DEMTHUG WHO TRIED TO MURDER GOP NY GOV CANDIDATE, RELEASED WITH NO BAIL

volsrock said:
so he was not a good person in 1976:laugh:
Click to expand...

It makes one wonder if the death penalty, and life imprisonment without parole, really make sense. If he can become a better person, maybe others can too...

But is he a better person? Chapman shakes people down for money. Not morally great.
 
Walt said:
I am all for giving people a second chance, even murderers like Chapman, but there has got to be an outer limit. He is demanding that he get to decide who is allowed to stay out of jail, and who has to go back. Often he has used that power to demand more money.
Picture that you are arrested for suspicion that you committed a crime. Maybe you did, or maybe you didn't, but it does not matter. You pay $10k out of your saving to a bail bondsman controlled by Chapman, mentioning off handed that you have an additional $5k still in savings. There is a real chance that a week or two later Chapman will breakdown your door, announcing he has a "bad feeling" about you, and you now need to hand him the additional $5k. If you complain about it, that just confirms his "bad feeling", and you have to go back to jail... No refunds.
Click to expand...
WTF? judges set bail, not bondsman. I dont even know i that is legal to mark up legal fees by a bondman
. I've known a few had to use bondsman- never heard of that.
Bondman aren't "criminals" or outlaws or skake down artists, and they wont allow anything like that from bounty hunters. Bounty hunters will try to get the bail jumper to jail, not screw with him

These guys get looked over by courts if defendants complain, a judge has the power to sanction the bondman

Bail has been around since the Magna Carta or before. There are bail hearings,and Bail Reviews.
You get to use your habeus corpus rights

Cashless bail for all but low level crime is not a way to guarantee a defendant shows up,
or act as a deterrent for committing other crimes while out on bail
 
volsrock said:
assaulting a member of Congress with a dangerous weapon

so thats not a serious crime.:laugh:


Gee thats good...i thought assaulting a cop with a flagpole was serious...guess not
Click to expand...

He didn't get close to a member of Congress. He was stopped prior to attacking any member of Congress. If we follow your logic then everyone that entered the US Capitol on Jan 6th should be charged with assault of a member of Congress.
 
Walt said:
Give me a list of who the charges are for. Everyone got an arraignment rather quickly, and one can only be arraigned when there are charges.
Click to expand...

So you are saying every one of those charged have been given a trial?
 
Lionfish said:
So you are saying every one of those charged have been given a trial?
Click to expand...

Not even remotely what I said. I said that all the rioters held in jail before their trial, have had an arraignment and have charges. They had an opportunity to argue that they deserved bail, and they deserved to be released on their own reconnaissance. Most got out of bail of some sort, because they were able to convince a judge. A few have not.

Many times the problem is they skipped bail in the past. It turns out that if you have a collection of criminals willing to attack our democratic institutions, they tend to be criminals.
 
volsrock said:
member of congress that was attacked would matter as well


Glad u show your true colors


Attacking members of congress that u dont agree with is A-OK ....you should be on a watch list
Click to expand...

I do still wear watches today in the cell phone era.
No need to put me on a list, however. I won't likely be buying any new ones at my age.
 
Walt said:
Give me a list of who the charges are for. Everyone got an arraignment rather quickly, and one can only be arraigned when there are charges.
Click to expand...

MORE LIES. NO ARRAIGNMENT AT THE STATE LEVEL ,WHICH IS/WAS SCHEDULED FOR WEDNESDAY...the 27th.

DO YOU EVER NOT LIE?


HE HAS NOT BEEN BEFORE A FEDERAL JUDGE YET ,EITHER.


YOU'RE A LAWYER??? IF THAT'S TRUE , YOU HAVE A LOT OF CLIENTS IN ORANGE ...

 
Grokmaster said:
MORE LIES. NO ARRAIGNMENT AT THE STATE LEVEL ,WHICH IS/WAS SCHEDULED FOR WEDNESDAY...the 27th.
Click to expand...

There is no state level for the January 6th Rioters. It is almost entirely federal crimes, and even the crimes that would have been considered state crimes are federal in DC. It is very rare that people are held for a long time without charges or arraignments.

If you have changed the subject back to Jakubonis, then he was arraigned last Friday, and released without cash bail. That is not happening almost a week later as you claim. Even though the local prosecutor decided to go for low charges, there was no way that he could get out without an arraignment.

