Queensryche's "The Mission" from "Operation: Mindcrime" album. Video montage made by Sezgin Yazar by using some scenes from Video: Mindcrime homevideo.
I made this video montage for "The Mission" by using some scenes from "Video Mindcrime". I've never understood why Queensryche did not shot an official video clip for this beautiful song.
@@wayneraisch2164 You're welcome 😊 Thank you 🙏 I wished it could have been more professional montage. But I was not a professional producer or director when I made it. I just made it with my amateur spirit with very basic and amateur technics on Windows Movie Maker years ago.
@@angryagain3801 Indeed the reason is money of course. But when Queensryche made and released Video Mindcrime in 1989, they had to make a clip for The Mission. Because it is one of the greatest songs in Operation Mindcrime, in Queensryche discography, and in history of music too. About making a video clip, they shouldn't have ignored an amazing song like The Mission. It is unbelievable...
@@FitzysMama520 i am referring to the time we live in now and the garbage music that’s out now. Operation mindcrime is my favorite album of all time and QR my favorite group. Seen them 3 times.
operation mindcrime was promoted when they toured with Metallica on their and justice for all your in 88. Best concert at Reunion Arena in Dallas I ever saw.
I saw them open for Metallica at Long Beach Arena in '88. After Ryche played me and a friend ran to the lobby to buy Mindcrime and 'Tallica T's. Well, lo and behold, by the time we got our shirts Metallica were getting ready to go on and Hell's Angels stole our seats. These were seats in the fourth row, center! The security told us we were shit out of luck and couldn't watch the show from the aisle. Crazy show! We wound up getting kicked out of the auditorium a dozen times that night. We saw snippets of the show and it was a riot, seats getting torn out by the thousands, fans getting carted away in ambulance after ambulance. I saw 'Tallica earlier that year (I wasn't a fan) at Monsters of Rock at the L.A. Coliseum and that was a riot too! Look it up, I was on the field right in the middle of it!
If I recall correctly, they were touring with Def Leppard when promoting this song. I was driving from Long Island to the NJ Medowlands arena for this show and was stuck in traffic. We finally parked about 40 minutes after QR was scheduled to take the stage. I was livid. While looking forward to seeing Leppard the real draw for me was the Mindcrime tour. I've managed to catch them only 2 times and both were fantastic. The last was in Atlanta at The Tabernacle in 2006; very small venue, very close to the band. Mindcrime was played in its entirety. Soooo much Win :-)
I hear ya! They came to Jax, FL, at the coliseum. I was right at the fences up front, near center, about 3 feet away from the left speaker stack on the ground. Mindcrime in its entirety was burned into my soul for a year prior, and that night was indescribable. Caught Wilton's guitar pick, and my best friend at the time nearly caught DeGarmo's. :D I'll never forget.
California Penal Code 31 - Principals, defined [California Penal Code section on aiding and abetting]. (“All persons concerned in the commission of a crime, whether it be felony or misdemeanor, and whether they directly commit the act constituting the offense, or aid and abet in its commission, or, not being present, have advised and encouraged its commission, and all persons counseling, advising, or encouraging children under the age of fourteen years, or persons who are mentally incapacitated, to commit any crime, or who, by fraud, contrivance, or force, occasion the drunkenness of another for the purpose of causing him to commit any crime, or who, by threats, menaces, command, or coercion, compel another to commit any crime, are principals in any crime so committed.”)California Jury Instructions - Criminal “CALJIC” 3.01 - Aiding and Abetting. (“A person aids and abets the [commission] [or] [attempted commission] of a crime when he or she: (1) With knowledge of the unlawful purpose of the perpetrator, and (2) With the intent or purpose of committing or encouraging or facilitating the commission of the crime, and (3) By act or advice, [or, by failing to act in a situation where a person has a legal duty to act,] aids, promotes, encourages or instigates the commission of the crime. [A person who aids and abets the [commission] [or] [attempted commission] of a crime need not be present at the scene of the crime.] [Mere presence at the scene of a crime