He also points to the Grand Jury being led by a former Waco police officer. He points to the liability of the City of Waco, if many of the bikers were arrested without probable cause. It also sounds like many have lost jobs, after being arrested.

I understand evidence not being released in order to protect the jury pool and insure a fair trial for a defendent. But keeping so much information hidden, when some of it may point to innocence of individuals, smells. It smells here and it smells in Baltimore.

If it is a gag order, it's the same judicial system that allowed a total round up of people and no bail ($1M bond) based on very limited, if any, evidence against individuals.
When you lock people up for extended periods of time, it tends to limit how they're able to make a living, which tends to limit the type of defense they can afford, which tends to make prosecution a bit easier...


It's all going to come out... Eventually...

cb1000rider wrote:

mojo84 wrote: I agree. If they aren't charged, why should they forfeit anything?

Because America.
If you can afford to contest the actions of the government, you too can have justice.

He was behaving in a way that the government doesn't like. Or otherwise associating with people that are deemed not-good. Must be punished.

mojo84 wrote:

RPBrown wrote:Looking at the forfeiture list, there are 2 people that were not charged with a crime but yet their motorcycles were forfeited. Doesnt seem right.

I agree. If they aren't charged, why should they forfeit anything?

There have been 61,998 cash seizures made on highways and elsewhere since 9/11 without search warrants or indictments through the Equitable Sharing Program, totaling more than $2.5 billion. State and local authorities kept more than $1.7 billion of that while Justice, Homeland Security and other federal agencies received $800 million. Half of the seizures were below $8,800.

Civil rights advocates have documented all sorts of outright legal theft:

The (minority) businessman from Georgia who was relieved of $75,000 he’d raised from relatives to buy a restaurant in Louisiana.
The (minority) church leaders who were carrying nearly $30,000 from their Baltimore parishioners to carry out church activities in North Carolina and El Salvador.
The young college grad with no criminal record on his way to a job interview out West who was relieved of $2,500 lent to him by his dad for the trip.

For instance, in fiscal year 2014 Justice Department agencies made a total of $3.9 billion in civil asset seizures, versus only $679 million in criminal asset seizures. In most years since 2008, civil asset forfeitures have accounted for the lion's share of total seizures.

Joseph Rivers was hoping to hit it big. According to the Albuquerque Journal, the aspiring businessman from just outside of Detroit had pulled together $16,000 in seed money to fulfill a lifetime dream of starting a music video company. Last month, Rivers took the first step in that voyage, saying goodbye to the family and friends who had supported him at home and boarding an Amtrak train headed for Los Angeles.

He never made it. From the Albuquerque Journal:

A DEA agent boarded the train at the Albuquerque Amtrak station and began asking various passengers, including Rivers, where they were going and why. When Rivers replied that he was headed to LA to make a music video, the agent asked to search his bags. Rivers complied.

The agent found Rivers's cash, still in a bank envelope. He explained why he had it: He was starting a business in California, and he'd had trouble in the past withdrawing large sums of money from out-of-state banks.

The agents didn't believe him, according to the article. They said they thought the money was involved in some sort of drug activity. Rivers let them call his mother back home to corroborate the story. They didn't believe her, either.

The agents found nothing in Rivers's belongings that indicated that he was involved with the drug trade: no drugs, no guns. They didn't arrest him or charge him with a crime. But they took his cash anyway, every last cent, under the authority of the Justice Department's civil asset forfeiture program.

But New Mexico's law only affects state law enforcement officials. As a result, in New Mexico -- and everywhere else, for that matter -- DEA agents will be able to board your train, ask you where you're going and take all your cash if they don't like your story, all without ever charging you with a crime.

talltex wrote:

VMI77 wrote:

Dave2 wrote:

DocV wrote:http://www.wacotrib.com/news/twin-peaks ... 6efa0.html

Waco Tribune wrote:The release also states the number of weapons discovered at the crime scene has increased to 475 “and may continue to increase.” The list includes 151 firearms, 12 of which were long guns. Other weapons include knives, brass knuckles, batons, tomahawks, weighted weapons, a hatchet, stun guns, bats, clubs, a machete, a pipe, an ax, pepper spray and a chain.

“Some were found using metal detectors as they were buried beneath the grass in the dirt,” the release said.

Why are they assuming that weapons found buried in the ground belonged to the bikers?