Friday, Jakubonis was arraigned on a separate state charge and released without bail.
Click to expand...
https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/new...ter-attempted-assault-congressman-lee-zeldin/

Grokmaster said:
HE HAS NOT BEEN BEFORE A FEDERAL JUDGE YET ,EITHER.
Click to expand...

Once again, Lionfish and I were discussing the January 6th Rioters, not Jakubonis, but what I said applies to Jakubonis. He is not going to be held for months without being arraigned. Charges will be filed, and an arraignment will happen within a few days. He will have a chance to argue for release until trial, and what the conditions would be if released. He will know what he is being charged with.

The January 6th Rioters have all been given the same rights. I suppose there might be a January 6th Rioter arrested in the last day or two that has not been arraigned yet, but none have been held for months without an arraignment.

Grokmaster said:
YOU'RE A LAWYER???
Click to expand...

I have never claimed to be a lawyer, but you are certainly not a lawyer either. I have posted the most accurate information I have at the moment.

On that note, it now appears that Jakubonis was released on Friday, and arrested on Saturday. This was probably not a release to immediate arrest situation that I thought it was. I am back to questioning why a Republican judge and prosecutor released and undercharged Jakubonis.
 
Walt said:
Not even remotely what I said. I said that all the rioters held in jail before their trial, have had an arraignment and have charges. They had an opportunity to argue that they deserved bail, and they deserved to be released on their own reconnaissance. Most got out of bail of some sort, because they were able to convince a judge. A few have not.

Many times the problem is they skipped bail in the past. It turns out that if you have a collection of criminals willing to attack our democratic institutions, they tend to be criminals.
Click to expand...

So you are saying they should be held wihout bail or have an extraordinary high bail imposed.
 
Walt said:
Why should being free depend on paying money to a third party?
Click to expand...

Why should there be no penalties for committing a felony such as attempted murder? You do understand if and when these criminals fail to show up for trial we working taxpayers foot the bill with the sheriff's department to bring them back to jail thatt is, if they haven't comitted another crime while out on the street.
You lefties are exactly what is wrong with America.
 
Lionfish said:
Why should there be no penalties for committing a felony such as attempted murder?
Click to expand...

The penalty comes after the conviction. You are demanding a penalty for pretty much all accusations, before the conviction. When an accused is found not guilty, they do not get the bail bondsman fee back. It is a penalty completely disconnected from guilt or innocence.

Lionfish said:
You do understand if and when these criminals fail to show up for trial we working taxpayers foot the bill with the sheriff's department to bring them back to jail thatt is, if they haven't comitted another crime while out on the street.
Click to expand...

I doubt you pay much in taxes, but yes, we taxpayers pay for law enforcement to arrest criminal. That is life.
 
Walt said:
The penalty comes after the conviction. You are demanding a penalty for pretty much all accusations, before the conviction. When an accused is found not guilty, they do not get the bail bondsman fee back. It is a penalty completely disconnected from guilt or innocence.



I doubt you pay much in taxes, but yes, we taxpayers pay for law enforcement to arrest criminal. That is life.
Click to expand...

THE BAIL IS TO ASSURE HIS/HER APPEARANCE IN COURT, FOR THE UMPTEENTH TIME.
 
Grokmaster said:
THE BAIL IS TO ASSURE HIS/HER APPEARANCE IN COURT, FOR THE UMPTEENTH TIME.
Click to expand...

Lets say you are arrested. Then you are forced to pay a criminal to get out of jail. That is money you will never get back. Does that money pay any part in whether you go to court or not?
 
Walt said:
Lets say you are arrested. Then you are forced to pay a criminal to get out of jail. That is money you will never get back. Does that money pay any part in whether you go to court or not?
Click to expand...

Because bail bonsdman (and women) are all criminals, right?

You're a fucking moron, and a lyingass moron at that.

THEY PROVIDE LOANS; you are free to seek opn elsewhere.


If you commit a serious crime ,you may well have to provide surety, such as YOUR FAMILY'S HOME ,to make bail.


If that doesn't assure yout appearance, then you are a LOW LIFE BIDEN VOTER.


Where is your outrage over all the JAN 6 ACCUSED BWEINT HELD WITHOUT BAIL, IN SOME CASES FOR OVER A YEAR?



MEANWHILE ,DEMTHUGS ATTEMPTING TO MURDER GOP CANDIDATES, ARE RELEASED BY DEMTHUGS WITH ZERO BAIL.



IF YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE BAIL SYSTEM, YOU ARE A FUCKING IMBECILE, AND A PISS POOR "LAWYER".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top