Sprawling Twin Peaks Case

October 14, 2017

All Posts, News

Sprawling Twin Peaks Case

The litigation surrounding the Twin Peaks Biker Brawl in May 2017 continues to coalesce like a black hole.

The big pieces are: The trial of Christopher Jacob Carrizal in Waco; an additional 191 unresolved criminal cases; various motions and inquiries related to the criminal cases – like the recusal motions in and the recent inquiry into whether McLennan County District Attorney Abellino Reyna committed perjury; about 100 civil complaints filed against Reyna and others for false arrest and imprisonment; and finally, the five lawsuits filed against the owners of the Twin Peak.

Four of the lawsuits against the restaurant were filed in Dallas. One was filed in Waco. They are all being litigated in Dallas as part of something called a “multidistrict litigation” or, as lawyers put it, MDL. There has not been much news to report about the litigation in Dallas for that last 18 months.

Two New Motions

In September, as reported here then, Judge Jim Jordan “dismissed with prejudice” the suit filed against the Twin Peaks by the Don Carlos restaurant on the other side of the parking lot. Yesterday that lawsuit went away officially. Both parties filed a “Joint Motion For Nonsuit” stating that “the parties have reached an agreement to settle and compromise their differences.”

Another long motion, filed by the Twin Peaks owners in suits by Yvonne Reeves and the estate of Daniel Boyett is interesting for the “identified responsible third parties” it lists.

Notably, they include:

“Each of the persons arrested and or charged with the first degree felony offense of engaging in organized criminal activity for their participation in the events of May 17, 2015…each of the McLennan County Criminal Defendants, acting individually or in concert with others, proximately caused or contributed to Plaintiffs’ alleged injuries and damages, if any, and their fault should be apportioned among the parties by the trier of fact.”

“Defendants further designate as a responsible third party, the estates of: Daniel Raymond Boyett; Wayne Lee Campbell; Richard Matthew Jordan; Richard Vincent Kirshner; Jacob Lee Rhyne; Jesus Delgado Rodriguez; Manual Isaac Rodriguez; Charles Wayne Russell; Matthew Mark Smith; and any other person who sustained fatal injuries during the events of May 17, 2015…. Defendants are informed and believe that each of the Deceased Persons, acting individually or in concert with others, proximately caused or contributed to Plaintiffs’ alleged injuries and damages, if any, and their fault should be apportioned among the parties by the trier of fact.”

Federal Bleed-Through

“Defendants further designate the following individuals as Responsible Third Parties: Jesse James Benavidez a.k.a. Kronic; Frederick Cortez aka Fast Fred; Justin Cole Forster; Jeffrey Fay Pike; John Xavier Portillo; Johnny Romo a.k.a Downtown Johnny; Robert Romo; and Norberto Serna, Jr. a.k.a. Hammer (collectively the “Federal Criminal Defendants”).

“Each of the Federal Criminal Defendants has been indicted in case number 5:15-cr-00820-DAE in the Western District of Texas, San Antonio Division, on multiple criminal counts….”

“These alleged law violations purportedly occurred in relation to a “war” declared on the Cossacks Motorcycle Organization, which “war” proximately caused or contributed to the violence alleged in Plaintiffs’ Original Petition. Each of the Federal Criminal Defendants, acting individually or in concert with others, proximately caused or contributed to Plaintiffs’ alleged injuries and damages, if any, and their fault should be apportioned among the parties by the trier of fact.”

The Police

“Defendants further designate the Texas Department of Public Safety (“Texas DPS”), Waco Police Department (“Waco PD”), and other law enforcement agencies who were actively involved in the May 17, 2015 incident at the Restaurant (collectively “Law Enforcement”) as responsible third parties. Law Enforcement’s acts and omissions, as alleged in Plaintiffs’ Original Petition, caused or contributed to other persons to be placed in danger. Law Enforcement encouraged members of the rival motorcycle groups to attend the otherwise intended peaceable assembly at the Restaurant, thereby bringing about the violent confrontation. Furthermore, Law Enforcement’s negligent use of firearms, negligent tactics in the manner in which they responded to a confrontation of their own creation and what they now claim was a known risk of Violence, and in other respects to be determined during discovery were unforeseeable and, therefore, constitute a superseding cause of any injuries or damages actually sustained by Plaintiffs. Defendants are informed and believe that the negligence of Law Enforcement proximately caused or contributed t0 Plaintiffs’ alleged injuries and damages each of said persons, acting individually or in concert with others, proximately caused or contributed to Plaintiffs’ alleged injuries and damages, if any, and the fault of Law Enforcement should be apportioned among the parties by the trier of fact.”

All of this great writhing pile of legal Mongolian cluster love could have been avoided, as Houston attorney Casie Gotro pointed out in Waco court yesterday, if instead of setting up extensive video surveillance of the anticipated blood bath the police had simply warned the Confederation of Clubs about what the police knew was going to occur.

 

Share

11 Responses to “Sprawling Twin Peaks Case”

  1. Garmin Says:

    Most state civil procedure rules have what’s known as the “empty chair” defense where a defendant can place blame on another party without having to formally sue them. In Texas they’re called “responsible third parties.” The purpose of this is so that the defendant can potentially reduce their liability to the plaintiff by having more lines on the jury verdict form where a percentage of liability can be entered.

