tvc184

Obviously I have no clue at all about this serious incident…. 
Let’s go out on a limb and say some of the people arrested are low level players like in my Organized  Crime examples. Like maybe they were not the actual shooters or the getaway driver but have been involved in other more minor crimes with a group.  Maybe they made a phone call to let people know that the party was underway.
 Whatever…..
Because of the organized crime law however, the people that may not have actually took part in the shooting itself might be facing up to 99 years in prison. Do anyone think that through a lawyer, they might give up the right to remain silent and cooperate in prosecution in lieu of reduced charges? 

Go to a firearms counter at a big box sporting goods store and listen. 🤣
I have heard things that are completely wrong. I am not talking like an opinion like brand A is better than B. I am talking about wrong.
 Even a young person at a specialty counter was expected to have some basic knowledge of the product. Not so much any more.
I think I have told this story before, but a few years ago I was at Subway sandwich with my partner at work. He ordered a 6 inch sandwich and I ordered a 12 inch sandwich. The conversation went like this:   
I would like a 12 inch on white bread.
We don’t have that.
OK give me a 12 inch wheat.
We don’t have that.
OK, what do you have?
We have white, wheat, jalapeño cheese…
OK, give me the 12 inch white.
We don’t have that. Sir, all we have is 6 inch and foot long sandwiches. We don’t have 12 inch bread.
My mistake, give me the foot-long white.
 
 

 

Also on the Organized Crime law, I have talked about a group of people (called a Combination) committing crimes but they may not know each other. This is the actual law from the Penal Code.
Sec. 71.01. DEFINITIONS. In this chapter,
(a) "Combination" means three or more persons who collaborate in carrying on criminal activities, although:
(1) participants may not know each other's identity;
(2) membership in the combination may change from time to time; and
(3) participants may stand in a wholesaler-retailer or other arm's-length relationship in illicit distribution operations.
You can see that they don’t even have to know each other and the membership can change. It does not have to be a static group of let’s five people in all five people always committing the same crime. That’s why I gave the example in the other thread about a guy breaking into homes another guy is storing the stolen property and a couple other guys help sell the stolen items but don’t even know who stole it or where.
A combination goes back to gang laws but all illegal enterprises are not gangs. Just because they don’t have a name, a common hand sign or specific color, etc.. the are still under the gang type laws.
A defendant or his attorney cannot make the case, this guy is not in a gang because they don’t have a name or color. The state legislature simplified it by coming up with the term combination where the state doesn’t have to prove that people actually belong to a specific gang. 

I read somewhere about 35 years ago (way before Google) that the FBI, believe from studies some thing like 90% of major crimes were committed by someone under the influence of drugs or alcohol. It did not mean that they were plastered but maybe a guy about to commit a robbery might have two or three beers to take the edge off. Consumed courage….

Actually (just a point of law) alcohol does legally play a factor in criminal law. Texas law says that the use of alcohol cannot be used as a defense to prosecution however it can be brought up as a mitigating factor in punishment.
In this case the guy should be charged with Capital Murder which only has two punishments. Life without parole or execution. A lawyer is legally allowed to bring up intoxication to plea for life in prison.
 But that is just the law. I agree with your assessment.
I just have a hard time getting away from opinions without bring up law. 🤣

Actually (just a point of law) alcohol does legally play a factor in criminal law. Texas law says that the use of alcohol cannot be used as a defense to prosecution however it can be brought up as a mitigating factor in punishment.
In this case the guy should be charged with Capital Murder which only has two punishments. Life without parole or execution. A lawyer is legally allowed to bring up intoxication to plea for life in prison.
 But that is just the law. I agree with your assessment.
I just have a hard time getting away from opinions without bring up law. 🤣

