tvc184

I am just stating the law. 🙃 If you speed and get away with it, then you got away with it. If you commit a felony and get away with it, then you got away with it. Here is what at times comes back to bite people in the butt. Playing my favorite game, what if…… An officer pulls a guy over for speeding and while talking to him at the window noticed that he has a holster handgun. The officer comments that it is a nice gun and he has one just like it. So Mr. Friendly Driver says, “Yeah, my brother just bought it for me yesterday. I was stuck at work and they had a sale so he went down and bought it for me”. You are now on camera admitting that your brother committed a felony. There was actually a case that went all the way up to the US Supreme Court. It wasn’t a traffic stop but like a traffic stop, was an accidental discovery. The police found a gun in a guy’s possession which was legal at the time because he was not a convicted felon. Unfortunately for him, he had the sales receipt and it had the original purchaser’s name on it and it was his nephew. The nephew was a former police officer and could get guns lawfully at a discount. When the nephew heard that his uncle wanted a new gun, offered to get it at his police discount. Both men could legally purchase a firearm at a licensed dealer. The police were able to track the sale to the former police officer and he was convicted of a felony. The nephew appealed to the Supreme Court and said, but we both can lawfully possess firearms. The Supreme Court said…. Oh well. So the Nephew is now a convicted felon. People love to talk, tell all of their friends what is happening, what they did and more times than not, getting on social media and proclaiming what a great day they had, and what they did. On a side note, social media is one of the great tools of modern law-enforcement. Many times the police don’t need a reason to question somebody, they can just get on their social media page. … or a routine traffic stop. For the most part, I could care less what people do. But if they get caught……

Absolutely no problem. If you don’t get caught….

It would be a felony under federal law to purchase the firearm from a licensed dealer if the intent of the purchase was for another person. It doesn’t matter if the other person could legally purchase the firearm. It is legal to purchase a firearm with intent to give it as an actual gift to another person who can legally possess the firearm. That means no money changed hands. So if you want to buy your brother a firearm as a gift because it’s his birthday, Christmas or just because you like him, it is legal. If your brother says buy it for me, because I don’t have time, it is a crime. The reason is on Form 4473 that you must complete to buy a firearm at a federally licensed dealer such a good at a sporting good store, it asks if you are purchasing the firearm for another person. If you are buying a firearm as a gift, you are the actual purchaser unlike if money changes hands. It is yours until you intend to give it away as a bonafide gift.

Your brother who is 30 years old, has never been arrested, was not dishonorably discharged from the military, etc., wants a new gun. He has absolutely nothing that will stop him from legally purchasing a firearm. Academy is running a sale on the gun he wants and it ends today but he will not get off of work in time. You are also of age to buy the firearm and he asks if you can buy it for him and he will pay you back tomorrow. Basically, both of you can legally possess and buy firearms. Can you lawfully purchased the firearm for him?

There are two types of crosswalks, marked (A) and unmarked (B). Unmarked crosswalks are extended lines from sidewalks. So if a sidewalk ends at the street AND then continues on the opposite side of the street, that is an unmarked crosswalk. Or as it is described in the Transportation Code: (2) "Crosswalk" means: (A) the portion of a roadway, including an intersection, designated as a pedestrian crossing by surface markings, including lines; or (B) the portion of a roadway at an intersection that is within the connections of the lateral lines of the sidewalks on opposite sides of the highway measured from the curbs or, in the absence of curbs, from the edges of the traversable roadway. So if a driver is coming upon an intersection with a stop sign AND there are sidewalks on both sides of the road, that is the same as a painted crosswalk and the law requires a person to stop before the sidewalk. If a driver is at an intersection and has, for example, a left turn green arrow, the driver can lawfully turn left. The driver however has to yield right of way to any pedestrian in a crosswalk or any oncoming traffic from the opposite direction. The green turning arrow allows a person to lawfully turn but that person must give way to any vehicle or pedestrian.

Did anyone watch that news conference that ended a short while ago? I don’t think “Brutal” covers it….

I know this is Fox News but watch this less that 9 minute video about Biden’s interview on MSNBC

OH…. NO KIDDING!? Maybe that’s why I said it was only a point of law noting that each state has different laws and it was for a future discussion. Just trolling or is your reading comprehension and reasoning perception lacking?