which does not itself assist the commission of the crime does not amount to aiding and abetting.] [Mere knowledge that a crime is being committed and [in the absence of a legal duty to take every step reasonably possible to prevent the crime,] the failure to prevent it does not amount to aiding and abetting.]”) See same. Our California criminal defense attorneys have local Los Angeles law offices in Beverly Hills, Burbank, Glendale, Lancaster, Long Beach, Los Angeles, Pasadena, Pomona, Torrance, Van Nuys, West Covina, and Whittier. We have additional law offices conveniently located throughout the state in Orange County, San Diego, Riverside, San Bernardino, Ventura, San Jose, Oakland, the San Francisco Bay area, and several nearby cities. See CALJIC 3.01, Aiding and Abetting, endnote 1, above. People v. Swanson-Birabent (2003) 114 Cal.App.4th 733, 751-752. (“Contrary to defendant’s assertion, advance knowledge is not a prerequisite for liability as an aider and abettor. “Aiding and abetting may be committed ‘on the spur of the moment,’ that is, as instantaneously as the criminal act itself. [Citation.]” ( People v. Nguyen (1993) 21 Cal.App.4th 518, 532, 26 Cal.Rptr.2d 323.) In People v. Cooper (1991) 53 Cal.3d 1158, 282 Cal.Rptr. 450, 811 P.2d 742 ( Cooper ), the court held that “a getaway driver who has no prior knowledge of a robbery, but who forms the intent to aid in carrying away the loot during such asportation, may properly be found liable as an aider and abettor of the robbery.” ( Id. at p. 1161, 282 Cal.Rptr. 450, 811 P.2d 742.) The court reasoned that “the commission of robbery continues so long as the loot is being carried away to a place of temporary safety.” ( Id. at p. 1170, 282 Cal.Rptr. 450, 811 P.2d 742; see also People v. Montoya (1994) 7 Cal.4th 1027, 1039, 31 Cal.Rptr.2d 128, 874 P.2d 903 [upholding burglary conviction for aider and abettor who did not have knowledge of criminal purpose until after entry].)”) People v. Durham (1969) 70 Cal.2d 171, 185, fn. 11. People v. Masters (1963) 219 Cal.App.2d 672, 680. People v. Fraize (1995) 36 C.A.4th 1722. California Penal Code 182 PC - Conspiracy.See also California Penal Code 184 PC - Conspiracy; overt act. California Penal Code 971 PC - Abrogation of distinction between accessories and principals, and between principals in first and second degree; effect upon pleadings. People v. Singleton (1987) 196 Cal.App.3d 488, 492. See CALJIC 3.01 - Aiding and Abetting, endnote 1, above. People v. Booth (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 1247, 1256. (“While accomplice liability cannot be predicated on conduct absent the required mental state, one can be guilty as an accomplice (if he shares the goal of the perpetrator) without having actually assisted the commission of the offense, e.g., by “instigating,” or “advising” the perpetrator to commit it or by having been “present for the purpose of its commission.” (See Campbell, supra, 25 Cal.App.4th at p. 411, and cases cited.)”) People v. Villa (1957) 156 Cal. App. 2d 128, 133. People v. Booth, endnote 13, above. See CALJIC 3.01 - Aiding and Abetting, endnote 1, above. (“[Mere knowledge that a crime is being committed and [in the absence of a legal duty to take every step reasonably possible to prevent the crime,] the failure to prevent it does not amount to aiding and abetting.]”) Penal Code 272 PC California’s contributing to the delinquency of a minor law, section (a)(2). People v. Swanson-Birabent, endnote 5, above. Riverside criminal defense attorney Michael Scafiddi uses his former experience as an Ontario Police Officer to represent clients throughout the Inland Empire including San Bernardino, Riverside, Rancho Cucamonga, Hemet, Banning, Fontana, Joshua Tree, Barstow, Palm Springs and Victorville. CALJIC 3.03 - Termination of Liability of Aider and Abettor. In re Michael T. (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 907, 911. (“Mere presence at the scene of a crime which does not itself assist its commission or mere knowledge that a crime is being committed and the failure to prevent it does not amount to aiding and abetting.”) People v. Montoya (1994) 7 Cal.4th 1027, 1039, footnote 7. (“[I]n accord[ ] with the clear trend, the accessory after the fact is no longer treated as a party to the underlying felony, as at common law. This kind of accessory is coming to be recognized for what he is: an ‘obstructer’ of justice, the author of a separate and independent offense.””) California Penal Code 32 - Accessories, punishment. (“Except in cases where a different