I understand that SF ended that policy with the removal of it's Soros sponsored DA Chesa Boudin (adopted son of Bill Ayers). But it still exists in your city of New York.
need of reform...from the attached link...
---------------------
"...Ohio Supreme Court Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor, a Republican who said: “Bail is a concept to allow for release from detention while awaiting resolution of your case, it is not a means to keep one in jail. Somehow the concept has gotten backward.” Or Kentucky Senator Rand Paul, who co-sponsored bipartisan legislation in 2017 to reform the system, arguing, “Americans should be able to expect fair and equal treatment under the law regardless of how much money is in their pockets or how many connections they have.”
--------------------
For a once educated person you are incredibly closed minded...absolutely no evidence of you ever trying to understand why others, who don't see things your way, disagree with you...and that applies to every single topic that comes up on this Forum...
If, for no other reason than Conor's education and experience in this field, you should listen respectfully to him and then consult with other attorneys that you may know...saving that, do some very easy searching of the internet, as I did, to get some perspective on "CASH BAIL"...took me 30 seconds...you have the time, but are either too lazy...too biased...or too afraid of being proven wrong to take that time...shame on you.
Link: https://captimes.com/opinion/john-nichols/opinion-gop-attacks-barnes-for-taking-same-stance-on-bail-reform-as-the-gop/article_16a3248c-efd3-5920-bbe8-2f0b31e7c047.html
(no message)
Bail (cash, secured, unsecured) and conditions of release should be as least restrictive as possible to reasonably ensure that defendant appears for trial, does not reoffend, yet protect the public.
The more serious and violent the offense, the more risk factors that suggest a defendant ought not be released, favors cash or secured bail.
Some jurisdictions (including the federal system), permit courts to detain defendant without bail.
Such a tightrope walking answer! I will leave you be since you at least tried….since I also understand that you post under your name and that your department undoubtedly has extremely liberal views on this of which you have to be aware.
I will say that there is a two tier justice approach occurring tight now. And it favors the Dems.
Im sure when they block off Nancy's home from onlookers and protestors in the coming weeks, that you will see this as “completely different” than doing so for Brett Kavanaugh.
Im also sure that you will see the Right’s questions here as callous whereas comments from the Left (Nancy Pelosi’s daughter and even here on this board) that the guy who attacked Rand Paul “didnt hit him hard enough” were “totally different and ok”.
Im against Zero Bond in any violent case. Sensible and fair,
I presume you are OK with the presumption of innocence?
Once we say that the nature of the charged offense dictates whether there is cash bail, the result is that defendants with financial wherewithal make bail, while the indigent sit in jail for months awaiting trial.
Let's take rape -- which we can all agree is a violent crime.
Take two separate defendants (both college students) -- one with wealthy parents (let's call him Johnny) and one from the projects who is on a full scholarship (let's call him Malik). Neither defendant has any prior record.
Presume identical facts: Both defendants charged with rape and strangulation against a coed. Both defendants insist the sex and "rough sex" was consensual, and that the allegation surfaced only after coed's boyfriend learned about the encounter, and that Suzie made herself a "victim" to ward off her boyfriend thinking she cheated.
Bail set at $100,000 cash.
Johnny's parents post the bail. Mailk is held in lieu of bail.
Trial held 11 months later. Jury returns verdicts on Not Guilty.
Sucks for Johnny that he had to endure the legal journey. Really sucks for Malik as he lost 11 months of his liberty.
In Malik's case, imagine if bail was $30,000 secured (meaning $3k to a bail bondsman -- an easier lift for Malik), no contact with complainant, GPS ankle bracelet monitoring device, and pre-trial supervision. Unreasonable???
Under NO circumstance should either scenario you describe result in the immediate release of the accused - there should be AT LEAST a 7 day waiting period for information to be obtained to determine flight risk and the "risk factors" you mentioned. At that point, bail may be considered an option depending on flight risk and whether or not there was intentional violence as well as the risk if recurrent violence.
But I have NO problem with no bail or release for anybody if there is fulfillment of " a quick and speedy trial" as we are all promised.
If it is equality of treatment you look for here (surprising to me since you support inequitable treatment based on political viewpoint based on your board posts), then there are two choices:
1) No release, no bail
2) Everyone is released, no bail.
While I disagree that "if we all cant chew gum in class, then no one can chew gum in class" thinking, if you are to choose between these two as you want, then #1 is FAR safer for the public as a whole.
You guys have been "catch and releasing" dangerous, violent people in NYC, and this has directly resulted in the death of many.
Why do you insist upon treating individual defendants all the same????
Our system of justice is not a gulag. It is not Catholic School with uniform bail terms and uniform sentences (once convicted).
As a whole, we seek a system of justice that does not result in disparate treatment. But, each case, each offender, should be treated as an individual case.
You assume anyone arrested is guilty and bears the burden of proving their innocence, and should sit in jail for 7 days until an investigation determines if they are not a flight risk. My guess is that you have never read any studies which reflect the ripple effect damage that 7 days loss of liberty can do an accused -- loss of employment, loss of housing, impact on children and elderly dependents.
Look, I realize you have been inundated with GOP political fearmongering about crime, highlighting persons of color and immigrants who commit crimes while released on bail. "Vote Republican .... they're coming for you ... let's lock 'em all up!"
[My guess is that If Donald Trump is indicted for Espionage or Seditious Conspiracy, you will be outraged if he is held without bail.]
We do not have a perfect criminal justice system, but it is very good -- the best on the planet because of good lawyers and judges doing their jobs. Bail and pre-trial detention is widely viewed as an area that requires improvement regarding its fairness and effectiveness. There has been great progress over the past several years, aimed at removing financial wherewithal as a factor, and eliminating monetary bail as a toll plaza for non violent offenders.
Edit: Typos
The rest of it is laughable too.
Your city is falling apart because of your policies and you can’t even see it. Keep the bail system as it is. Bu if you MUST make it equal, then err on the side of the public- not the accused criminal
(no message)
Risk of flight cannot be speculative such as "he's looking at a minimum 10 year sentence."
Risk of flight has to be based upon objective facts -- e.g., defendant arrested enroute to airport with a "Go bag" filled with $35000 cash and three passports.
Malik probably couldn't catch a ride to the local mall if there was any publicity.
I don't know why you chose the name Malik but it pretty much intones a racial aspect.
(no message)