THEY CAUGHT HIM  Somewhere in Cut and Shoot

Because it may be interesting…..
Organized Crime (OC) is not a crime by itself. OC is an enhancement to certain other crimes if committed with 3 or more persons. The punishment is generally one degree higher than the most serious crime committed.
In this case Aggravated Assault is a second degree felony or up to 20 years in prison. By charging OC, it would move the punishment to a first degree felony and up to 99 years maximum.
 They will probably get indicted for Organized Crime-Aggravated Assault.
 The Agg Assault with at least 3 people is what allows the enhancement to Organized Crime.
 What may also be interesting in the OC law, the participants don’t need to know each other. They don’t have to all be in the same room and say, let’s do this.
For example….
A guy gets with an acquaintance and says that he wants to start breaking into homes in the daytime when people are at work. He does not need the acquaintance’s help in the burglaries but he wants the acquaintance to hide the stolen property because the acquaintance has a big shed in his backyard. If the acquaintance can help sell the property, he can keep some of the cash. The acquaintance agrees and says that he has a friend with a lot of street contacts who can get rid of the stolen property quickly.
 The friend in turn has a cousin who will help him.
 So the first guy starts breaking into homes and stealing various items. He gives it to the acquaintance who has it for a while in the shed. The acquaintance gets with his friend to sell the stolen property. The friend gets his cousin to help him.
So the guy that started the whole thing has no clue who the acquaintance’s friend is and he certainly does not know the cousin. In fact, the acquaintance does not know his friend’s cousin.
So….
A-Original guy breaking into homes   
B-the acquaintance   
C-his friend   
D-the cousin
A knows B only
B knows A and C
C knows B and D but not A 
D only knows C
B, C and D are knowingly possessing stolen property at some point but take no part in the burglaries. C and D don’t even know who the guy is.
Burglary of a Habitation is a second degree felony. Since this involved at least three people, even though they did not all know each other and had no clue where the crimes were being committed, they can all be included in organized crime. The Burglaries can now be enhanced to a first-degree felony carrying that 99 year maximum sentence and….. all 4 can be charged with Organized Crime-Burglary. Since the cousin who is helping to sell the property that he did not know where it came from or who the guy was that stole it, is now face 99 years in prison.
 THAT…. is the Organized Crime law. 
 

Because it may be interesting…..
Organized Crime (OC) is not a crime by itself. OC is an enhancement to certain other crimes if committed with 3 or more persons. The punishment is generally one degree higher than the most serious crime committed.
In this case Aggravated Assault is a second degree felony or up to 20 years in prison. By charging OC, it would move the punishment to a first degree felony and up to 99 years maximum.
 They will probably get indicted for Organized Crime-Aggravated Assault.
 The Agg Assault with at least 3 people is what allows the enhancement to Organized Crime.
 What may also be interesting in the OC law, the participants don’t need to know each other. They don’t have to all be in the same room and say, let’s do this.
For example….
A guy gets with an acquaintance and says that he wants to start breaking into homes in the daytime when people are at work. He does not need the acquaintance’s help in the burglaries but he wants the acquaintance to hide the stolen property because the acquaintance has a big shed in his backyard. If the acquaintance can help sell the property, he can keep some of the cash. The acquaintance agrees and says that he has a friend with a lot of street contacts who can get rid of the stolen property quickly.
 The friend in turn has a cousin who will help him.
 So the first guy starts breaking into homes and stealing various items. He gives it to the acquaintance who has it for a while in the shed. The acquaintance gets with his friend to sell the stolen property. The friend gets his cousin to help him.
So the guy that started the whole thing has no clue who the acquaintance’s friend is and he certainly does not know the cousin. In fact, the acquaintance does not know his friend’s cousin.
So….
A-Original guy breaking into homes   
B-the acquaintance   
C-his friend   
D-the cousin
A knows B only
B knows A and C
C knows B and D but not A 
D only knows C
B, C and D are knowingly possessing stolen property at some point but take no part in the burglaries. C and D don’t even know who the guy is.
Burglary of a Habitation is a second degree felony. Since this involved at least three people, even though they did not all know each other and had no clue where the crimes were being committed, they can all be included in organized crime. The Burglaries can now be enhanced to a first-degree felony carrying that 99 year maximum sentence and….. all 4 can be charged with Organized Crime-Burglary. Since the cousin who is helping to sell the property that he did not know where it came from or who the guy was that stole it, is now face 99 years in prison.
 THAT…. is the Organized Crime law. 
 

Go to a firearms counter at a big box sporting goods store and listen. 🤣
I have heard things that are completely wrong. I am not talking like an opinion like brand A is better than B. I am talking about wrong.
 Even a young person at a specialty counter was expected to have some basic knowledge of the product. Not so much any more.
I think I have told this story before, but a few years ago I was at Subway sandwich with my partner at work. He ordered a 6 inch sandwich and I ordered a 12 inch sandwich. The conversation went like this:   
I would like a 12 inch on white bread.
We don’t have that.
OK give me a 12 inch wheat.
We don’t have that.
OK, what do you have?
We have white, wheat, jalapeño cheese…
OK, give me the 12 inch white.
We don’t have that. Sir, all we have is 6 inch and foot long sandwiches. We don’t have 12 inch bread.
My mistake, give me the foot-long white.
 