punishment is prescribed, an accessory is punishable by a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars ($5,000), or by imprisonment in the state prison, or in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by both such fine and imprisonment.”) California Penal Code 31 - California Penal Code section on aiding and abetting, endnote 1 above.See also People v. Green (1950) 96 Cal.App.2d 283, 290. (“”Where persons are not actors in the actual commission of the crime charged, but aid and abet others in its commission or procure others to commit the crime, all are equally guilty.”) CALJIC 3.00 Principals-Defined. People v. Mccoy (2001) 25 Cal.4th 1111, 1122. (“We thus conclude that when a person, with the mental state necessary for an aider and abettor, helps or induces another to kill, that person’s guilt is determined by the combined acts of all the participants as well as that person’s own mens rea. If that person’s mens rea is more culpable than another’s, that person’s guilt may be greater even if the other might be deemed the actual perpetrator. Because we cannot anticipate all possible nonhomicide crimes or circumstances, we express no view on whether or how these principles apply outside the homicide context. (See Dressler, Understanding Criminal Law, supra, § 30.06[C], pp. 450-451.)”) Facts taken from same. People v. Coffman (2004) 34 Cal.4th 1, 106-107. (“Elaborating on the natural and probable consequences doctrine, in People v. Prettyman (1996) 14 Cal.4th 248, 261, 58 Cal.Rptr.2d 827, 926 P.2d 1013, and People v. Croy (1985) 41 Cal.3d 1, 12, footnote 5, 221 Cal.Rptr. 592, 710 P.2d 392, we observed that an aider and abettor “is guilty not only of the offense he intended to facilitate or encourage, but also of any reasonably foreseeable offense committed by the person he aids and abets.” As the Court of Appeal in People v. Brigham (1989) 216 Cal.App.3d 1039, 265 Cal.Rptr. 486 noted, although variations in phrasing are found in decisions addressing the doctrine-“probable and natural,” “natural and reasonable,” and “reasonably foreseeable”-the ultimate factual question is one of foreseeability. ( Id. at pp. 1050, 1054, 265 Cal.Rptr. 486; see People v. Roberts (1992) 2 Cal.4th 271, 316-322, 6 Cal.Rptr.2d 276, 826 P.2d 274.) “A natural and probable consequence is a foreseeable consequence…””)See also CALJIC 3.02 Principals-Liability for Natural and Probable Consequences. See both cites, endnote 28, above. People v. Godinez (1992) 2 Cal.App.4th 492, 499. (“The parties agree the liability of an aider and abettor [as set forth in California Penal Code 31 PC] is not limited to the target crime which he knowingly and intentionally aids and encourages, but can include crimes committed by the perpetrator which are natural and reasonable consequences of the criminal course of conduct the aider and abettor knowingly aids and encourages. ( People v. Jones (1989) 207 Cal.App.3d 1090, 1095-1096 [ 255 Cal.Rptr. 464].) It is now settled that it is a question of fact whether the charged offense was a natural and reasonable consequence of the target offense knowingly encouraged, and the jury should be instructed of its responsibility to determine this factual issue.”) People v. Hammond (1986) 181 Cal.App.3d 463.
Hey, this is an amateur video montage from official Queensryche video clips from official Mindcrime Home Video. I don't understand why you tell about California Penal Code. Queensryche's 1988 album "Operation: Mindcrime" has a fictious story about several fictious incidents and fictious characters. It's not about provoking people to commit crimes or being criminals. It is a sad story of Nikki and Mary. You'd better read the story of Mindcrime well and you should listen to the album well too... It is real music...
REV LON IS THE REASON THIS THE SON OF THE VETRASN ASSOCATIONS elvis presly garciasa budgetttt barnettts dmikos mendez cruises wrigggly mansion ratttrays fuentez martinez wrigggles fillmores martines crawfords bradleys killibrews venus quiet north side tim e mane ghe ment trudillio cramersa xmen soldior to the day that hess mo may be to olin untill they feir zbies
HAPPYHOLDIDAY BROS BEEN LONG ROAD LOVE YA WHITTTON DEGARMO ROCKFORD DEMARZIO STAYS ON THE SIDE LINES JUST LIKWE I DO FROM JUNOIR PRESLY FRISBY WRIGGLY FILLMORES DMIKOS WENDYS BARNETTTTS RATTTTRAYS FUNETEZ GARCIA S RODRIGEZ MARTINEZ WIGGLY KEEP GIONG YOUR DOING GREAT
HEY TATE SEEEN YOUR DAUGHT ER THAT WAS PRICE LESS HER ON STAGE HEY THANKS MAN I DIDNT KNOW YOU WERE MARREID BROS WERE STILL ON MAN GOT TO GO KEEEP GIONG T
