4 ms·

Your language assumes guilt first , He is a murder suspect and alleged to have committed murders[1] until is proven guilty that distinction is important . The

Your language assumes guilt first , He is a murder suspect and alleged to have committed murders[1] until is proven guilty that distinction is important . The prosecution should have asked for higher bail if he was further threat to society or a flight risk not because the crimes were heinous, if they failed to prove it, that is on them. Far too easily we judge people as a society quickly and usually with strong racial bias. 1% of America is incarcerated far higher than any other developed economy. I don’t think we are predisposed to crime more than others perhaps we need to think how we ended up here ? [1] he probably did I am not arguing the facts of the case, keep in mind unlike civil cases where balance of probabilities is the deciding factor in criminal cases beyond reasonable doubt

iudqnolq 3y ago
> The prosecution should have asked for higher bail if he was further threat to society If he is a risk to society that won't change however much money he pays. A millionaire murderer isn't less dangerous than a minimum wage one. Judges are allowed to deny bail based on dangerousness. That's the appropriate tool here, not setting a high dollar number.
NoMoreNicksLeft 3y ago
> The prosecution should have asked for higher bail if he was further threat to society or No. Bail shouldn't ever be excessive... if it's purpose is to ensure that they show for trial, then it can only be so high that the defendant should work towards avoiding forfeit. By definition, it must be affordable to them, if only barely so. It shouldn't be used to keep someone detained. In such cases, prosecutors should have the balls to demand they not be offered bail, and judges the same to withhold it. Every time a judge sets some ridiculous bail (I think I've personally heard amounts approaching eight digits and this for non-billionaires), it further conditions everyone including the public that high amounts are justifiable, it normalizes it. Given our reliance on the parasitic bail bonding industry, it turns these amounts into either a pre-conviction fine, buying their way out of detainment, or judicial/prosecutorial incompetence masquerading as prudence.
- manquer 3y ago
  Avoiding forfeiture works by assuming a rational frame of mind . Someone bent on revenge or societal harm or will not be stopped because the money will be forfeit . Perhaps bail should be denied then as courts have the power to do , but setting it high is not that different from denying .

iudqnolq 3y ago

> The prosecution should have asked for higher bail if he was further threat to society If he is a risk to society that won't change however much money he pays. A millionaire murderer isn't less dangerous than a minimum wage one. Judges are allowed to deny bail based on dangerousness. That's the appropriate tool here, not setting a high dollar number.

NoMoreNicksLeft 3y ago

> The prosecution should have asked for higher bail if he was further threat to society or No. Bail shouldn't ever be excessive... if it's purpose is to ensure that they show for trial, then it can only be so high that the defendant should work towards avoiding forfeit. By definition, it must be affordable to them, if only barely so. It shouldn't be used to keep someone detained. In such cases, prosecutors should have the balls to demand they not be offered bail, and judges the same to withhold it. Every time a judge sets some ridiculous bail (I think I've personally heard amounts approaching eight digits and this for non-billionaires), it further conditions everyone including the public that high amounts are justifiable, it normalizes it. Given our reliance on the parasitic bail bonding industry, it turns these amounts into either a pre-conviction fine, buying their way out of detainment, or judicial/prosecutorial incompetence masquerading as prudence.

manquer 3y ago
Avoiding forfeiture works by assuming a rational frame of mind . Someone bent on revenge or societal harm or will not be stopped because the money will be forfeit . Perhaps bail should be denied then as courts have the power to do , but setting it high is not that different from denying .