They caught the Brighton Peeping TomLespecialpackage t1_iugucmz wrote
Glad that creep is off the streets
Comfortable-Scar4643 t1_iui224z wrote
Throw away the key.
SinibusUSG t1_iuisnu3 wrote
Look, he should be behind bars for a while, I grant you, but this is going to cause several problems, starting with the other dude in his holding cell who just got caught fencing pirated DVDs or some shit.
bwma t1_iuj0zrj wrote
His bail is only $3,000. There’s only one felony mentioned there. They may not be able to throw away the key.
Fairbanks_Bus_142 t1_iujatjw wrote
Isn't this the type of criminal that the bail reform crowd seeks to release until he no-shows for his court date?
Goron40 t1_iujhli2 wrote
From what I understand, yes. This guy is innocent until a trial or plea bargain say otherwise. Bail reformists argue that whether he gets held until that trial shouldn't be dependent on his financial situation.
If the court thinks he's a danger to the community or a flight risk (like in your scenario), they always have the ability to hold him "without bail", but it seems like they chose not to do that here.
anurodhp t1_iuhgymr wrote
Not really, bail fund will make sure he’s back on the streets asap.
9Z7EErh9Et0y0Yjt98A4 t1_iuhhnua wrote
If this guy has enough money to pay his own bail, does that make a difference to you?
What an odd thing to fixate on. Not even a "tough on crime" stance, but specifically a "tough on only those who can't pay their own bail" stance. How bizarre.
Considering this guy already has a default on a previous felony warrant, I'd say there's a good chance there will be no bail offered.
gallagdy t1_iuhjf9i wrote
its not an odd stance. this guy is clearly being tricked by fox news. hes not odd, just gullible.
9Z7EErh9Et0y0Yjt98A4 t1_iuhkckh wrote
In a way, its actually a very informed view of how the criminal justice system works. One of the key features of our system is how it disproportionately disciplines the poor.
Efforts to make the system more equitable in regards to wealth are contrary to the implied purpose of the criminal justice system, no matter how much the system itself insists otherwise. Blind lady justice makes for a nice statue, but only a child believes in such fairy tales.
Still, it's somewhat notable how mask-off calls for protecting this inequity have become. This country is having quite the reactionary moment.
Cersad t1_iuhpsj0 wrote
As long as our justice system claims to be designed for everyone to be equal under the law, as long as our legislators write laws designed to apply equally to all parties who break said laws, and as long as the courts rule to uphold equal protection under the law as principle...
...as long as that continues, people have every right to insist on equal protection under the law. No matter how cynical you may feel about it.
9Z7EErh9Et0y0Yjt98A4 t1_iuhq8oo wrote
The laws are clearly written to disadvantage the poor and there's nothing cynical about admitting that.
You really have to twist your brain into pretzels to see a system like cash bail any other way. Poor people rot in lockup while prosecutors dangle freedom as leverage in plea deals while richer people negotiate from the comfort of their homes. That's a fact, not cynicism.
Cersad t1_iuhr5u6 wrote
The laws disadvantaging the poor is true. It's also not relevant to my comment.
People advocating for an equitable justice system are advocating for the spirit of the justice system that was founded for this nation, and are supported by plenty of legal, cultural, and philosophical precedents. It's far more than simply "a reactionary moment."
Viivusvine t1_iui5759 wrote
Cash bail needs to be phased out, but that doesn’t mean that bail funds don’t deserve their share of criticism.
Remember that the MA Bail Fund doled out $15k in donations to bail out Shawn McClinton, who was charged with rape. He then raped ANOTHER woman after his release.
Investigators found that the MA bail fund had paid for the release of many others charged with violent and/or sexual crimes, even against children. So yeah, nothing wrong with criticizing bail funds until they work that out.
teenytinyvoid t1_iuibb9v wrote
This is an issue with that person being eligible for bail then, no…? Wealthy people post bail on sexual assault charges routinely.
How could the MA Bail Fund have known that he was going to reoffend any better than the people charged with determining if he was safe for posting bail in the first place?
Viivusvine t1_iuifewi wrote
So since rich rapists can be released back to the public, so should poor rapists? That’s BS. I’m not OK with someone being assaulted because some out-of-touch organization is too hung up over single-issue philosophical purism that they can’t exercise common sense.
You can fight to abolish cash bail AND fight to keep dangerous people off the streets at the same time. Criminal justice reform can only work if it’s done holistically, not incrementally and on an issue-by-issue basis.
The MA Cash Bail fund knew what McClinton was being charged with. He was in fact a REPEAT OFFENDER and that was public record. The fact is that they knew but they didn’t care.
teenytinyvoid t1_iuimd3m wrote
To your first point: yes. Equality for everyone means… even rapists. Sorry, dude. I don’t like it any more than you do. The law applies equally is the concept we’re supposed to be all behind, yeah? I’m not picking and choosing my “I like that this one locks up the poors” when it benefits me.
Because I say it again: if the people using the pretrial risk assessments agreed that he could post bail, meaning he scored lower than a certain number on their 1-6 PRA algorithm, which takes into account prior convictions and flight risk and risk of future violent offenses, then it is NOT on a bail fund to know any better. They (rightfully, in my opinion) see someone who would have freedom but the price tag is too high.
