prosecutor for hands you know he just returned his office he said before every trial he would go into the top of his legal pad and write the new and he would not stop until he had crossed it out in this case mr parker was convicted of three counts circuits analysis on conspiracy and vinnie each count has to be assessed separately and first and foremost as he was charged under reka count well all the testimony that occurred in this case came from twenty seven witnesses or fifty two exhibits there's absolutely nothing that puts mr parker in the northern district of mississippi under even the government's best factual scenarios starting under the rico  lock up but the testimony of their own witnesses that they said because of the allegations in count two the drug conspiracies that those were in furtherance of the air in brotherhood enterprise or their own witness and bringing creel just crucified them  and he said no no no well that's just the second venue that's right i'm asking you about the rico conspiracy even you do you are you good with that you're not good with i'm not ok with it but i mean there's nothing that thomas into the northern district well there's some other activity something that ties him under the rico conspiracy or is it satisfactory if the conspiracy it's on is where it took place in the northern district and  admittedly there's not many cases that lined up like this the nato case is probably the closest one that this court has decided that similar in any kind of fashion and in that case there's coconspirators that that  mr nader and the other participants in that case in dallas which was in the western district as part of an agreement but there's no agreement here there's no overt act here the allegations against mr parker all occurred back in two thousand and nine and then he  association with the area brotherhood after that and the conspiracies that the northern district as far as the facts go from the government's position came about in two thousand and twelve there's nothing prior to that that links them to those things and when asked about the  actions that were trying to be used to associate mr parker with the arion brotherhood the n that were criminal came from perry manske who testified he never even met mr parker from michael hugh banks he said i don't know just just argue window said to me that you were right about then you on that count what what result what practical result in the case but if may be allowed to go to account for which is  i'm going to argue the exact same thing with it i mean there's there are multiple ways i guess that this court could rule i'm asking that venue not be associated and crypt for all three but have in florida be correct on counts two and count four this court would have to reverse on those was the only one we found on it when it really wouldn't and i don't think it matters does it even if you're right about venue as it i'm sorry i'm disagrees of this rico ok i'm not asking you concede your three arguments but i'm just saying if you win on the middle argument and don't win on the first and third argument doesn't change the result in the case what happens in the case you know it would just be that government's allegations go one of the rico overt acts and as it goes to mr parker the only two acts that he's been told are associated with him specifically or that he was even knows about or that in the murder and when it comes to the murder that the allegations were that all occurred in the southern district of mississippi there's absolutely nothing about it if if the government script it doesn't continue it begins and ends in the southern district over a drug that mr cre support that the drugs or the murder or any brotherhood related as far as the testimony goes their own witnesses mr creel and in particular who was the one that disposed of the body that testified against my client said it was not just saying that he's a member of the area brotherhood because far as the testimony goes that's all they have and from what i can tell as far as the area brotherhood what they were doing that was criminal as an enterprise goes that they put on for proof everybody said that it was an area of brotherhood really the other portions of the vie car murder charge that were argued by the government and by the district court that say hey don't use proper in northern disk image city has to do with it being a bike or murder charge second circuit has analysis t dressin the second circuit or the four circuit i was just operating off of venue law as it stood in mississippi and with this court and i didn't find anything that could get target as far as to circle all the talk about bike or murder charge under these live and there's nothing the times it's in the northern district of mississippi but i'm trying to argue a negative a feel like sometimes i say and i can point to you in the record where it exists because the government failed to prove it as an element of the the cr i'm out of time too disregarding vicar that is if this were just an ordinary murder case the venue would be a little different the vicar because if we take the second church could be a bit shoot ability of venue for accurate fact finding there's no problem leaders are very close to each other in mississippi idaho months before but they wouldn't because they had concluded they wouldn't now have been you and it was somewhere in brooklyn i believe is where it was it was in the second circuit they wouldn't be able to make that connection because it was over and that's that's how i interpreted that when you asked about suitability of the venue i have to say that there is nothing about the vi car murder that shows any attachment at all as far as those four factors the side of the crime its elements of the nature of the place where effective the criminal conduct occurred and the suitability of the venue well it fails the first the first factor so your position is you win regardless good afternoon and gregory weber i'm representing frank george jones jr in this matter there are as i have to my point want to argue the