8 ms·

OK - so I just had two experiences with a bay area law enforcement agency, and I am beside myself with disgust and anger: I was accused of doing something I di

OK - so I just had two experiences with a bay area law enforcement agency, and I am beside myself with disgust and anger: I was accused of doing something I did not. I was taken to jail and they held me on bail - and set my court date for about three weeks from the time I was booked, but an arraignment in about 5 days. I had just accepted a new job - but still had a week on my current. I HAD to post bail (and I didn't really have the money for it) so I had to get a bail bond. so I could get out and go to work!! This cost my $3,000 out of pocket. So I did, and then went to my arraignment: Guess what "no charges filed and case rejected for lack of any evidence at all" But now - I am out $3,000 and I have an arrest on my record for something that was simply a false accusation! Further, WHile I was in jail over night, the guards and police are absolute douchebags. They treat EVERYONE like crap. I now hate all cops. ALL of them.

gambiter 11y ago
I'm curious... in a situation like this, could you sue for wrongful arrest?
- webkike 11y ago
  Uh, no. The entire point of the criminal justice system is to determine if arrests are wrongful or not.
  - maxerickson 11y ago
    Still, just because a police officer arrests you does not mean that the arrest is legitimate. (especially in a legal sense, I guess in a de facto sense this is a relatively safe avenue for police to abuse their power)
  - gambiter 11y ago
    The criminal justice system determines if the accused is innocent. The arrest is a separate action. In fact, if you are convinced that is IS a wrongful arrest, you may legally resist arrest, tell the officer, and he is supposed to let you present evidence of your innocence. However, it doesn't HAVE to be claimed at the time of arrest. I was curious in OP's case because of the "no charges filed and case rejected for lack of any evidence at all" line. It seems to me, that would be enough reason to claim wrongful arrest and at least get compensation for the bail bond.
    - runako 11y ago
      >> you may legally resist arrest Very risky advice for the nonwhite.
      - msandford 11y ago
        > Very risky advice for the nonwhite. Very risky advice for ANYONE. Doesn't matter your race, the police don't like people to stick up for themselves. Judges tend to frown on this behavior as well, even if it's morally right. The truth doesn't matter when the judge doesn't care. EDIT: That's not to say that all judges will allow these kinds of questionable abuses, just that there are enough that you're kind of taking your fate in your hands in a more substantial way than say driving a car or taking an airline flight.
        koube 11y ago
        In addition to getting in trouble for resisting a wrongful arrest, you can also easily get in trouble for resisting a non-existant arrest. http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/01/29/382497080/arrested-for-resisting-arrest-yes-its-possible http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/01/29/382497080/...
      - ch4s3 11y ago
        For anyone, especially for the nonwhite. FTFY.
    - aidenn0 11y ago
      The most likely event of you legally resisting a wrongful arrest is that you will be convicted of resisting arrest. Particularly in the event that it is your word against the arresting officer.
    - kahirsch 11y ago
      > In fact, if you are convinced that is IS a wrongful arrest, you may legally resist arrest As of 2001, it was illegal to resist unlawful arrests in 39 states.[1] > and he is supposed to let you present evidence of your innocence. Where is this the law? [1] http://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1719&context=ublr http://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?articl...
  - danielweber 11y ago
    There is such a thing as wrongful arrest, and it's not the same as "you are not guilty of the crime that we accused you of."
gohrt 11y ago
There is no legitimate reason to make the the arrestee pay the bond fee in this case. The state (taxpayers) should pay.
- ma2rten 11y ago
  Yes, the entire system is flawed.
- chongli 11y ago
  Really, the arresting officer ought to be on the hook personally for this. That would change police behaviour overnight.
  - fnordfnordfnord 11y ago
    I think they or their department ought to have to carry individual officer liability policies that pay out when they do something like this.
- gnopgnip 11y ago
  The point of the bond is to give a financial incentive for the arrested to show up to court. If anyone other than the arrested was on the hook for the bill there would be no point. The reality is that judges rarely face any penalty for setting bail too high and preventative detention is used for nonviolent crimes.
  - LordKano 11y ago
