6 ms·

I think this is an example of using slow trials as a nonjudicial weapon. The defendant did not break the law and isn't likely to be convicted (at least not on a

I think this is an example of using slow trials as a nonjudicial weapon. The defendant did not break the law and isn't likely to be convicted (at least not on appeal), but they can hold him in jail for months because they got mad at his Facebook post.

_heimdall 1y ago
That should be where the right to a speedy trial comes into play. If he is held in jail because he isn't released on bail, the best thing to do is repeatedly file motions for the speedy trial.
- everforward 1y ago
  A speedy trial is much slower than you’d probably think. I can’t find specific guidelines for Tennessee beyond having the right to one. The federal guidelines are generally 30 days to make a specific charge, and 70 days from then to appear before a judge. That also doesn’t ensure the case goes to trial, just that you’ve had a hearing. Ie you can spend over 3 months in jail before an hearing and still be considered to have had a speedy trial. He’d have to wait til after that period to even file a motion for dismissal on speedy trial grounds, and then wait for the hearing on that to happen. This is part of why plea deals are so common. Even if he were somehow to be convicted, his sentence would probably be less than the speedy trial window. At a certain point, the prosecution will offer to bump it down to some kind of misdemeanor with jail time less than he’s already done so it’s time served. He may as well plead guilty to that because otherwise he’ll keep sitting in jail waiting on a trial and do more time for no reason. There’s no realistic route where he gets compensated for being wrongly prosecuted, even if he goes to trial and is found not guilty. The justice system is deeply, deeply flawed and unjust.
  - gamblor956 1y ago
    At the state level, if a defendant does not waive their right to a speedy trial, the time from being charged (arraignment) to trial is limited by law. It ranges from 30 days for misdemeanors to 6 months for felonies. . In California, the clock for a misdemeanor is 30 days if a defendant is taken into custody, or 45 days if not in custody. For a felony, it's 60 days from arraignment. If the defendant remains in custody after arrest, arraignment must occur within 48 hours of arrest, or on the first business day after the 48-hour period expires if it ends on a weekend or court holiday. If the defendant is freed from custody prior to arraignment, then arraignment can occur at a later date. In NY and most red states, the clock is approximately 6 months for felonies. Due to the longer clock, in many of these states the clock begins when the defendant is taken into custody (or the state has a shorter timeframe for trial for defendants in custody). Florida just changed its laws to make the clock start on arraignment, lengthened the time required for arraignment to 30 days for defendants in custody, and made the speedy trial right an affirmative right that the defendant must specifically assert. Unlike pretty much every other state, the clock also restarts if the prosecutor withdraws and re-files the same charges (in almost every other state, the clock is only started anew for new charges.) FL also made the consequences for violation of these rights a mere dismissal without prejudice. (TLDR: don't get arrested in Florida.) Most defense lawyers will advise clients to waive their speedy trial rights. This is for the lawyer's benefit, not the client's. It allows the lawyer to preserve their negotiating relationship with the prosecutor for future clients. In California, due to the shortened time frames, 99% of the time it is advisable to assert speedy trial rights (especially in felonies, but even in misdemeanors) because the prosecution usually can't get its act together in time. Some forensics can't even be completed in the 60 day window. The defense win rate in proceedings where the defendant asserts their speedy trial rights is so high that prosecutors will always offer a sweetheart plea deal to avoid going to trial. (Of course the obvious solution is for the prosecutors to just wait until they have an actual complete case before filing charges. But if they did that we wouldn't need speedy trial laws in the first place.)
- scythe 1y ago
  I think if there's a major constitutional right to be invoked here, it's the Eighth Amendment "excessive bail shall not be required". Two million dollars?! For a 61-year-old posting on Facebook? What kind of risk does he pose exactly?
  - someemptyspace 1y ago
    He can post again, so highly likely to "reoffend".
  - estearum 1y ago
    Pointing attention at the basic hypocrisy and complete lack of principle of Dear Leader's party is an existential risk!
  - _heimdall 1y ago