corollary first i'm going to argue about the introduction of the photograph of m klein and i think it was error it was highly prejudicial and in addition there was other racially charged evidence that was introduced which i think requires the court to either s the verdict against him or at the very least primitive trunk second i believe there was insufficient evidence to support the fight or murder charge and it should have been taken from the jury or it should be sent back for a proper instruction diner mississippi law and a corollary to that argument involves what i believe was improperly introduced evidence from a girlfriend of mr parker which i believe wood's a very damaging evidence that does not  to that is i believe what the what the eleventh circuit said in the boeing case is that the uneasy racial history of criminal law in the united states has yielded a simple rule of thumb there is no place in criminal prosecutions progressed to us references to refer to race especially where here is a serious charge they said where the defendant's wife hangs in the balance i think race is treated differently than just about every other thing in jurisprudence and here there could be no dispute that this is a very racially charged issue i cited the constitutions that were introduced several times i think are like four different copies of the constitution of the area brotherhood they were your dues and it has a w only policy white supremacy policy listed in the constitution in addition there was other evidence that i did go into four different witnesses were asked whether they were racist and they know they have very responses to that some some said i'm a separatist and then the question after that was well a lot of people think that's racism and said well ok maybe someday and then well don't we have a case though that  said that tattoos really shouldn't be admitted unless they're needed for identifying but that it's harmless to we you talk about the eleventh circuit but i thought we have a case it was a racially charged crime and we said in that but if they're not that they can sometimes be harmless even a race case which i was thinking about that case with the guy hitting the other guy at the bus stop but i never mind i'm n cause nearly settled is it that we look at mississippi law rather than more general principles thank you also a very good question the biker requires that either under state law or united states law well here there is no question it had to be state law because that all the action occurred in mississippi in addition the prosecution and the judge applied mississippi law murder law in coming to the conclusion that there was a biker violation of was no forensic evidence produced and in fact creel witness testified that he supposedly disposed of the body but he says i assume there was a body he never saw a body there are a couple of statements in the record that say yes they killed somebody that should have been the it's arguable whether that should have been admitted because it was a spontaneous utterance to someone but she went on to interrogate him about why why did he kill someone and he said because they made me and then she went on asking well who's day and she said and then he supposedly said mr o s and others so she directly implicated mr owens in it in something that was not just a good afternoon your honour's moneymen scott leroy i was the lead trial counsel in this case myself and co counsel teresa while bomb have divided this argument although we're both rico investigation because it dealt with the area of brotherhood the investigation led us to the southern district of mississippi there's been some question as to whether the murder in this case was related to the area of brotherhood or whether it was just a mark and i would respectfully assert that the murder of michael hudson was a textbook area brotherhood murder as a matter of fact he was not murdered for not paying drug that he was murdered for violating a what evidence do you have other than circumstantial which in bad you tell me that that this was connected to the actual killing as opposed to just to beating up was eerie and direct up your honor all assume that that th court has an understanding of baron brotherhood constitution and what a direct order s which is if a direct order is given to an area brotherhood member about superior it must be followed and if it's not the same the inferior party is subject to the same display in the summer of two thousand and thirteen two thousand and ten eric parker of captain sold methamphetamine to michael hudson and area brotherhood sold hudson did not pay for the meth because he said it was bad eric parker did not go to michael hudson with this problem he went to the area brotherhood and james dean testified that there was a church meeting with over twenty five hearing and brotherhood members to discuss this dispute between air parker and michael hudson then there was a second church meeting where the area brotherhood was present michael hudson was president and they actually put air parker on a speaker phone and during that meeting the area brotherhood told michael hudson you have two weeks to pay the debt and you can pay half up that's  branding creel who was the spode or general for the area brotherhood in the free world at that time ordered minutes which is a physical assault big twain eric parker and michael hudson the second direct order in this case michael hudson did not comply and he violated a second order now brandon creel testified that a captain has the ability was ordered an area brotherhood subordinate james dean to kidnap michael hudson and take him to a residence for big james dean said he had to comply with that direct order because if he did he would be subject to the same punishment frank young once a captain also told sonny maxwell who was an area brotherhood prospect that if you comply with this order it will be your area of brotherhood blood in miss so sunny maxwell complied with the order and act after he kidnapped michael hudson he was actually that he was able to join the area