 

 

Go to a firearms counter at a big box sporting goods store and listen. 🤣
I have heard things that are completely wrong. I am not talking like an opinion like brand A is better than B. I am talking about wrong.
 Even a young person at a specialty counter was expected to have some basic knowledge of the product. Not so much any more.
I think I have told this story before, but a few years ago I was at Subway sandwich with my partner at work. He ordered a 6 inch sandwich and I ordered a 12 inch sandwich. The conversation went like this:   
I would like a 12 inch on white bread.
We don’t have that.
OK give me a 12 inch wheat.
We don’t have that.
OK, what do you have?
We have white, wheat, jalapeño cheese…
OK, give me the 12 inch white.
We don’t have that. Sir, all we have is 6 inch and foot long sandwiches. We don’t have 12 inch bread.
My mistake, give me the foot-long white.
 
 

 

From the law…
Sec. 22.01. ASSAULT.
(a) A person commits an offense if the person: (1) intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly causes bodily injury to another, including the person's spouse;
 This is misdemeanor assault or assault with an injury (bruise, pain, etc.). Notice that it only requires to prove the injury was caused by being reckless. 
Next is Aggravated Assault…..
Sec. 22.02. AGGRAVATED ASSAULT.
(a) A person commits an offense if the person commits assault as defined in Sec. 22.01 and the person: (1) causes serious bodily injury to another, including the person's spouse;
or (2) uses or exhibits a deadly weapon during the commission of the assault.
First a person must commit an Assault as defined in 22.01 which is to intentionally or knowingly OR recklessly causing injury.
Then it becomes aggravated by either causing serious bodily injury OR using a deadly weapon.
A firearm by Texas law is the only item specifically listed as a deadly weapon. Other things “could be”, depending on how used, which requires proof. A firearm requires no proof and just is a deadly weapon.
"Deadly weapon" means: (A) a firearm or anything manifestly designed, made, or adapted for the purpose of inflicting death or serious bodily injury;

I am sure but it will be likely concurrent.
And a note on the law… just because it may (probably) come up later in the media.
Aggravated Assault is a better charge than Attempted Murder. Things like Att. Murder or Manslaughter sound worse but Aggravated Assault is way easier to prove for the same penalty.
An example is Attempted Murder carries a 20 year maximum sentence (2nd degree felony) and Aggravated Assault carries a 20 year maximum sentence (2nd degree felony).
In Attempted Murder the state has to prove that the defendant’s intent was to kill the injured victim. So what if the victim was a bystander? Maybe the shooter/defendant was shooting at A and accidentally hit B. How do you prove intent to kill B when it was an accident remembering that B was a bystander. 
Aggravated Assault only requires the state to show that the defendant “recklessly” injured victim B.
So would the DA rather try to prove “intent” which is not only way more difficult, it might actually be true that the defendant did not want to injury victim B or would the DA rather try to prove that B was recklessly injured, meaning an accident, but caused by someone acting recklessly?
Remember that both are 2nd degree felonies with a 20 year maximum.
I could just about guarantee that they will be charged with aggravated assault for the victims who did not die and Facebook will explode with comments about how stupid the DA is and the police don’t have to investigate because it should be Attempted Murder!!!
No, it should be Aggravated Assault. 

I have hunted with a .223 AR. 

