Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Another benefit to this is that higher risk drug dealers won't be able to get out just because they have access to enough money to make bond or post bail. Am I right?
Sooo by not requiring bail that some criminals cannot afford that means the state does not have to pay to keep them locked up.
What is next for California reducing costs further by not arresting anyone?
The cops would still catch criminals and give them a stern talking to before letting them go but not too stern because someone might think they are being unfairly targeted and turn around and sue the state.
No bail for criminals ? Yet another reason NOT to visit California.
I have never been charged with a crime, a moving violation or a parking ticket. I had not previously pondered the bail dilemma until this thread.
2 people are charged with the same crime. Both pose the same flight risk. Neither has a prior criminal conviction. Both are innocent until proven guilty.
Both are offered the same opportunity to post bail. The one with financial resources is released. The other, without financial resources, sits in jail, sometimes for months or years, pending trial.
The one who posted bail is free to work and go about his/ her life. The one unable to post bail loses his/ her job and freedom. If this accused has a dependent family they may be up a creek without a paddle.
Now let’s assume both are found not guilty. The one who posted bail gets a refund. The one who spent time in jail in lieu of bail is freed.
Seems the system favors those charged with a crime who have the financial resources to post bail over those without adequate resources.
The concept of bail bondsmen is unique to the US. Fees vary by state and if the charge is state or federal. Some states allow felony defendants to post 10-15% of the required bail directly to the court. The American Bar Association has long opposed the concept of bail bondsmen and has called for bail reform.
Bail bondsmen are represented by several trade associations/ lobbies who seek to protect the interests of their members.
The criteria used to determine flight risk is highly variable.
.
I have no problem with this because it removes ability to pay from the equation and focuses on flight risk.
So, let's say two guys go out after work and get in a fight somehow wind up on some sort of charges.
Both are poor, one has parents with enough money to make bail.
The other one sits there and loses his job because he can't get to work, defaults on his rent, his car payment etc.
I fail to see how this is good for him or society.
Additionally:
1) Doesn't apply to felonies.
2) As has long been my mantra around here, that is the business of that state. The people that live in the state can vote how they see fit and live with the consequences. (added bonus that other states can then watch the experiment and reject following suit or adopt the practice themselves)
If they didn’t commit the crime they wouldn’t have this problem in the first place . As a criminal defense attorney I’m sure you know that most people arrested did commit the crime .
What happened to innocent until proven guilty?
Why should the one with financial resources to pay bail be released while another charged with the same crime and same flight risk sit in jail because of an inability to post bail?
Seems to me it’s all about the objective/ subjective criteria used to determine flight risk.
I always thought the cash-bail system was a weird concept. Some non-violent offenders with minor infractions remain locked up, because they don't have couple of hundred dollars to pay the bail, and if you do have the money, then you just pay you way out.
I am guessing other States will follow suit (both red and blue).
I'm a criminal defense attorney- this is definitely a good change that needs to be adopted in more states. Can't tell you how many times I've had a young/dumb/poor kid sit in jail for >than the typical sentence handed out on a case because he couldn't post bail. Hard to not realize what its like to be that poor when you have never been that poor but 100 bucks can keep some people in jail in perpetuity.
I think he got it HALF correct....
yes eliminate bail... just keep the criminals in the cushy jails until their trial... then convict and send them to prison, or capital punishment depending on the crime... and no more than ONE appeal
If they didn’t commit the crime they wouldn’t have this problem in the first place . As a criminal defense attorney I’m sure you know that most people arrested did commit the crime .
Why should a person with money get out of jail faster than someone without money if they are charged with the exact same minor offense?
Cox has no chance of winning. When California began its shift to the far left I moved out. Probably your best option if you want your elected officials to reflect your politics.
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.”"
(set 3 days ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,182 posts, read 13,469,799 times
Reputation: 19501
Quote:
Originally Posted by middle-aged mom
What happened to innocent until proven guilty?
Why should the one with financial resources to pay bail be released while another charged with the same crime and same flight risk sit in jail because of an inability to post bail?
Seems to me it’s all about the objective/ subjective criteria used to determine flight risk.
There are generally two types of bail in England & Wales.
Police Bail, where the police arrest and charge you and decide on whether to remand you in custody or give you bail.
Police Bail may be subject to numerous factors such as the seriousness of the crime, your likelihood to abscond and your previous history.
If the police do give you bail they may place restrictions upon you, if you breal these restrictions you will be arrested and remanded in custody until you can be seen as the Magistraes Court.
All criminal cases start at the Magistrates Court, and the Magistrates can decide on bail in relation to future court appearances including for more serious cases before the Crown Court.
The magistrates will also examine the sriousness of the crime, whether you have a history of absconding and your criminal record. Magistrates will either remand you in custody until trial or impose bail, usually with conditions. These conditions can occasionally include bail money, however this is rarely used and most cases are either a case of remand in relation to serious, violent or sexual crimes or bail in relation to lesser crimes.
If you break bail conditions in the UK the police will track you down and arrest you.
I don't know any other country that has a system similar to the US with bail bonds and bounty hunters.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