    The reality is that judges rarely face any penalty for setting bail too high and preventative detention is used for nonviolent crimes. Judges can even benefit from it. Elected judges can tout their "tough on crime" bona fides in their ads. Appointed judges become more attractive for higher seats by politicians who promised to be "tough on crime". It's bad medicine.
ma2rten 11y ago
Why did you have to go back to your old job? If your employer really needed you to document your work or something, shouldn't they have payed for your bail?
- pavel_lishin 11y ago
  > If your employer really needed you to document your work or something, shouldn't they have payed for your bail? What?
  - ma2rten 11y ago
    OP said he had to post bail, because he had to go to work. He was going to leave in one week, the same amount of time we would be in jail waiting for his arraignment. Since he was leaving anyway they could not fire him. It would thus be in his financial best interest to sit out the time until the arraignment. The only one who benefits from him getting out would be his old company. I am assuming he had something important to do there, like documenting what he did or training his replacement. Thus, I feel like they should have paid for his bail.
    - pc86 11y ago
      Yeah I'm pretty sure if you just stop going in to work they can fire you, resignation or no resignation.
      - ma2rten 11y ago
        What I meant is that at most he could loose one week's salary. As long as that is less than 3k it's a net win.
        sangnoir 11y ago
        >As long as that is less than 3k it's a net win Financially, you're right. But money isn't the only factor here. Would you pay $3000 - $WEEKS_SALARY to stay out of jail for the week? For some people, being in jail for a week is not a 'net win'
trhway 11y ago
>I am out $3,000 and I have an arrest on my record for something that was simply a false accusation! (IANAL) There are good news and bad news - you probably can "seal" your arrest, bad news is that it isn't automatic, takes effort, and you'll probably will need to pay for a lawyer.
- pacquiao882 11y ago
  It depends which state you were arrested in. In some states it will remain with you for the rest of your life, regardless of innocence.
marincounty 11y ago
Same thing happened to a relative, but he was out $20 grand on bail, and $10 grand on a lawyer who went to court one time to get bail reduced; he couldn't get the judge to budge. After three weeks in Santa Rita jail, he was let out. The cop at the impound yard said, "Sorry--you were at the wrong place at the wrong time." He went bankrupt soon afterwards.
- e40 11y ago
  That is horrible. That is literally the type of random thing which can ruin a life. I (and others) feel so powerless to change this part of our society. I just have no idea how this will ever change.
developer1 11y ago
I sympathize with your situation, but am confused by "I am out $3,000". Do you not get bail money back when your presence in court is concluded? I always thought bail was a deposit, not a payment. You only lose your bail money if you don't show up when required, no?
- BrentOzar 11y ago
  > Do you not get bail money back when your presence in court is concluded? If you post the full bail yourself, yes, but he said he'd paid a bail bond. If you can't post the full bail yourself (say, it's $30k) then you go to a bail bondsman and they pay the full bail for you - in exchange for a fee, usually 10% of your bail. That fee is non-refundable. Then if you skip out while you're on bail, they come find you and drag you back to court to get their money back.
- fnordfnordfnord 11y ago
  Laws vary by state but basically it amounts to: Bail was too expensive/risky so he paid a fee to a bondsman to get him out. A bond is a guarantee provided by a third party, the bondsman, that you will appear in court. It is usually some fraction of your actual bail, like 10%. So if we assume 10% and $3,000 paid to the bondsman, then his bail was probably $30,000. If that's correct then GP's alternative would have been to post $30k with the police until the conclusion of his/her case.
  - addandsubtract 11y ago
    >A bond is a guarantee provided by a third party, the bondsman, that you will appear in court. How can bondsmen stay in business? I have no idea what the turn up rate of appearing in court is, but I doubt it's 100%. So how are they allowed to stay in business if just one person they bailed out fails to appear in court?
    - angersock 11y ago
      If I understand it correctly, a warrant is filed, and then it's no longer their problem--they are, in effect, a hapless victim of the now at-large criminal! :|
beachstartup 11y ago
the interactions i had with the legal / police system when i was younger form the basis of most of my political opinions, especially the controversial ones. i won't mention them here but you can probably use your imagination to determine what i'm talking about. the police are not there to help you, or seek truth. they are there to fuck you over swiftly and silently if the powers that be decide you need to be fucked over. simple as that.

