02-25-2021, 02:08 PM
(02-25-2021, 01:51 PM)Au165 Wrote: I would replace "seriousness" with violent crimes. Essentially, if it was not a violent crime then no one should be held until they are tried. If it is a violent crime they need to demonstrate a relatively high certainty to the judge that the defendant is involved somehow. Pre-trial detainment can ruin lives, we need to make damn sure we limit this as much as possible. Prohibitively high bail is all relative though and that is why this all matters. What is prohibitively high to me and to someone working at Mcdonald's are not the same thing. The average bail amount for a felony is about 10k, I can float that without a bail bondsman many can't and that starts a cycle of poverty for many is hard to dig out of.
I think we are kind of aligned but it's more about defining prohibitive.
To your first point, I'll absolutely agree, but you can't just use violent as crimes such as arson are not considered violent but have the potential to cause (many) fatalities. Also, prohibitively high bail is relative, but not to the extent you're stating. A judge will almost always tailor the bail to the amount of money the defendant can access. There is obviously a limit to this, you can't set bail high enough for Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos to give a shit, but it's not just a single figure for a single offense.
You are correct, we are far more on the same page than we are not. But what disturbs me about these types of movements across the nation is they shift far too much focus away from the victim, and in some cases treat the suspect as more of a victim then the person they victimized. That's why I stated I have no issue with this as long as it also includes an increase in remanding orders for certain crimes.
