No Bail Required Now In CA: What Could Possibly Go Wrong

[Skip]

Agree completely. Why should 2 people arrested for the same minor crime be treated differently because one has money and the other doesnt?

Having/not having money shouldn't factor into it. It should be based on flight risk. And if you follow high profile bond/bail you'll notice judges set the amounts higher for defendants who have money to create incentive.

CA is a state full of illegals who would have no incentive to return for trial. They are effectively removing the consequences by completely eliminating bail/bond. Even if petty. They are going to be turning loose a ton of theft (identity and physical) suspects who are free to go out and victimize more taxpayers.

This change isn't for the benefit of the avg Joe hard working guy who gets caught up on a minor charge. It's for the criminal illegal underclass that is exploited for political power.

It's reverse Broken Windows. And they know it.

[Irving]

Sounds similar to police departments report crime less, to look as if there is less crime in their districts. Stuff like this seems rational under ideal circumstances, but are often instituted at the wrong time.

[BushMasterBoy]

Get real, it is harvest time. Somebody has to bring in the crops from the fields. The peasants feed the powers that be, same as ever. California is the fifth largest economy in the world.

[Bailey Guns]

That massive chip on your shoulder is really weighing you down, foxtrot.

I know how the system works. I've been on both sides. I've been falsely accused and sued for $17 million. It's not perfect, I'll concede that. This isnt the way to fix it.

The overwhelming majority of people jailed are given bail according to a set bail schedule. And many of those people are subsequently released on their own recognizance if they're in jail long enough to see a judge.

[ChadAmberg]

Until/unless the justice system compensates people for bail when they are innocent/not convicted, it will be a travesty no matter how you slice it. And even then, it would have it's issues.

I have to agree 100% with this. I just read about a case where a poor woman went to court for something. She could plead guilty immediately with a thousand dollar fine and probation costs. Or her nonrefundable bail + other costs just to go to trial was even more money she did not have. She was almost assuredly innocent as she had proof of identity theft, but could not afford to prove it. And now has a criminal record.

As much as we hate people getting away with things when they're guilty, poor people are absolutely fucked over all the time. My uncle spent years in jail because he was boned by the system and couldn't afford to defend himself. That was thirty years ago, and his life is still completely screwed over by it.

[Zundfolge]

I think people fail to realize bail isn't free, even if you show up and prevail. You still lose 5-10%, forever. Is that not a fine imposed by your government, without trial, appeal, or review; just an assumption of guilt considering the fact you will never recover it in any circumstance? That's what we were founded on.

Is that 5-10% what you pay the bail bondsman? Because if that's the case the state can weasel out of that by claiming that no, you borrowed the money at interest, so its not taken by them, its taken by the bail bondsman (an independent contractor) and if you'd just pay the full bail yourself you'd have gotten it all back.

[Bailey Guns]

Like it or not that's the fee bondsmen charge for their service. I'm not defending bondsmen but that's the reality.

And in regards to ChadAmbergs post, I've never heard of non refundable bail. The bondsmen fee isnt refundable but bail should be.

[Zundfolge]

Like it or not that's the fee bondsmen charge for their service. I'm not defending bondsmen but that's the reality.

And in regards to ChadAmbergs post, I've never heard of non refundable bail. The bondsmen fee isnt refundable but bail should be.

I agree, the bondsmen should be able to charge for their service. But the problem has become that bails are routinely set so high that the only way the vast majority of arestees can pay them is to go through a bondsman. If the average person can't afford to make bail on their own, doesn't that start to rub against the 8th Amendment?

[roberth]

Having/not having money shouldn't factor into it. It should be based on flight risk. And if you follow high profile bond/bail you'll notice judges set the amounts higher for defendants who have money to create incentive.

CA is a state full of illegals who would have no incentive to return for trial. They are effectively removing the consequences by completely eliminating bail/bond. Even if petty. They are going to be turning loose a ton of theft (identity and physical) suspects who are free to go out and victimize more taxpayers.

This change isn't for the benefit of the avg Joe hard working guy who gets caught up on a minor charge. It's for the criminal illegal underclass that is exploited for political power.

It's reverse Broken Windows. And they know it.

Agreed.

[Bailey Guns]

The average arrestee is usually a DUI or some other low level misdemeanor. Bail for these types of offenses rarely exceeded $1000 back when I was working the street. I don't know what the schedules are now. Not only that but I think the image of the average, falsely arrested, honest, hard working poor person being abused by the system is probably not accurate. Not saying it doesn't happen.

More likely, though, the person is "poor" based on lifestyle choice. They chose to not get an education, chose not to look for a job, chose to spend money on other things or chose to commit crimes to support themselves. Over and over and over I'd arrest or cite people for various things like no insurance or failing to register a car. They'd tell me they didn't have the money. But inside the car they had a nice cell phone, couple cartons of cigarettes, cell phone, fast food wrappers, etc. Sorry...if you can afford that shit and the Jordan's you're wearing you can afford basic insurance or registration or whatever. Again...not saying it applies to all but I feel confident in saying that's typical.

Poor decision making is responsible for a lot of the woes most people suffer...not the system.

And, I think were blurring the distinction between the system and corrupt people administering the system. I think the system is basically OK. I think there are far too many corrupt people in the system. Look no further than the recent and current leadership at the DOJ and FBI as evidence of that.