02-25-2021, 02:52 PM
(02-25-2021, 02:28 PM)Au165 Wrote: I'll let Fred chime in on this as he has more experience but I know specific examples where that was not the case.
No, I don't put any stock in what Fred says. He's not here for an honest discussion on anything.
Quote:They don't know that someone is house poor or has mountains of medical debt, or whatever. Sometimes they do and they simply don't care, the system is too arbitrary, maybe a middle ground is to set guidelines?
Correct, which is why I said there are limits to the ability to do so.
Quote:Maybe, but the assumption is the person being held is innocent at this point which means their rights are being violated up until their trial. One could argue that there was no way the founding fathers could have dreamed people would potentially wait months to a year before they could prove their innocence.
Except that doesn't really happen unless the delays are coming from the defense. You have a constitutional right to a speedy trial. The People may get away with one continuance in a detained case, but the judge will very rarely grant another and if they are unable to proceed at that time then the charges will be dismissed with our without prejudice. If you're having someone remain detained for several months it's almost always because the defense has requested more time. Of course the counter argument to this is that they need the time to put together the best possible defense, which is true. But I can tell you is that, barring defense requests a detained case will work its way through the court process rather quickly. Of course, I realize "quickly" is relative.
Again, I largely agree with your arguments against cash bail, I just can't sign on to such a plan that doesn't also include provisions for more serious cases to be remanded at a higher rate.