    Regardless of bail, IMO you are almost always better off staying in jail if at all possible and forcing the state to a speedy trial. I watched a close family member go through the process after getting out on bail. The charge was effectively a he-said she-said situation, at a time when that was going especially poorly for the he involved. He bailed out and took his lawyer's advice to wait the state out. That turned into a 4 year delay for what was technically a misdemeanor charge with a 1-year max charge. The trial was a joke and they offered effectively no evidence beyond one testimony contradicted by another witness directly in the room at the time. Who knows what would have happened in a speedy trial. If nothing else, a 1-year sentence would have been completed 3 years earlier than the trial he had even happened.
    - nobody9999 1y ago
      >Regardless of bail, IMO you are almost always better off staying in jail if at all possible and forcing the state to a speedy trial. I'm guessing that you have the means to pay your bills for years before having to worry about losing your income and your home. Most folks don't. If you're in jail, you can't work. If you don't go to work, you'll lose your job. If you lose your job and you're like most people in the US, within a few months, you can't pay your mortgage or rent, so you'll lose your home as well as any belongings in that home. Which are the biggest reasons why high/no bail forces folks to accept plea deals. "Speedy Trial" laws generally don't even enter into it.
- arresin 1y ago
  Bail is set at 2 million. So it’s a strategy
marcusb 1y ago
As they say, you can beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride.
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago
  > but you can't beat the ride You sure as hell can get paid for it afterwards.
  - overfeed 1y ago
    Those settlements need to come out of police retirement funds, to better align interests.
    - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
      > Those settlements need to come out of police retirement funds, to better align interests If the sheriff, DA and judge each thought this was a good idea, it's fair for the voters who hired them to take the hit.
      - tremon 1y ago
        Are sheriff, DA and judge directly electable positions then? I thought they were appointed by the Council or Senate (no, I don't live in the US nor do I have any desire to).
        JumpCrisscross 1y ago
        > Are sheriff, DA and judge directly electable positions then? Even if they're not, they're local enough positions that electeds have significant--if not final--say over their appointment.
        dghlsakjg 1y ago
        In some places in the states, yes, all three can be elected. Typically the sheriff is always elected, the DA almost always elected, and for the judges it depends, but if they aren’t elected they are appointed by elected officials. The other thing to remember is that the US judicial system varies tremendously by state. No two states are the same so there is no easy way to summarize it.
reb 1y ago
Had the exact same thought. How is there not a reasonable maximum time you can hold someone pre-trial? As always, rich offenders walk free.
- philjohn 1y ago
  IIRC some states have defined timeframes where charges are dismissed if the case is not brought to trial.
senkora 1y ago
The process is the punishment.
IlikeKitties 1y ago
And that's why there should be serious consequences for everyone involved in this prosecution and prosecutions like it. If the case is as described here, there should be jail time involved for kidnapping and false imprisonment. But any justice system always protects their own.
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago
  > why there should be serious consequences for everyone involved Do we have names of the arresting officers, prosecutors and judge this is in front of? With that we can determine who above them is elected.
  - culll_kuprey 1y ago
    > "numerous…teachers, parents and students" somehow interpreted Bushart's meme—with its citation in fine print about a previous school shooting at Perry High School in Perry, Iowa—as a threat to carry out a similar shooting at nearby Perry County High School. Wouldn’t matter. Those elected would likely be re elected. This wasn’t Trump advising some federal agency to bully someone he doesn’t like. It was the community organizing. This is the will of the people.
    - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
      > Wouldn’t matter. Those elected would likely be re elected This is just rationalising laziness and nihilism. They may get re-elected. That doesn't mean you can't create a lot of chaos and cost for them along the way. Like, I wish my adversaries would preëmptively conclude that even attempting to oppose me is not worth it. > This is the will of the people You're concluding this how?
      - IlikeKitties 1y ago
        You are 100% correct. Just recently a single website that linked some e-mail addresses destroyed the EU Plans for chat control. Apathy and Cynicism would've led it happen but just the act of making one website and posting it at the right places, something everyone here could easily do, changed the course of law dramatically. That small victory really made me reconsider.
astura 1y ago
Months? This shit can go on for years. Emanuel Fair spent 9 years in prison and was ultimately acquited. https://www.investigationdiscovery.com/crimefeed/seeking-justice/halloween-horror-man-accused-of-killing-arpana-jinaga-freed-after-hes-held-9-years-with-no-conviction https://www.investigationdiscovery.com/crimefeed/seeking-jus...