Only a point of law for a future discussion and noting that every state has its own laws…. not in Texas.

It is all useless against an attacker with time to plan. According to the article, the median age of school shooters is 16. That means that they couldn’t legally buy a gun even from an individual, yet they did. Hmmmm…. it’s like when they were about to commit Capital Murder, the laws seemed like no deterrent. You answer was clearly the correct assessment. If no rifle, a shotgun. Then a handgun. Then a Molotov cocktail thrown into a couple of rooms.

I did not follow the case in the least however if what I read today is true, she claims that he sexually assaulted her in a department store dressing room. There was no report made and no witnesses. Is that true?

The latest poll from the Washington Post and ABC News. To say that they lean left would be an understatement. I don’t think anyone would call them right wing. Polls are a snapshot in time. Will it change with a jury verdict in a lawsuit? But father moment…. Biden approval rating is 36%. Who do you trust more on the economy? Trump 54% Biden 36% Mental shsrpness to be president? Trump 54% Biden 32% Physical condition to serve? Trump 64% Biden 33% If election held today, would vote or likely vote for? Trump 45% (36%/9%) Biden 32% (32%/0%) There is a long way to go but this is not good news for Biden. You can disbelieve a left leaning poll if you wish and even if it’s true, it could certainly change next week. I would say your premise that Biden is starting out with a huge lead is a pie in the sky wishful thinking at best. [Hidden Content]

Money grab.

The law reads that if you face a solid red light (not flashing), you must stop before a clearly marked stop line or if no line, before the crosswalk. Meaning, once you have passed the stop line or crosswalk, you have to proceed. You can’t stop before a line that you have already passed as required by the law. Sec. 544.007 (d) An operator of a vehicle facing only a steady red signal shall stop at a clearly marked stop line. In the absence of a stop line, the operator shall stop before entering the crosswalk on the near side of the intersection. A vehicle that is not turning shall remain standing until an indication to proceed is shown. So what about a vehicle that now has the green light but you were already in the intersection before your light turned red and their light turned green? Or what if you were in the intersection for several seconds but traffic up ahead in your lane stopped, forcing you to remain stranded in the intersection? In either case, if the vehicle with the now green light proceeds and hits you, who is at fault? That is also covered in the same section. Section 544.007 (b) An operator of a vehicle facing a circular green signal may proceed straight or turn right or left unless a sign prohibits the turn. The operator shall, while the signal is exhibited: (1) yield the right-of-way to other vehicles lawfully in the intersection when the signal is exhibited; and (2) stop and yield the right-of-way to pedestrians lawfully in the intersection or an adjacent crosswalk. So the person with the now green light must yield the right of way to vehicles that were lawfully already in the intersection when the light turned green. You can also see that if pedestrians were already in the crosswalk, they have the right away. In fact that goes for all crosswalks even in the middle of a city block. A crosswalk is essentially a stop sign but requires no action on the driver unless there is a pedestrian already in the crosswalk. I have personally heard people make comments like, if I’m driving down the road and there’s no stop sign or red light, I don’t have to stop for pedestrians. Welllllll….. yes you do. To do otherwise might result in a Manslaughter or Aggravated Assault charge. Which leads to another question. What is a crosswalk?

You are coming upon a red light at a wide intersection (5-9 lanes) such as crossing Gulfway Dr in Port Arthur or College St in Beaumont. The light turns yellow but you think you can make it. You get completely into the first lane you are crossing by the light turns red so you cross the last few lanes such the light red. A violation?

Pigs?

For $750,000 to bonding company you might be able to get him out.

I have been saying from the first report of this case, it is clearly Capital Murder. There are several aggravating circumstances that change a Murder to a Capital Murder. This guy committed three of those circumstances. 1. A victim under 10 years old 2. More than one victim 3. During a Burglary If any one can be proven, he is death penalty eligible. I have no clue why this guy has not been accused already with Capital Murder. Obviously, the law requires a grand jury indictment later but probable cause allows the holding of the person. clearly there is probable cause for Capital Murder. With a capital murder charge, bail can be denied. I am breaking this up because of the news articles like the one below. I know they are just reporting but are they really asking questions? This is a quote from that article: If officials have aggravating factors to support Francisco Oropeza's charges, they will be upgraded. San Jacinto County District Attorney Todd Dillon has 90 days to present the case. “IF” officials have aggravating factors??? Why not ask an official if they believe there are aggravating factors? Of course they throw in the not involved defense attorney who concluded, this guy is going to likely get 5 death sentences. I will concur with the attorney’s opinion. [Hidden Content]