    Unfortunately, naming LEO as “responsible third parties” will not cost them a red cent.

    Sometimes, a plaintiff will pick up the defendant’s cue and sue the alleged responsible third parties but that is not likely to happen in this case. Civil cases are all about money and lawyers are keen on only pursuing the low hanging fruit. That is, the easiest money. In this case, it doesn’t appear that either the estates or the LEO community are easy money. None of the deceased appear to have been wealthy and whether we like it or not, LEOs (including prosecutors) are generally immune from civil lawsuits by operation of statute. There are some very slim exceptions.

    I don’t like being the bearer of bad news, but I believe the civil suits against Reyna, etc., are at a minimum, an uphill battle and quite possibly going to go nowhere unless Broden, et al can prove malfeasance, which requires proving a certain “state of mind that is set on doing harm.” This is difficult in any circumstance but even less so against a public official who believes he is just doing his duty. A conviction against one or more criminal defendants will go a long way toward vindication of Reyna, et al, which is why they’ve been very careful about who gets tried first, etc.

    All that pragmatically said, I’m rooting for Jake and everyone else caught up in this massive state sponsored circus.

  2. BMW Says:

    At least they try to cite the LEO as being “somewhat” responsible. In fact, to me, it looks like corrupt elements of LEO is directly responsible for half the deaths, ALL of the bad publicity, and ALL of the false arrests. Of course, in my humble opinion, the crooked persecutor, and the corrupt judge are part and parcel of those corrupt elements!

    FREE THE INNOCENT HOSTAGES OF THE CORRUPT WHACKO INJUSTICE INDUSTRY AND THEIR MURDEROUS CABAL OF CO-CONSPIRATORS!!

    BMW

  3. Paula Carroll Swann Says:

    Bucher & Jackson was already out and shooting into the crowd which caused them to defend themselves against themselves, of not knowing that the person who had been shot next to them was shot by police. If you watch the dash cam video of Bucher vehicle counting up to when everyone took off running. Then know that both Bucher & Jackson was already shooting at them with AR -15’S. If you watch the patio video #1 and keep your eyes on the people standing on the sidewalk, you will see a guy getting shot the 2nd time as he drops. The 1rst shot grazed his neck, 2nd shot was in his shoulder which you can see & it’s before everyone took off running.
    Government trying to disarm American Citizens & Veterans as these MC clubs are made up of so the government markes them as a gang so they can take away their rights.

  4. James W Crawford Says:

    Re Freebird.

    Amen!

    The police intentionally incited the violence by having their CIs or UCOs inform the Cossacks of the location of the meeting that they had been disinvited to.

    If I was a Cossack, I would be pissed off because it is obvious that given the chaotic meleee that made it impossible to distinguish between alleged aggressors and victims, and the fact that many of the people shot were not brandishing firearms, the rules of engagement was to shoot anyone wearing a Cossack cut.

  5. Iron Rider Says:

    @ Paladin

    You hit the nail right on the head.

  6. Paladin Says:

    With the exception of law enforcement, anyone thinking that any of the defendants named in this or any other Twin Peaks civil suit has deep pockets or any pockets for that matter is beyond delousional. The fact of the matter is that the number of flies a turd can support is in direct proportion to the size of the turd. In this case the turds are extremely small when compared to the number of flies hoping to land and feed.

    Law enforcement will likely defend their actions or lack thereof by stating something along the lines of the following:

    Yes; we knew there was a great likelihood of trouble with both groups meeting at the same place, at the same time. On more than one occasion we warned the operators of Twin Peaks of the possible danger. The operators of Twin Peaks chose to ignore our warnings.

    We were powerless to stop the meeting, as it was held on private property. Because the assembly was held on private property, a permit was not required and therefore could not be revoked. We then took a pro-active position by having a large and visible law enforcement presence in the immediate area, hoping that this large and visible presence would be enough to keep the peace. However, we were prepared to intervene as necessary with force deemed reasonable under the prevailing circumstances. When hostilities broke out, both groups immediately used deadly force against each other, which required us to respond as we did in order to contain and end the violence while at the same time keeping the public safe.
    The End

    Paladin

  7. Iron Rider Says:

    Someone is taking the shotgun splatter approach to suing I see, suing the estates of the dead, gee how classy, suing Law Enforcemnt and all the shit they started before Twin Peaks to fan the flames of a biker war they had been trying to start for months, a good idea.

  8. Hollywood Says:

    Has any of the “surveillance” videos” been released anywhere?

  9. Freebird Says:

    Maybe a good question to ask is how much additional funding did Waco PD receive since their ambush went down? Brings some old saying to mind. “Follow the cigar smoke….. find the fat man” “Follow the Money boy”

  10. Freebird Says:

    At this point I don’t think for a minute they had any intention of stopping it….. Hell they wanted and needed it to happen!!!! That money tree we call the tax payer is spread thin so we need a really big scary tell your family to run for their life…. the bikers are coming! They will kill everyone. Fuck me running naked through a cactus patch!!

  11. Gandalf Says:

    Translation: When all these Trials are done… however they end… whoever the courts holds responsible… We want our $$$. We can wait. You can split the tab depending how Guilty the Courts find you to be. Don’t go trying to settle the Estates because we want the dead guys $ too. If He’s involved. Don’t go transferring titles just yet. If you do we will sue the Executer of the Estate.

Leave a Reply