Bail System

huskers1217

huskers1217

Joined
Aug 17, 2020
Posts
23,632
Reaction score
26,564
Bookie:
$ 500.00
Location
Sitting in Houston Traffic....
I don't want this to be political or about race nor do I think it should be.

If you could reform bail. What would you do??

Example: A bf "allegedly" killed his gf here in Houston a couple days ago by shooting her in the back 22 times. He is now out on bail - should he be?

Do we have a bail hierarchy system? Should anyone accused of murder be out on bail?
 
I’ll just stick close to the situation you share…..

The real challenge on something like this case is less about the amount or what amount that bail should be, and more about whether suspect should be held without bail, right?

I’m leery of too many instance of holding without bail. This guy probably is dead to rights, but that has to be determined yet. IIRC bail is set by a hearing after arrest by a judge. The judge has the purview to set or even deny bail based on what they have in front of them.

That might be the best way it should be done. I don’t know the intricate details of this arrest, I just know if we flat out say accusation of murder is no bail as innocent people will be held for a long while just to be cleared later.

As an example….if the cops came in as he was putting the 21st and 22nd shots into her and the judge allowed, or went light on bail, the problem is with that judge, not the system.
 
Bring a little more broad….I’m not sure how much I would reform bail as the current system exists.

The question that emphatically needs answering is if there is truly inequity based on any race or social class lines with bail. You could fix that with a set hierarchy of bail….but that doesn’t account for any unique aspects of a case, and would likely lead to more injustice than many observe currently.
 
huskers1217 said:
I don't want this to be political or about race nor do I think it should be.

If you could reform bail. What would you do??

Example: A bf "allegedly" killed his gf here in Houston a couple days ago by shooting her in the back 22 times. He is now out on bail - should he be?

Do we have a bail hierarchy system? Should anyone accused of murder be out on bail?
Click to expand...
problem with this question is if you answer one side of it. The other side of it is used to counter & vice versa.
if you say this is a heinous crime he shouldnt be allowed out on bail............ but what if he ends up innocent?
If you say innocent until proven guilty......... what if there is irrefutable evidence?

Bottomline is whatever the rule is. It has to be for all people. Otherwise you would go down the road of political, racism, sexism, list all the ism's.
Since technically we supposed to live in a country where we are innocent until "proven" guilty. It should be pretty rare to deny bail. My understanding & I could be absolutely wrong here. Is that main reason to deny bail is in the belief of being a serious flight risk. So if in your example the guy was some super rich guy that had the ability to leave the country as soon as he walked out of court. He might have been denied bail. Taking away one's freedom without proving guilt, should not be an easy thing to do, or be taken lightly. So in the spirit of "innocent until proven guilty" you dont typically lock up an "innocent" man until the court process is over. So court cases can go on for years. So it should be a very high bar to deny Bail. Even if logically it makes sense. Since the process is for all people. (innocent & guilty)
 
huskers1217 said:
I don't want this to be political or about race nor do I think it should be.

If you could reform bail. What would you do??

Example: A bf "allegedly" killed his gf here in Houston a couple days ago by shooting her in the back 22 times. He is now out on bail - should he be?

Do we have a bail hierarchy system? Should anyone accused of murder be out on bail?
Click to expand...
It's like too much of everything else happening with the criminal justice system in primarily blue areas, and that's a massive overcorrection to what could've been something worthy looking into reforming. I feel like I've seen people held on outrageous bail totals for things like pot possession where illegal, that's worth changing. But now it's turned into suspects in carjackings, armed robberies or anything of the like being arrested multiple times in the span of a few weeks because of how easy the system is on them. That's not OK.
 
Fix the overcrowding issues by getting rid of stupid menial laws. Then you don't need bail at all. Keep the honest to god bad guys locked up until they can be seen and sentenced.
 
huskers1217 said:
I don't want this to be political or about race nor do I think it should be.

If you could reform bail. What would you do??

Example: A bf "allegedly" killed his gf here in Houston a couple days ago by shooting her in the back 22 times. He is now out on bail - should he be?

Do we have a bail hierarchy system? Should anyone accused of murder be out on bail?
Click to expand...
A murderer can get bail but a protester on Jan 6 can't. Does this make any sense?
 
White Knight said:
It is just an analogy.
Click to expand...
Political as it is….I think it’s actually fair. Simply speaking, the answer to your question is no….that makes no sense.

But, it’s also highlighting the inequities that exist in a system administered by humans. I’ll leave it alone after this post so this can stay out of the cesspool….but I think either it’s a thing across the board or it’s not.

Can’t deny political biases and accept racial inequities as an example. They are examples of the same issue.

And I just do think there is adequate reform to discuss until things like this can be agreed upon.
 
Orlando_Eagles said:
Political as it is….I think it’s actually fair. Simply speaking, the answer to your question is no….that makes no sense.

But, it’s also highlighting the inequities that exist in a system administered by humans. I’ll leave it alone after this post so this can stay out of the cesspool….but I think either it’s a thing across the board or it’s not.

Can’t deny political biases and accept racial inequities as an example. They are examples of the same issue.

And I just do think there is adequate reform to discuss until things like this can be agreed upon.
Click to expand...
It comes down to "flight risk", which is subjective. Also figured in is essentially a "social credit" score. If you have nothing to lose by jumping bail, then they are going to be less likely to grant it. So if you are a poor black minority that has zero incentive to come back to face a judge then you get a higher bail to try to create a reason to come back. If you are a well to do businessman then you have plenty to take away if you jump.
 
huskers1217 said:
I don't want this to be political or about race nor do I think it should be.

If you could reform bail. What would you do??

Example: A bf "allegedly" killed his gf here in Houston a couple days ago by shooting her in the back 22 times. He is now out on bail - should he be?

Do we have a bail hierarchy system? Should anyone accused of murder be out on bail?
Click to expand...
You can’t reform bail, or any aspect of the American legal system, in a meaningful way, unless you’re somehow able to reform human nature. Criminals aren’t going to stop committing crimes simply because someone asks nicely; there needs to be penalties and deterrents of some kind. The current state of society is to treat criminals like victims and true victims like annoyances.

If the goal is public safety and not recidivism or ‘equity’ then someone needs to think logically about what is necessary to keep violent criminals from walking the street, committing yet more crimes. It’s hard to hard the discussion without politics, since that’s undeniably the complicating factor.
 
Mofo said:
If the goal is public safety and not recidivism or ‘equity’ then someone needs to think logically about what is necessary to keep violent criminals from walking the street.
Click to expand...
Lethal injections would be very effective.
 
fordman84 said:
It comes down to "flight risk", which is subjective. Also figured in is essentially a "social credit" score. If you have nothing to lose by jumping bail, then they are going to be less likely to grant it. So if you are a poor black minority that has zero incentive to come back to face a judge then you get a higher bail to try to create a reason to come back. If you are a well to do businessman then you have plenty to take away if you jump.
Click to expand...
Well said. This is just facts. It’s why I get the “social class/racial inequity” inequity argument with bail. But there is a very specific reason why it has to be this way.

I don’t see need to reform there. I guess where the crux of this OP comes from though it’s more the question about perceived misapplication of denial of or acceptance to bail.

You can’t change human behavior impacts on such things. I’m sure there is someone out there that thinks “let’s plus criteria into a computer and get a recommendation for bail”. That sounds horridly fraught with potential issues as well.
 
White Knight said:
Lethal injections would be very effective.
Click to expand...
See my first paragraph from that post. Enacting the death penalty is seen as “excessive”, “revenge” and “state-sponsored lynching” regardless of circumstances and awful the criminal in question is.

The criminal is expected to be taken care of by the state, by providing indefinite amounts of food, shelter, education, medical care and even entertainment / conjugal visits. Meanwhile, the victims, or their families, get nothing… except to join the rest of taxpaying citizens in paying for the criminals’ incarceration.

Bail provided a tiny way to hurt the criminal, by agreeing to behave for the short time leading up to trial / sentencing, or else risk having the state seize the property put up as collateral in bond. Now, it’s literally a revolving door to let criminals back on the street.
 
Democrats consider this guy the most dangerous person in America.

1642700220859.png
 
Last edited by a moderator:
White Knight said:
Democrats consider this guy thye most dangerous person in America.

View attachment 57381
Click to expand...
stop no GIF by cerecdoctors
 
Orlando_Eagles said:
Well said. This is just facts. It’s why I get the “social class/racial inequity” inequity argument with bail. But there is a very specific reason why it has to be this way.

I don’t see need to reform there. I guess where the crux of this OP comes from though it’s more the question about perceived misapplication of denial of or acceptance to bail.

You can’t change human behavior impacts on such things. I’m sure there is someone out there that thinks “let’s plus criteria into a computer and get a recommendation for bail”. That sounds horridly fraught with potential issues as well.
Click to expand...
The only reform I see is what I called out earlier, which is stop crowding jails with non-violent offenders. Legalize weed (more drugs if we want) or at worst make it a citation offense. Create a different system for drunk tanks and impound the drunks car until their sentencing is over. Use jails for those who need to be away from society and end bail. If you end up doing something that gets you in jail, then stay in jail.
 
fordman84 said:
It comes down to "flight risk", which is subjective. Also figured in is essentially a "social credit" score. If you have nothing to lose by jumping bail, then they are going to be less likely to grant it. So if you are a poor black minority that has zero incentive to come back to face a judge then you get a higher bail to try to create a reason to come back. If you are a well to do businessman then you have plenty to take away if you jump.
Click to expand...

there is some truth to that. I would agree.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top