gambiter 11y ago

I'm curious... in a situation like this, could you sue for wrongful arrest?

webkike 11y ago
Uh, no. The entire point of the criminal justice system is to determine if arrests are wrongful or not.
- maxerickson 11y ago
  Still, just because a police officer arrests you does not mean that the arrest is legitimate. (especially in a legal sense, I guess in a de facto sense this is a relatively safe avenue for police to abuse their power)
- gambiter 11y ago
  The criminal justice system determines if the accused is innocent. The arrest is a separate action. In fact, if you are convinced that is IS a wrongful arrest, you may legally resist arrest, tell the officer, and he is supposed to let you present evidence of your innocence. However, it doesn't HAVE to be claimed at the time of arrest. I was curious in OP's case because of the "no charges filed and case rejected for lack of any evidence at all" line. It seems to me, that would be enough reason to claim wrongful arrest and at least get compensation for the bail bond.
  - runako 11y ago
    >> you may legally resist arrest Very risky advice for the nonwhite.
    - msandford 11y ago
      > Very risky advice for the nonwhite. Very risky advice for ANYONE. Doesn't matter your race, the police don't like people to stick up for themselves. Judges tend to frown on this behavior as well, even if it's morally right. The truth doesn't matter when the judge doesn't care. EDIT: That's not to say that all judges will allow these kinds of questionable abuses, just that there are enough that you're kind of taking your fate in your hands in a more substantial way than say driving a car or taking an airline flight.
      - koube 11y ago
        In addition to getting in trouble for resisting a wrongful arrest, you can also easily get in trouble for resisting a non-existant arrest. http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/01/29/382497080/arrested-for-resisting-arrest-yes-its-possible http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/01/29/382497080/...
    - ch4s3 11y ago
      For anyone, especially for the nonwhite. FTFY.
  - aidenn0 11y ago
    The most likely event of you legally resisting a wrongful arrest is that you will be convicted of resisting arrest. Particularly in the event that it is your word against the arresting officer.
  - kahirsch 11y ago
    > In fact, if you are convinced that is IS a wrongful arrest, you may legally resist arrest As of 2001, it was illegal to resist unlawful arrests in 39 states.[1] > and he is supposed to let you present evidence of your innocence. Where is this the law? [1] http://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1719&context=ublr http://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?articl...
- danielweber 11y ago
  There is such a thing as wrongful arrest, and it's not the same as "you are not guilty of the crime that we accused you of."

gohrt 11y ago

There is no legitimate reason to make the the arrestee pay the bond fee in this case. The state (taxpayers) should pay.

ma2rten 11y ago
Yes, the entire system is flawed.
chongli 11y ago
Really, the arresting officer ought to be on the hook personally for this. That would change police behaviour overnight.
- fnordfnordfnord 11y ago
  I think they or their department ought to have to carry individual officer liability policies that pay out when they do something like this.
gnopgnip 11y ago
The point of the bond is to give a financial incentive for the arrested to show up to court. If anyone other than the arrested was on the hook for the bill there would be no point. The reality is that judges rarely face any penalty for setting bail too high and preventative detention is used for nonviolent crimes.
- LordKano 11y ago
  The reality is that judges rarely face any penalty for setting bail too high and preventative detention is used for nonviolent crimes. Judges can even benefit from it. Elected judges can tout their "tough on crime" bona fides in their ads. Appointed judges become more attractive for higher seats by politicians who promised to be "tough on crime". It's bad medicine.