I realize most people know this but to refresh our memories… Technically it is not a bond, it is bail. For practicality purposes, most people use the words interchangeably. A judge sets bail as a promise to appear in court. If you post bail, if charges are dropped or if you show up at trial, you get your money back. It’s that simple. Most people can’t afford bail on felonies however. If a person is arrested and gets a $10,000 bail assessed by a judge, most people can’t pull up $10,000 cash or perhaps they have it but don’t want to use $10,000 in a savings account and not have access to it for 2-3 years awaiting trial. Instead they can go to a bondsman. A bondsman acts as a bank and loans the money. I think the going rate is 10% and as high as 15% but I am not sure. If a person has a $10,000 bail, a bondsman will likely get that person out of jail for $1,000. Once you pay the bondsman in cash, your money is gone. It is like taking a loan out at a bank but there is no early payoff benefit. If you buy a car for $30,000 at 5% interest for five years. If you pay it off in one year instead of five, you can save on not having to pay 5% for another four years. With a bondsman, the moment you walk out the door that is yet. If the DA drops the case the next morning, you don’t get you $1,000 back. The bondsman doesn’t run down to the jail at 3AM to hand $10,000 over to a corrections officer. He is a “surety” or is good for it if the arrested person doesn’t show back up for court. It’s kind of like a co-signer. A surety bond is basically Insuance but for a single specific purpose/incident/project. Most surety bonds are probably contracts like if a company hires a construction firm. The company will likely demand that the construction firm purchase a surety bond. If the construction company defaults on the project, the surety bond company has to pay for the damages, the completion of the project, etc. A surety bond for a person getting out of jail works the same way. If the person shows back up in court, no harm no foul and the bondsman got to keep his 10% profit. If a person does not show up, the bondsman as the surety can lose the $10,000 or maybe $200,000 or $1,000,000 or in this Cleveland case, $5,000,000. That is where a Dog The Bounty Hunter comes in. A bondsman who is about to lose $200,000, might pay a 10% finders fee or $20,000 to bring the suspect in. So when a person is arrested, a judge will set bail at his discretion on what he thinks is a fair amount to get the person back to court if he is released. The amount of bail can be appealed as excessive. Since perhaps most people cannot post the amount of bail, they go to an insurance company who will guarantee the court that the accused will show up for trial or he loses the bail amount. That insurance company is a surety bond company or also commonly known as a bondsman. Who would post a $5,000,000 for a mass murder? Hopefully no one. I’m sure if a billionaire’s son was arrested, he would gladly post the $5 million or even pay a bondsman $500,000 to get him out. For the rest of us…… Clear as mud?

Under your scenario… You are indicted for OC-Agg Assault and facing 99 years. They have you stealing a handgun and selling the gun to a 17 year old. That is two state jail felonies with a maximum of two years on each count. Through your attorney they offer to accept guilty pleas in the crimes you actually committed but no deferred adjudication probation and you will testify in court that you sold the gun to one of the suspects and he told you what he was going to do. Or… they will not drop the Aggravated Assault charge but will allow you to plea guilty with a guaranteed sentence of 5 years (minimum for 1st degree felony) and the same testimony deal. Or… the same deal but a 10 year sentence and parole eligible at 5 years. To not take an agreed upon plea, you risk life in prison or up to 99 years, both of which can receive parole in 30 years. The worst plea deal I made up would probably have you home in five years…. You could risk 30 for parole. If it looked like a solid case against you, would you accept any of those deals? But we don’t even know what they really have on anybody. It is interesting to think of what may happen. Some of these later arrests might even have nothing to do with the shooting and just incidental crimes they ran into. Like while investigating where somebody might have gotten a gun, they inadvertently ran across a guy with a stolen credit card, which is a minor felony. And I highly doubt that they would offer immunity but anything is certainly possible.

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?

Stackin’ ‘em line cord wood…..

BS

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….

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.