_heimdall 1y ago

That should be where the right to a speedy trial comes into play. If he is held in jail because he isn't released on bail, the best thing to do is repeatedly file motions for the speedy trial.

everforward 1y ago
A speedy trial is much slower than you’d probably think. I can’t find specific guidelines for Tennessee beyond having the right to one. The federal guidelines are generally 30 days to make a specific charge, and 70 days from then to appear before a judge. That also doesn’t ensure the case goes to trial, just that you’ve had a hearing. Ie you can spend over 3 months in jail before an hearing and still be considered to have had a speedy trial. He’d have to wait til after that period to even file a motion for dismissal on speedy trial grounds, and then wait for the hearing on that to happen. This is part of why plea deals are so common. Even if he were somehow to be convicted, his sentence would probably be less than the speedy trial window. At a certain point, the prosecution will offer to bump it down to some kind of misdemeanor with jail time less than he’s already done so it’s time served. He may as well plead guilty to that because otherwise he’ll keep sitting in jail waiting on a trial and do more time for no reason. There’s no realistic route where he gets compensated for being wrongly prosecuted, even if he goes to trial and is found not guilty. The justice system is deeply, deeply flawed and unjust.
- gamblor956 1y ago
  At the state level, if a defendant does not waive their right to a speedy trial, the time from being charged (arraignment) to trial is limited by law. It ranges from 30 days for misdemeanors to 6 months for felonies. . In California, the clock for a misdemeanor is 30 days if a defendant is taken into custody, or 45 days if not in custody. For a felony, it's 60 days from arraignment. If the defendant remains in custody after arrest, arraignment must occur within 48 hours of arrest, or on the first business day after the 48-hour period expires if it ends on a weekend or court holiday. If the defendant is freed from custody prior to arraignment, then arraignment can occur at a later date. In NY and most red states, the clock is approximately 6 months for felonies. Due to the longer clock, in many of these states the clock begins when the defendant is taken into custody (or the state has a shorter timeframe for trial for defendants in custody). Florida just changed its laws to make the clock start on arraignment, lengthened the time required for arraignment to 30 days for defendants in custody, and made the speedy trial right an affirmative right that the defendant must specifically assert. Unlike pretty much every other state, the clock also restarts if the prosecutor withdraws and re-files the same charges (in almost every other state, the clock is only started anew for new charges.) FL also made the consequences for violation of these rights a mere dismissal without prejudice. (TLDR: don't get arrested in Florida.) Most defense lawyers will advise clients to waive their speedy trial rights. This is for the lawyer's benefit, not the client's. It allows the lawyer to preserve their negotiating relationship with the prosecutor for future clients. In California, due to the shortened time frames, 99% of the time it is advisable to assert speedy trial rights (especially in felonies, but even in misdemeanors) because the prosecution usually can't get its act together in time. Some forensics can't even be completed in the 60 day window. The defense win rate in proceedings where the defendant asserts their speedy trial rights is so high that prosecutors will always offer a sweetheart plea deal to avoid going to trial. (Of course the obvious solution is for the prosecutors to just wait until they have an actual complete case before filing charges. But if they did that we wouldn't need speedy trial laws in the first place.)
scythe 1y ago
I think if there's a major constitutional right to be invoked here, it's the Eighth Amendment "excessive bail shall not be required". Two million dollars?! For a 61-year-old posting on Facebook? What kind of risk does he pose exactly?
- someemptyspace 1y ago
  He can post again, so highly likely to "reoffend".
- estearum 1y ago
  Pointing attention at the basic hypocrisy and complete lack of principle of Dear Leader's party is an existential risk!
- _heimdall 1y ago
  Regardless of bail, IMO you are almost always better off staying in jail if at all possible and forcing the state to a speedy trial. I watched a close family member go through the process after getting out on bail. The charge was effectively a he-said she-said situation, at a time when that was going especially poorly for the he involved. He bailed out and took his lawyer's advice to wait the state out. That turned into a 4 year delay for what was technically a misdemeanor charge with a 1-year max charge. The trial was a joke and they offered effectively no evidence beyond one testimony contradicted by another witness directly in the room at the time. Who knows what would have happened in a speedy trial. If nothing else, a 1-year sentence would have been completed 3 years earlier than the trial he had even happened.
  - nobody9999 1y ago
    >Regardless of bail, IMO you are almost always better off staying in jail if at all possible and forcing the state to a speedy trial. I'm guessing that you have the means to pay your bills for years before having to worry about losing your income and your home. Most folks don't. If you're in jail, you can't work. If you don't go to work, you'll lose your job. If you lose your job and you're like most people in the US, within a few months, you can't pay your mortgage or rent, so you'll lose your home as well as any belongings in that home. Which are the biggest reasons why high/no bail forces folks to accept plea deals. "Speedy Trial" laws generally don't even enter into it.
arresin 1y ago
Bail is set at 2 million. So it’s a strategy