I'm more interested in when this burying took place and how.....either they buried weapons while under police observation or they would have had to bury them in advance of the meeting. Seems a little strange that people burying guns in a shopping center wouldn't be noticed by anyone or draw any attention. And how were they buried....just in the dirt, inside plastic bags, etc? How deep? When they were burying these guns were they wearing their MC gear or had they disguised themselves as gardeners or something? Did they use their hands or were they out digging holes around the shopping center with shovels? Did both sides in the conflict bury weapons, and if so, how did they make sure they didn't run into the other side at the time? How long beforehand were the guns buried...the night before, week before, month before? Seems like the longer they were in the ground the greater the chance of being discovered, and if they did it just prior, since the police were on to this meeting, were they watching the shopping center? If they weren't why weren't they? If they were did the police dig the weapons up before the meeting to deny one possibility of escalation? If not, why not? If they needed the weapons how were they going to retrieve them in a fight? Dig holes in exposed positions while the bullets were flying? If the police had to use metal detectors to find them how were they going to find them in a firefight? If they planned to dig them up before the fight how were they going to do it without tipping off the other side, and why didn't they dig them up? Were they throwaways or were they going to come back and dig them up later if they weren't needed, risking another opportunity to be caught?

I think the likely case is not that they were burying anything beforehand. They had all the people they detained standing and sitting around the parking lots and on the grassy area for 3-5 hours after the fight before they started processing them and taking them downtown. Look back at some of the photos and you can see guys lined up sitting on the curb around the shrubs and beds filled with mulch. I doubt that very many of the "weapons" recovered were guns but with all the folks milling around for several hours it wouldnt be very hard to remove a knife or spray or knuckles or even a pistol from a boot or inside vest pocket and unobtrusively slide it under the mulch or in the case of a knife push it down into the grass all the way. There's going to be a LOT of legal problems for the prosecution to overcome to link anyone other than the Bandidos or Cossacks to the organized crime charges...and even there it's not going to be a slam dunk by any means. The ones they can spot on video actually participating in the fight can probably be convicted on other charges than RICO.

cb1000rider wrote:Wait.. it the tide turning here? What happened to mamma-said, the company you keep, and what you wear matters? OK, I made that last bit up about what you wear... But still, it amazes me that outspoken, law-abiding, conservative, constitution-believing people could ever support an such an obvious round up and throw-away the key... Even if it did net quite a few bad guys.

Makes me want to go live on an island. No, you don't need to second that motion..

ELB wrote:The Breitbart article is basically some quotes from other newspapers. Not exactly news, I think. Especially when a substantial part of it is quoting an article that quotes a woman who wasn't there but is repeating "rumours swirling" around the biker community.

meh.

I'll wait a bit longer.

cb1000rider wrote:When you're counting weapons via TSA-style, every little weapon counts. Never know when you might unearth a deadly arrowhead that could be used to help convict a jacket-wearing harley rider.

Four weeks after the deadly May 17th shooting incident outside a Waco Twin Peaks restaurant, more details have come out concerning the incident, but significant questions still remain about the actions taken by law enforcement and the police’s account of what transpired.

Although the national mainstream media has largely moved on from the Waco story, if critics of the police are correct, the incident represents an unprecedented civil rights violation and media cover-up campaign by the Waco authorities.

However, since the four were arrested, the incident has cast a shadow over their lives, because the Waco authorities immediately took a “Guilty Until Proven Innocent” attitude.

Grim Guardians members King, Harris and Garcia were featured in a previous Breitbart Texas story because they were arrested near the Twin Peaks scene, but hadn’t actually been there. They were given a smaller bond and then released, but once Waco officials realized they had been released, they ordered the trio re-arrested… before they were eventually released again.

Dave2 wrote:

DocV wrote:http://www.wacotrib.com/news/twin-peaks ... 6efa0.html

Waco Tribune wrote:The release also states the number of weapons discovered at the crime scene has increased to 475 “and may continue to increase.” The list includes 151 firearms, 12 of which were long guns. Other weapons include knives, brass knuckles, batons, tomahawks, weighted weapons, a hatchet, stun guns, bats, clubs, a machete, a pipe, an ax, pepper spray and a chain.

“Some were found using metal detectors as they were buried beneath the grass in the dirt,” the release said.

Why are they assuming that weapons found buried in the ground belonged to the bikers?

Two weeks later, Waco authorities still aren’t telling how many of the dead bikers were shot by police officers, how many cops fired their weapons, or how many total rounds they discharged.

Yahoo News filed public records requests to try to learn more, but reported last night that Waco authorities have asked state officials for permission to withhold documents.

Police haven’t released any video of the shoot-out to the public.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

VMI77 wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:

ScooterSissy wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:I don't give a cup of warm spit for what someone else says I can wear, and frankly, I think it is shameful that anyone would be an apologist for this kind of crap. Someone is going to tell me that a club of dirtbags with a membership of only 2300 (worldwide) gets to tell a state with 27 MILLION people what they can and can't wear? That dog won't hunt, and shame on anybody who says that it should.

TAM, please look back and see where I said "should". If I did, it was a typo. I'm talking about the way things are, not the way they should be.

It's interesting, seems most folks on here have the attitude that the Cossacks, the MC that had the most die, were "scum" or "thugs"; yet this is the very attitude they had, and was largely the reason they've been at "war" with the Bandidos, and had 7 or 8 of their members die - the attitude that no one was going to tell them what rocker they could wear.

Now, are we suddenly going to see a change in attitude from forum members, and see them pronounced heroes for standing up for what they believe?

The "dirtbags" I referenced were the Banditos, which the article I quoted described as having a membership of 2300 "worldwide". I never referenced the Cossaks, who, by my reconning came to make peace. Re read my post.

The state of Texas has never granted the Banditos a charter to collect a fee for the privilege of putting a Texas rocker on their colors. Therefore, when they extort a fee backed up by an implied (and apparently quite real) threat of violence for "permission" to wear the rocker, that makes them a true criminal enterprise.......even if they never ran guns or sold drugs or murdered rivals, or any of the other crimes of which they are suspected. They have no LEGAL authority to demand or collect the fee, and they have no LEGAL authority to enforce their claim. That makes them a criminal gang. Period.

Near as I can tell, while the Cossaks may not be sweet little angels, they are willing to live and let live. As a philosophical libertarian, I say good for them. But, until the state grants them exclusive use of the word "Texas" on a rocker and authority to restrict its use, the Banditos club needs to be eradicated......just like any other criminal organization.

While I might agree that by the power of state violence it may be able to grant such authority or forcefully restrict such usage, the state has no more right to enforce such a claim than you or I. The State is not a private entity that can claim a trademark or copyright or patent.

I see your point, but if even the state has no authority to restrict it, then for SURE the Banditos don't.

ShootDontTalk wrote:

ScooterSissy wrote: I think it's more along the lines of (the 99%, mind you) - "we're imitating them (and they are to a large degree), so if we're playing their game, we should play by their rules."

Better you said it than me. Again, thanks for your honesty.

I'll try another analogy. If someone donned camos that looked very much like military attire, but was slightly different; and then started adding ribbons that were very similar to real military ribbons, but still slightly different; what do you think the chances are that a vet somewhere would tell that person to take them off?

Wonder what the opinion of those on here would be of the poser?

The analogy again breaks down - but you have found a kernel of truth. Posing as a veteran is a real crime that can land you in jail. And yes, people on here probably would not condone anyone posing as one. They also question the sanity of anyone who dresses up like an outlaw biker and sits down to eat a burger with a couple hundred armed gang members. See the connection?

The truth is people (including the rest of the world) paint us by the company we keep and the look we strive for. If I decided to dress up in man-Jammie's, let my beard grow out, sling my AK-47 look alike and walk the streets in company with 20 or 30 other real terrorists, people would probably perceive me to be a terrorist. What would I gain for myself besides a pot full of trouble? Nothing. A lot of real pain for being a make believe terrorist-or am I make believe?

I could dress up like a HAngel, let my beard grow out, let my hair get scraggly, don the leathers and ride my Harley around with some real HAngels. The critical issue is not what the outlaw bikers think of me, but what millions of non-bikers who see the group roaring down the street think of me. Am I one of them? Yes. Why? Because I associate with them. What do I gain from pretending to be a HAngel? Nothing good.

Not criticizing because I wasn't there, but I really doubt there were was any evangelizing by Christians going on when the shooting started. I suspect any "evangelizing" was being done by outlaw bikers just showing up.

Abraham...yours is an excellent question. There comes a point where all the look-alike, dress up pretending causes the focus to shift from eternity to the world. I don't think I want to have to stand before the Lord and explain why I was more interested in the bikes than the souls.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

ScooterSissy wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:I don't give a cup of warm spit for what someone else says I can wear, and frankly, I think it is shameful that anyone would be an apologist for this kind of crap. Someone is going to tell me that a club of dirtbags with a membership of only 2300 (worldwide) gets to tell a state with 27 MILLION people what they can and can't wear? That dog won't hunt, and shame on anybody who says that it should.

TAM, please look back and see where I said "should". If I did, it was a typo. I'm talking about the way things are, not the way they should be.

It's interesting, seems most folks on here have the attitude that the Cossacks, the MC that had the most die, were "scum" or "thugs"; yet this is the very attitude they had, and was largely the reason they've been at "war" with the Bandidos, and had 7 or 8 of their members die - the attitude that no one was going to tell them what rocker they could wear.

Now, are we suddenly going to see a change in attitude from forum members, and see them pronounced heroes for standing up for what they believe?

The "dirtbags" I referenced were the Banditos, which the article I quoted described as having a membership of 2300 "worldwide". I never referenced the Cossaks, who, by my reconning came to make peace. Re read my post.

The state of Texas has never granted the Banditos a charter to collect a fee for the privilege of putting a Texas rocker on their colors. Therefore, when they extort a fee backed up by an implied (and apparently quite real) threat of violence for "permission" to wear the rocker, that makes them a true criminal enterprise.......even if they never ran guns or sold drugs or murdered rivals, or any of the other crimes of which they are suspected. They have no LEGAL authority to demand or collect the fee, and they have no LEGAL authority to enforce their claim. That makes them a criminal gang. Period.

Near as I can tell, while the Cossaks may not be sweet little angels, they are willing to live and let live. As a philosophical libertarian, I say good for them. But, until the state grants them exclusive use of the word "Texas" on a rocker and authority to restrict its use, the Banditos club needs to be eradicated......just like any other criminal organization.

cb1000rider wrote:

Sorry you missed the obvious sarcasm. They are all criminal thugs and should be treated as such.

If that's true, why do some of the hold jobs that require background checks? Why do some of them have absolutely zero criminal history?
I could get to "most" are criminal thugs, best case. There is no doubt in my mind that they rounded up everyone that met a visual profile. If that's OK with you make sure you continue to dress and act like the majority - you should be safe. (I don't mean you specifically, Mojo)

"More than a dozen local men were among the 170 people arrested after the shootout, including Juan Carlos Garcia, 45, who is an engineer with the city of Austin’s Public Works Department. According to his Facebook page, he has been a member of the Guardians of the Children biker club and the Grim Guardian of Slaughter Creek. Police said neither groups are considered to be criminal in the Austin area."

"Also arrested was Theron J. Rhoten, 35, an Austin mechanic who drove to the meeting on a vintage Harley chopper, according to the Associated Press. He was with two other members of Vise Grip motorcycle club."

jmra wrote:According to a story released by WFAA, Twin Peaks will no longer host bike nights at any of its 76 locations nationwide.

That's a good solution. Lets ban car shows too. Makes perfect sense to me. Motorcycles are the problem. No, wait.. It's the kind of people that own motorcycles. Where have we heard that before?
There are monthly bike nights all over the country that go by peacefully.. Overreaction and silly.

AndyC wrote:I'm curious to hear how you would have sorted out a massive crime-scene like that on the spot - what you would have done instead.

You do what the constitution and the law allow. Round them all up. You hold them for what the court has deemed a "reasonable" length of time, which I believe is 24 hours. After that, you charge the ones based on evidence and background. You let the rest go and pick them up later if necessary. This is what amounts to "indefinite" hold. Best case, it'll take a month to get trials just on the bail issue. If it's OK with you to be locked up for a month before you can even have a discussion on it, I'm afraid for this country.

What you don't do is hit them all with impossible bonds and ruin them financially based on zero evidence. Sure, they're catching some bad guys, but they're also destroying good guys too. If that's OK with you, I hope you're never in the wrong place, sitting next to the wrong person, or happen to be associated with *any* interest group that might be of government interest.. You know, like a gun owner.

One of the black men, Martin Lewis, 62, whose photos show him with a gray beard apparently dyed black on just one side, is a retired detective who spent 32 years with the San Antonio Police Department.