ma2rten 11y ago

Why did you have to go back to your old job? If your employer really needed you to document your work or something, shouldn't they have payed for your bail?

pavel_lishin 11y ago
> If your employer really needed you to document your work or something, shouldn't they have payed for your bail? What?
- ma2rten 11y ago
  OP said he had to post bail, because he had to go to work. He was going to leave in one week, the same amount of time we would be in jail waiting for his arraignment. Since he was leaving anyway they could not fire him. It would thus be in his financial best interest to sit out the time until the arraignment. The only one who benefits from him getting out would be his old company. I am assuming he had something important to do there, like documenting what he did or training his replacement. Thus, I feel like they should have paid for his bail.
  - pc86 11y ago
    Yeah I'm pretty sure if you just stop going in to work they can fire you, resignation or no resignation.
    - ma2rten 11y ago
      What I meant is that at most he could loose one week's salary. As long as that is less than 3k it's a net win.
      - sangnoir 11y ago
        >As long as that is less than 3k it's a net win Financially, you're right. But money isn't the only factor here. Would you pay $3000 - $WEEKS_SALARY to stay out of jail for the week? For some people, being in jail for a week is not a 'net win'

trhway 11y ago

>I am out $3,000 and I have an arrest on my record for something that was simply a false accusation! (IANAL) There are good news and bad news - you probably can "seal" your arrest, bad news is that it isn't automatic, takes effort, and you'll probably will need to pay for a lawyer.

pacquiao882 11y ago
It depends which state you were arrested in. In some states it will remain with you for the rest of your life, regardless of innocence.

marincounty 11y ago

Same thing happened to a relative, but he was out $20 grand on bail, and $10 grand on a lawyer who went to court one time to get bail reduced; he couldn't get the judge to budge. After three weeks in Santa Rita jail, he was let out. The cop at the impound yard said, "Sorry--you were at the wrong place at the wrong time." He went bankrupt soon afterwards.

e40 11y ago
That is horrible. That is literally the type of random thing which can ruin a life. I (and others) feel so powerless to change this part of our society. I just have no idea how this will ever change.

developer1 11y ago

I sympathize with your situation, but am confused by "I am out $3,000". Do you not get bail money back when your presence in court is concluded? I always thought bail was a deposit, not a payment. You only lose your bail money if you don't show up when required, no?

BrentOzar 11y ago
> Do you not get bail money back when your presence in court is concluded? If you post the full bail yourself, yes, but he said he'd paid a bail bond. If you can't post the full bail yourself (say, it's $30k) then you go to a bail bondsman and they pay the full bail for you - in exchange for a fee, usually 10% of your bail. That fee is non-refundable. Then if you skip out while you're on bail, they come find you and drag you back to court to get their money back.
fnordfnordfnord 11y ago
Laws vary by state but basically it amounts to: Bail was too expensive/risky so he paid a fee to a bondsman to get him out. A bond is a guarantee provided by a third party, the bondsman, that you will appear in court. It is usually some fraction of your actual bail, like 10%. So if we assume 10% and $3,000 paid to the bondsman, then his bail was probably $30,000. If that's correct then GP's alternative would have been to post $30k with the police until the conclusion of his/her case.
- addandsubtract 11y ago
  >A bond is a guarantee provided by a third party, the bondsman, that you will appear in court. How can bondsmen stay in business? I have no idea what the turn up rate of appearing in court is, but I doubt it's 100%. So how are they allowed to stay in business if just one person they bailed out fails to appear in court?
  - angersock 11y ago
    If I understand it correctly, a warrant is filed, and then it's no longer their problem--they are, in effect, a hapless victim of the now at-large criminal! :|

beachstartup 11y ago

the interactions i had with the legal / police system when i was younger form the basis of most of my political opinions, especially the controversial ones. i won't mention them here but you can probably use your imagination to determine what i'm talking about. the police are not there to help you, or seek truth. they are there to fuck you over swiftly and silently if the powers that be decide you need to be fucked over. simple as that.