marcusb 1y ago

As they say, you can beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride.

JumpCrisscross 1y ago
> but you can't beat the ride You sure as hell can get paid for it afterwards.
- overfeed 1y ago
  Those settlements need to come out of police retirement funds, to better align interests.
  - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
    > Those settlements need to come out of police retirement funds, to better align interests If the sheriff, DA and judge each thought this was a good idea, it's fair for the voters who hired them to take the hit.
    - tremon 1y ago
      Are sheriff, DA and judge directly electable positions then? I thought they were appointed by the Council or Senate (no, I don't live in the US nor do I have any desire to).
      - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
        > Are sheriff, DA and judge directly electable positions then? Even if they're not, they're local enough positions that electeds have significant--if not final--say over their appointment.
      - dghlsakjg 1y ago
        In some places in the states, yes, all three can be elected. Typically the sheriff is always elected, the DA almost always elected, and for the judges it depends, but if they aren’t elected they are appointed by elected officials. The other thing to remember is that the US judicial system varies tremendously by state. No two states are the same so there is no easy way to summarize it.

reb 1y ago

Had the exact same thought. How is there not a reasonable maximum time you can hold someone pre-trial? As always, rich offenders walk free.

philjohn 1y ago
IIRC some states have defined timeframes where charges are dismissed if the case is not brought to trial.

senkora 1y ago

The process is the punishment.

IlikeKitties 1y ago

And that's why there should be serious consequences for everyone involved in this prosecution and prosecutions like it. If the case is as described here, there should be jail time involved for kidnapping and false imprisonment. But any justice system always protects their own.

JumpCrisscross 1y ago
> why there should be serious consequences for everyone involved Do we have names of the arresting officers, prosecutors and judge this is in front of? With that we can determine who above them is elected.
- culll_kuprey 1y ago
  > "numerous…teachers, parents and students" somehow interpreted Bushart's meme—with its citation in fine print about a previous school shooting at Perry High School in Perry, Iowa—as a threat to carry out a similar shooting at nearby Perry County High School. Wouldn’t matter. Those elected would likely be re elected. This wasn’t Trump advising some federal agency to bully someone he doesn’t like. It was the community organizing. This is the will of the people.
  - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
    > Wouldn’t matter. Those elected would likely be re elected This is just rationalising laziness and nihilism. They may get re-elected. That doesn't mean you can't create a lot of chaos and cost for them along the way. Like, I wish my adversaries would preëmptively conclude that even attempting to oppose me is not worth it. > This is the will of the people You're concluding this how?
    - IlikeKitties 1y ago
      You are 100% correct. Just recently a single website that linked some e-mail addresses destroyed the EU Plans for chat control. Apathy and Cynicism would've led it happen but just the act of making one website and posting it at the right places, something everyone here could easily do, changed the course of law dramatically. That small victory really made me reconsider.

astura 1y ago

Months? This shit can go on for years. Emanuel Fair spent 9 years in prison and was ultimately acquited. https://www.investigationdiscovery.com/crimefeed/seeking-justice/halloween-horror-man-accused-of-killing-arpana-jinaga-freed-after-hes-held-9-years-with-no-conviction https://www.investigationdiscovery.com/crimefeed/seeking-jus...