Another suspect arrested in connection to recent Jasper shooting

[Dirty_but_Dazzling]

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[tvc184]

I mentioned it in the other thread but this is where Organized Crime really could potentially come into play. Failure To Report Felony in this case seems pretty weak. The elements of that crime are that a person witnessed what a reasonable person would believe is a felony resulting in serious injury or death… AND… has a reasonable belief that it has not been reported.

I am not sure where they have probable cause that this guy witnessed the crime AND reasonably believe that it had not been reported. Really? 

It seems like a stretch at best.

Anyway, let’s assume just for legal discussion that any person witnessed such a shooting but didn’t report it. That would imply that the person was in a vehicle that was used. Had the person just been in the crowd, he would have reasonably known that 911 had been called.a

So he is in the car. Driver? Lookout?

It doesn’t even matter under Organized Crime. In fact, if such a person was a driver or a lookout, that would be a direct participant (accomplice which isn’t used in Texas) and there would be no need for the organize crime law.  If however the person was in a loose group of people committing any of a whole list of crimes that apply to the Organized Crime law and he was involved in any way, the person could potentially be charged with Organized Crime- Aggravated Assault in a case like this. 

To make it more clear, let’s say the group of people were breaking into cars, beating people up and stealing checks and forging names. Those are either misdemeanors or low grade felonies like a State Jail felony has a two year maximum sentence.

So the person committing low level crimes with this group, can be charged in Organized Crime for the most serious crime committed by members of the group. Maybe that person should only committed a couple of forgeries where nobody got hurt or broke into a car to steal a wallet. He personally might have only committed those crimes where nobody got hurt and they were misdemeanors with a year in jail maximum. Even though he personally did not commit any serious crimes, he could potentially be charged with the shootings and not be facing a year in jail for a crime he actually committed (and failure to report a felony has a one-year maximum) but 99 years.

I have no clue who this guy is or if any of that applies to him. All I know is the public information that he was arrested for failing to report a felony which again is a misdemeanor. The situation makes for an interesting scenario on the OC laws though as an example.

I’m sure we have all heard the saying, you’re judged by the company you keep. In the case of criminal law, that might be true to the point of a person facing a serious criminal charge for something that they did not even personally commit but were in a group of criminals who did. 

[tvc184]

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. 

[Dirty_but_Dazzling]

19 hours ago, tvc184 said:

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. 

#6 arrested today with 7th being sought.

[tvc184]

42 minutes ago, Dirty_but_Dazzling said:

#6 arrested today with 7th being sought.

Stackin’ ‘em line cord wood…..

[tvc184]

50 minutes ago, Dirty_but_Dazzling said:

#6 arrested today with 7th being sought.

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? 

[WOSdrummer99]

17 minutes ago, tvc184 said:

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? 

Not that I expect full cooperation from anyone in exchange for full immunity. It could happen. If someone looking at 99 for making a call about where the party was. Not as bad as stealing a gun and selling it to the shooter. It could definitely happen. Its always more likely to plead guilty to a lesser charge/charges with a concurrent sentence to save the courts time and the taxpayers money. Wouldn't you think?

[tvc184]

2 hours ago, WOSdrummer99 said:

Not that I expect full cooperation from anyone in exchange for full immunity. It could happen. If someone looking at 99 for making a call about where the party was. Not as bad as stealing a gun and selling it to the shooter. It could definitely happen. Its always more likely to plead guilty to a lesser charge/charges with a concurrent sentence to save the courts time and the taxpayers money. Wouldn't you think?

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. 

[CardinalBacker]

I suspected that some of these men might have been returning fire at the party, then they didn’t cooperate with the pigs. 

[tvc184]

39 minutes ago, CardinalBacker said:

I suspected that some of these men might have been returning fire at the party, then they didn’t cooperate with the pigs. 

Pigs?

[rupert3]

45 minutes ago, tvc184 said:

Pigs?

Wow!!!

[BS Wildcats]

1 hour ago, CardinalBacker said:

I suspected that some of these men might have been returning fire at the party, then they didn’t cooperate with the pigs. 

BLM or Kaepertwit supporter are you?  Why use that term?  After claiming to vote for Trump, seems you have quickly turned into a left winger.  

[CardinalBacker]

Nah… I always call ‘em pigs. It’s a term of endearment.  
 

And probably one of the nicer names they’re called these days. 
 

Really, though…. Try it. It’s usually good for a laugh. 

[LumRaiderFan]

12 hours ago, tvc184 said:

Pigs?

Someone's looking for attention, probably hasn't been able to find a Trump hit piece lately.

[Separation Scientist]

On 5/7/2023 at 11:29 PM, CardinalBacker said:

Nah… I always call ‘em pigs. It’s a term of endearment.  

A lot of the wanna-be cop killers call them that, too.