The case you bring up sucks. I’ll give you that. But we can’t point get so hyperfocused on an anomaly when we’re trying to overhaul such a complicated system.
To the rest… I have a spent years researching the horrific coercive nature of our criminal legal system, including cash bail and pretrial detention, and I currently work for a national org supporting reform in the system but honestly, John Oliver does my job better: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xQLqIWbc9VM
Viivusvine t1_iujzc4y wrote
Why trust the risk assessment in the first place if the system is broken? McClinton was a Level 3 sex offender by the time the MA Bail Fund covered his release.
How egregious does the crime have to be before the bail fund says that the risk assessment was wrong?
The McClinton case doesn’t deserve to be diminished as a mere “anomaly.” This is a known issue with the MA Bail Fund.
abhikavi t1_iuia88f wrote
Some bail funds literally don't factor in the crime. The theory is that bail is immoral; the type of crime it's for doesn't matter. If the person shouldn't be on the streets, they shouldn't be allowed bail to be on the streets.
Obviously, a lot of judges are currently using bail for exactly this, to keep people off the streets, which is exactly what the bail funds are protesting, and I get why that's bad, but.... it does lead to exactly this.
Others consider it case by case, usually because they don't want to do something like pay someone's bail only to have them commit another violent crime.
jokeres t1_iuidrz7 wrote
Isn't it just a direct reply to this "creep" being "off the streets"?
He won't be. That's it; that's the whole thing. He was arrested and will be out doing whatever a "creep" does soon, probably without rehabilitation.
Workacct1999 t1_iuhqpbw wrote
Cash bail is a stupid concept. Either someone is a danger to the community or they are not. Either someone is a flight risk, or they are not. It should have nothing to do with how much cash someone can pony up to a bail bondsman. In this case, the person is a threat to the community and should stay locked up.
oneMadRssn t1_iuhuhos wrote
Cash bail would make more sense if the bail amount was proportional to one's net worth. The theory or history behind cash bail is that it's a deposit to ensure you show up for your trial. Forcing someone to put up substantial amount of money that they would lose if they don't show up was a good way to ensure people could continue working while awaiting trial but also show up for trial back when 80% of the population were farmers, before the invention of airplanes, and before massive income inequality. Today, it makes no sense because for some people the bail amount is trivial and for others it's insurmountable, and the ease of skipping town makes it all irrelevant.
Workacct1999 t1_iui0qia wrote
That would work, but I still think that the entire bail system is foolish. You either are or you are not a threat or flight risk, finances should play no role in that.
oneMadRssn t1_iui1mer wrote
>You either are or you are not a threat or flight risk, finances should play no role in that.
Eh, life is not so binary. Most people are somewhere in the gray area between flight risk and not.
Again, I agree that cash bail doesn't work anymore today. Also, it's effectively become a privatization bail enforcement, which is sick on it's own.
We have better ways today.
anurodhp t1_iui3o6w wrote
you know what, we can speculate but in this case its pretty easy to see what happens. so lets see what happens. I know breaking and entring is actually on the do not prosecute list in your county. If he is even prosecuted, does bail fund show up? they haven not shied away from helping rapists get out and attack new people while on bail in the past.
Workacct1999 t1_iui43mg wrote
It must be exhausting to be this outraged all the time. Go take a walk or something.
merp-merp_merp-merp t1_iuj3aaa wrote
Captain Anecdote is locked in an eternal struggle with his nemesis, Data Man.
anurodhp t1_iuiafnq wrote
as i said lets see what happens. if he is actually prosecuted and not let out on the street again i will concede that i was in correct, if you find that to be unreasonable or outrageous, you may be the one who needs to take a walk.
MojoFilter111isThree t1_iuhk7op wrote
Innocent until proven guilty by a trial of your peers, that’s justice and it’s in the constitution, if you don’t like it find a different country
tacknosaddle t1_iuhmd71 wrote
Even if he is it will most likely be with an ankle monitor which will either make him realize that he's being tracked and had better stick to the straight and narrow or he will hand irrefutable evidence to prosecutors for revocation of his bail and towards his conviction.
_Hack_The_Planet_ t1_iuigzs0 wrote
"Free them all"
meltyourtv t1_iuijelv wrote
What bail fund? Care to elaborate?
anurodhp t1_iuijr5f wrote
their motto is 'free tham all" and in the past have been involved in getting rapists back on the streets to rape again.
"The Massachusetts Bail Fund said in a statement Wednesday that it bails out people based on financial need “regardless of charge or court history” because it believes pretrial detention is “harmful and racist.”
"The bail fund posted $15,000 for the release of Shawn McClinton, a convicted sex offender facing rape charges. Prosecutors say McClinton raped a woman just weeks after his July release. "
this guys offenses are far milder than rape. My assertion is they will likely work to get him out so he can keep doing what he does until trial. I hope to be proven wrong but nothing about ma bail funds history makes me think i will be.
meltyourtv t1_iuijzco wrote
Well says they only cover up to $1000, so hopefully if this fund is used then his bail will be much much higher than that
[deleted] t1_iuim5dg wrote
[removed]
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments