Double standard?

by getting vaguely insulting is both childish and a concession that your reasoning stands on feet of clay. I'm rushing to defend no point of view... I'm just questioning how this situation can be viewed as so unreasonable given the charges.

I personally find it offensive that the bail was set so low for the alleged killers mentioned but I don't see much outrage expressed here over the low value placed on a young black mans life as reflected by his alleged killers bail amount... what I see is complaining about how white privileged Duke students are being abused. You should notice that I have not said they are guilty. All I have done is ask if they are being treated differently from anyone else of the same social stature under the same indictment. The lack of DNA evidence is disconcerting yet the grand jury felt there was a reasonable suspicion to bring charges. Why?

I've read the 2 articles sighted... they mention nothing about what I am asking.

... hears only one side and there are no rules. Only a 2/3rds majority must find on a rather low threshold of likelihood that they committed the crime.

I do think the disparity on the bail amounts is worthy of note.

O.K., then, make it I was crossing the street and he was driving after drinking and hit me. To make that senario better match in degree, let's say I was injured, but not killed, as in the Duke case she was not killed. So I take it that you would hold that setting Gates' bail at something like a billion dollars would not be excessive. That post cracked me up.I can imagine a senario where Gates punched me in the mouth or hit me while driving, but not raped me. The point of discussion is amount of bail, and if the net worth of the person should be the major factor in setting the amount.

I imagine that is why it is so important for judges to have autonomy when it comes to judicial decisions such as setting bail or sentencing.

Through this whole thread I've seen a lot of "what ifs" and "it's not fairs" but the truth is that no article about this matter that I've read so far gives any information about what bail amounts should be in this type of case.

The evidence appears somewhat questionable without DNA evidence. Still, the prosecutor somehow came up with 3 specific names. A lot of questions have been raised about whether the bail amount is a burden on the suspects families. No one has demonstrated that the families can't afford it though.

I would rather discuss the merits of the evidence... not the "fairness" of the bail amount. I would rather know if the prosecutor is up for reelection... not if the prosecutor is liberal or conservative. I would rather know if the case is real before I cry foul about how the suspects have been treated.

I agree it seems unfair that a murder suspect gets a lesser bail than a rape suspect but then again I think it unfair that a kid selling LSD at a Grateful Dead show gets a mandatory sentence that is longer than many street murderers get.

Show me the bail amount is unreasonable as compared to similar crimes. Show me it's an unreasonable burden on the families. Show me the kids are being unfairly treated. I'm not saying they aren't but I got to see more than what I've seen so far to feel these kids are being railroaded.

I have seen a lot of documentation that would indicate that the Duke lacrosse team was a bunch of rowdy guys that liked to push the limits. It would be a shame if they are being prosecuted mainly because of this reputation. It also should be a warning to other student sports teams and especially the coaching staff. Handsome is as handsome does... in other words, how you act may come back and bite you in the butt - fair or not!

... and what they "manage to afford" are two different things. Bail should be set mostly based on threat to society and risk of fleeing, not so much on a person's worth -- or, in this case, that of the parents of young adults. IF the kids fled the country there are ways to bring them back and/or prosecute whoever helped them financially punishible with jail time as well. Without a passport it would be difficult to flee at all.

And to buy false paperwork... It all enters into the judge's mental equation to set bail.

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

-- think Andrew Luster (the name finally came to me from another post in this thread).

There's no reason to presume these kids' parents would even assist in such, let alone have the resources to sustain them abroad without detection. I doubt they have significant resources of their own.

especially those convinced their little darlings can do no wrong. Unfortunately, parents of that sort are more likely to end up with kids who get in serious trouble, as they always get bailed out of the little scrapes and so never learn to take responsibility for their actions.