I was off duty and on the way home but in uniform (in my personal vehicle) about 10 years ago. I stopped a guy parked in a handicap parking spot at a pharmacy where I had stopped to pick up a prescription. He had no license plate or hang tag and admitted to not being handicapped. His wife was with him.
I hardly made any public contacts on traffic stop but that is maybe a pet peeve. Not unusual in this kind of a situation, he could’ve parked 10 feet away in a regular parking spot and half the parking lot was empty. 
Since I was off duty and did not have a ticket book, I contacted the dispatcher by walkie-talkie and asked for a patrol unit to check by with me. A lieutenant showed up (actually my lieutenant and I was one of his sergeants) since he was on the way home also but he had a take home patrol unit, so had his ticket book.
So the lieutenant agreed with the citation and begin writing it. As a routine, the guy was checked for warrants. Oops! He had a couple of traffic tickets that we that he had not paid and warrants for his arrest. So he started boohooing and his wife was crying.
Geez…. I know that you don’t want to go to jail but you have warrants so no option but it’s only for traffic citations.
What does this have to do with Jerry Springer?
All the crying was because they were supposed to catch a flight the next morning (in about 14 hours) to NYC to be on the Jerry Springer Show. I said just pay for the warrants. Nope… they had no money. These folks from the country (like a heavy east Texas accent) were about to miss their dream shot at NYC because the about 30 year old healthy guy didn’t want to walk 10 more feet.
I asked them why they were going to be on the show. The guy told me he was supposed to claim that he was having an affair with his wife’s sister and they were supposed to get in the big argument when he springs the information on his wife. Of course the sister-in-law would then walk on stage.
I asked him about being paid and he said they would get something like $500 but got to stay in New York City with all expenses paid for a couple of days.
 

Yes, in fact (great question) warrants have nothing to do with charges being filed.
Maybe (likely?) a misunderstood part(s) of law.
Accusations, warrants, filing charges, indictments, court complaints, etc., are or can all be different. They are sometimes used interchangeably in discussions when technically they are related as involving criminal justice but one may have nothing to do with the other… other than being in criminal justice.
If anyone is interested….

The culpable mental states from highest (most culpable) to the lowest are:   
Intentionally
Knowingly   
Recklessly   
Criminal Negligence
Proof of a higher mental state automatically proves all lower states.
So they can charge a person with intentionally committing crime but if there are lower available options in that particular, it doesn’t have to be proven.
Some crimes show multiple mental states and if so, only the lowest has to be proven. 
 

Wait, they used firearms in the shootings? 

From the law…
Sec. 22.01. ASSAULT.
(a) A person commits an offense if the person: (1) intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly causes bodily injury to another, including the person's spouse;
 This is misdemeanor assault or assault with an injury (bruise, pain, etc.). Notice that it only requires to prove the injury was caused by being reckless. 
Next is Aggravated Assault…..
Sec. 22.02. AGGRAVATED ASSAULT.
(a) A person commits an offense if the person commits assault as defined in Sec. 22.01 and the person: (1) causes serious bodily injury to another, including the person's spouse;
or (2) uses or exhibits a deadly weapon during the commission of the assault.
First a person must commit an Assault as defined in 22.01 which is to intentionally or knowingly OR recklessly causing injury.
Then it becomes aggravated by either causing serious bodily injury OR using a deadly weapon.
A firearm by Texas law is the only item specifically listed as a deadly weapon. Other things “could be”, depending on how used, which requires proof. A firearm requires no proof and just is a deadly weapon.
"Deadly weapon" means: (A) a firearm or anything manifestly designed, made, or adapted for the purpose of inflicting death or serious bodily injury;

I hope they charge them with 11 counts of attempted murder. F*** the dumbs&*t !!  Hammer their azz!

This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up  

Details are usually released when the police feel the need to release it.
Freedom of information does not cross into active police investigations.
A few months ago when students were killed in a home in Idaho, not much, was released in the police a statement it seem like they were looking for clues. In various forums (and maybe this one), people were making comments that the police were incompetent and that there were no clues and this was blah blah blah.
On another sport forum I just committed that I have no clue, but I would suspect that the police have a lot of information and we’re just not releasing it. Failure to notify the public does not mean that the investigation is not moving forward. In the Idaho situation, the police were actively already tracking the killer and made an arrest not long afterward.
I realize that this is not a police bashing thread and it is not a, “where is the investigation going” thread. I was using those examples as information on how investigations are sometimes run. 
It has evolved into a “how come people aren’t talking” thread. They might be if there was something to comment on.
Just because it is not in the news and just because we haven’t heard about it, does not mean that it is not happening behind the scenes. 

If a kid can't show up for a game then in my opinion they shouldn't have been on the team to begin with. 

Carlson was almost certainly part of the sealed Fox News/Dominion lawsuit settlement. 

100% 
I recently told a coworker the lawsuit was going to try to target Carlson, watch for him to be forced out. He scoffed.