brotherhood based on  now not hearing is it is the evidence contested and what you're telling me is perhaps the way the government sees the evidence i think use is there not evidence which says that that does not support that he was actually wanted to be killed that something happened by the person who was actually involved and did kill him it was not fully explained in the death of much and was a result of that and it seems to me that that tying the murders is central to some of these some of these counts time the murder to the ar eric parker take it blood on his hands to make him stand up for it because what the evidence was was that eric parker had been threatening michael heights and so frankie i took his body to eric parker to get blood on his hands and to see if he could stand up for it and then air parker confirmed that when she saw when he told his girlfriend i had to do it what did he so what does that mean to get blood on his hand and make him stand up for an area brotherhood in the world that the area brotherhood he had threatened to this man and so therefore he brought him this man to see are you just talk or are you going to do what she said she would well why wasn't assaulting him good enough under the rules in that i mean i they're the ones that ordered the murder mark where did they order the murder well i don't have an example of where they i don't have in there some testimony where somebody ordered the murder you know except for the defendants so is that so in answer to judge south thinks question the answer is there's a big gap between taking the guy there and wanting him to get blood and wanting him to be killed is that is that the best argument for the other side you have to buy please a court to salaam for the united states i'm happy to discuss in you before i do that if i may just address the question about the order under rico and by car law it's not legally required that there be a specific order it is sufficient if it's understood that that is not we'll have to resolve but it seems to me that that you don't have anything suggesting that anybody other than the actual killer warning him bit what you're on of those who are those killers were themselves to dispose of the body and that is he getting leadership decides or makes a mistake and kills somebody he was only trying to beat up is that the common area brotherhood killing us it was it was orchestrated ordered coordinated executed using words that don't fit my scenario it was only supposed to be kidnaped and somebody got carried away got angrier than he should have been which it was maybe more successful in fighting back you know and a death occurred that no one knew about until it actually occurred nobody had ordered nobody wanted which is difficult to know what that means in the area of brotherhood but nobody was directing until the actual killer whichever one it was did it and it and it was not at anybody else's direction or even his own that's still sufficient yes if you have an intention to beat up to to that extent and death occurs it's not it's completely forseeable and it's also pretty typical as is my co counsel said this was textbook brother in murder and the fact that it wasn't precisely planned to every detail that they were going to kill him when you talk to somebody and hit them over the head and you know in the course of the assault and and drive them one hundred miles and then you take them into another trailer to beat them or it is it is entirely forseeable that it is that a murder is going to result and again both those men were captains and it was orchestrated entirely with the assistance before during and after with aaron brotherhood there is no non here in brotherhood member involved in this entire scheme what's your best case that foreseeable is enough and it doesn't have to be intentionally planned well your honor i think again going back to their acts involving murder is one of the rectory an activity for the conspiracy and under the rico definition acts involving murder if we're talking about the rico conspiracy it can be any in court crime so that any of any of the attempted murder the the completed murder the conspiracy all the acts of murder for the rico conspiracy purposes for the vi car murder i would say that again it was this is typical i mean not just in the air in brotherhood but out of a case i do not have a case on the top of it your honor if i returned a venue as i had promised the venue was proper in the northern district mississippi on all count the case law regarding the rico conspiracy in the drug trafficking conspiracy is is clear it is that they're both continue offenses and you may be prosecuted in any district where any coconspirator committed and overt act looking at what was happening in the northern district of mississippi there is evidence in the record from perry mask that starting in in two thousand and ten at the latest that he was engaged in drug trafficking and money laundering in the marshall county jail and with other areas brotherhood members they would bring drugs in and they would money that they would launder that those drug proceeds that money would then go to provide care packages t brotherhood members it would pay for bail for the area brotherhood members and legal disputes outside of the outside of the jail that was one key piece of the evidence and he is upset mr mask is upset because in august of two thousand and thirteen frankie owens orders the murder of german bailey and that is going to disrupt his plans because they get input into lockman walked out and sent to another facility and that destroys the area brotherhood's record here in activity in the marshall county jail and in addition to that there is evidence rand kriol that he as the freewheel free world will went back and forth to the northern district in two thousand ten and in order to set up tractors appoint people as as managers and to basically deal with any issues that are that arise there that is all in the record that there was in from two thousand and ten to the two thousand and thirteen money laundering and drug trafficking in the northern district after two thousand and ten there's also acts involving murder including the attack on j p so those are the those are more than know him and he doesn't need to know what everyone is doing that this second client was into the drug abuse prevention and control act and not under a rico there's no rico umbrella for that count your honor this is all it is you aren't it's a different conspiracy well except that mr parker is in the conspiracy if you look at the racketeering activity but it's not a racketeering charge it's a drug abuse prevention and control act under twenty one u s c eighty one eight forty one a charge yes does it matter that that is not the under a rico statute on bella for the drug charge now and if not why not because it is also it doesn't matter because it's prevention and control act also uses an expanded form of conspiracy no bit it does not need to hear honor your honor because the people charged in the conspiracy include perry mask and steve and you banks and mr parker and those are all the people who business on the side no your honor i do i respectfully disagree with that i think that first of all there is evidence that perry mass testified that the drug trafficking the proceeds went to the benefit of the area brotherhood also that their testimony and where perry  personal personal is really not the the issue because the jury heard a lot of evidence about how the area brotherhood work and they decided that it was you know prize it was the enterprise activity and there is it is very good if they can't decide that if there's not evidence from which they could decide that and so you're telling me that the evidence is perry mask testimony that in addition to the testimony from her mask and others that the airing brotherhood work together all of these people are in  doesn't mean everything they did was working together it does it does prove that significant evidence your honor that this is an issue that this is wreckage or an activity because they benefit from working with people who are other members of the brotherhood who are sworn to protect them or their sources their suppliers or their their customers why is this brought in the northern district when this is the second time and i think three months that we have had oral argument about of improper venue and a case just just in our luck of the draw what what is going on that people are being put in and we're having all these venue challenges with that why was not brought in the southern district did the can viper is a continuing offense rico conspiracy is a continuing offense and the enterprise acted engaged in an op operations in the northern district of mississippi it was perfectly permissible to try it in that in that district i have two other questions one relates to the tattoo evidence this was not a mistake in a dinner t k so the person saying they had not ever been in a group or they were never confessed to the crimes to coconspirators and multiple times so there was ample evidence that they committed the vikram murder and the rico conspiracy so there would be it would be no up different effect on the outcome  introducing gang tattoos is generally accepted to prove membership in the in the enterprise that wasn't at some point they had admitted that they had been in it so it's not wasn't prohibitive that they didn't need any evidence of covered up if you run lucky it was cut off or burned off and it was neither he still had and finally it is relevant in the case that sonny maxwell had obtained that tattoo in as his blood in michigan mission for the was probative of multiple issues and nothing you do said is your and it's good because my two questions are related back because you said as your other reason why it would be harmless is because they told the co defendants that had done this and that was why perhaps our law is wrong and they argue that we should we should reconsider our law about the co defendants testimony  of this discussion of active in your mouth shut and he's not they're never going to find him and that is all traditional conspiracy coconspirators statement and further and further into the conspiracy nothing of the supreme court decide yes any doubt on didn't and this gap the size of his in question has absolutely to do with something they didn't prove everybody standing here talking about it right now thank you only a few minutes your honor i would get it i'd specifically like to address judge all right so references of one thing i want to point out real quick is that they were guarding the feasibility or the foreseeability of murder the court the court and struck at the jury under mississippi law that they had to find deliberate design so they really couldn't use foreseeability argument by what the court was imposing upon them and what the jury should have found and i don't think the evidence s i think we should obviously however as with specific reference to miss henderson is testimony i don't think you have to go there because it clearly under the till gado test did not result as part of the conspiracy it was not a in furtherance of the conspiracy it was just a statement to a girlfriend that has nothing to do with the conspiracy going forward at all so those two of them finally let me return to the the issue about the race card that was played the tattoo obviously it was racking my brain trying to remember the case that europe was talking about and it might be that that was unrelated to race but here it's completely unrelated to race the crime had to do with only people in the same gang committing an offense against each other in the murder case and it had nothing to do with racism as a topic at all the issue of race was only brought up to point out the fact that somebody should have a guy a bad if you have these these defendants and  you know i think they succeeded in that and i think that has to be what the court looks at in determining whether the same thing should be reversed and set back for a trial where we delete references in the constitution to anything about the race don't allow any