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

... it's discriminatory and extortion to some extent. IF either of these kids were to flee, explain to me how that would be accomplished. I can't remember the famous case from NYC, but he was living abroad for some time. Eventually the noose tightened and he's doing jail time. AIR he fled after verdict before sentencing, but could be wrong on that. I think higher bails are justified in those circumstances. I think there should be a higher threshold to show an ability/desire to flee. Otherwise seems we have some racial/class profiling going on here, dontcha think?

skip bail and start new lives?

did they ever get the last kid in custody? Last time I watched the news was the day they had 2 kids in custody and the third was MIA.

You brought up many things, but allow me to bring up a couple of points. As I understand from news reports the prosecutor is not up for reelection, he's up for election the first time as that position was formerly an appointed position, but has become an elected one.
How did the prosecutor come up with those 3 specific names? The woman identified them from a photo lineup. Unfortunately for the validity of that selection, the lineup contained only photos of the team members. This is a "loaded" lineup, as any picture she chooses will will be guaranteed to be a member of that team. Normally, the selection includes photos (or actual viewing) of people who have nothing to do with the situation. This "load" may have already trashed the entire ID, as it looks like one of the people selected may be able to prove that he was not there at the time of the incident.

the loaded line up is inexcusable. I have seen some mention about the digital camera pics showing a time line... only thing that bothers me is if some one had the know how to get into the camera and change the exif information. I would be interested in knowing if the police got ahold of the camera right away or whether it was a later discovery.

Some interesting things to consider J... I need to get some sleep so goodnight. Don't let Bill Gates haunt your dreams!

grim

Grim, while you're drifting off and thinking about this case, think about the search of their dorm rooms. Why their dorm rooms specifically? Because of the lineup. If it was based upon that loaded lineup, any evidence seized might be as they like to say on TV cop shows, Fruits of the Poisonous Tree.

... is if the boys ARE guilty but get off on some technicality because of the DA's conduct in the case.

Evie

... and didn't ''Dog the Bounty Hunter'' get that Max Factor guy? (Can't recall the name, but serial rapist that fled to Mexico). In the case of the former, they waited until they had enough goods to make the case. In the latter, he fled, but just went to show that even with his resources, he got caught. C'mon. With 24 hour tragedy TV, if the boys were eventually charged and they fled, they're not of the kind of means of the MF dude. Plaster a few pictures up and they would be caught post haste.

It seems to me that if this was a reversal -- rich white girl alleging a gang rape by the black members of a basketball team -- and the DA made arrests prematurely (can we agree on that much irregardless of the outcome here?), there would be louder cries about a rush to judgment, etc. There's definitely a double standard in play here.

Don't get me wrong, if they did it they should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. I think if the DA had waited until all the ducks were in a row and not tried to play this out in the media, there would be a better chance of that happening if the accusation is true.

The thory is that the more serious the crime (and hence presumably the likely sentence if convicted), the more likely a guilty person would be to flee. The judge's estimation of the strength of the prosecution's case also plays an "unofficial" rule -- the bail would doubtless have been even higher had they been caught in flagrante delicto.

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

But Dave, isn't bail set before any trial? Where would the judge have seen this evidence? Are you saying that at an arraignment evidence of guilt is presented to and examined by the judge? I'm not talking about flight risk, I'm talking about evidence of the crime itself.

There was a case similar to this (for a millionaire with much lower net worth than Gates) here a while back:
Appeals court lowers $3 billion bail for millionaire Robert Durst.

>> At $3 billion, Robert Durst's bail was the highest ever set in Texas. Now it's just a memory.

On Tuesday, a Texas appeals court lowered the bail to $450,000, or $150,000 for each of three felony counts he faces in connection with the death of his elderly Galveston neighbor in September 2001. <<

Interestingly, Durst tried to force the judge to recuse herself, saying the high bail showed bias, but that didn't happen.

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

Sheez come back to reality Dave. These kids are being portrayed as privileged and rich, when we don't even know the full story. If their parents have owned those homes long enough to have raised them in them, much of their wealth is the dramatic appreciation of real estate in the NorthEast (my home is now approaching triple its value when purchased, and its not near NYC ... the burbs -- even Yonkers and seedier sections of Mt. Vernon -- have exploded in value!). One article put the median income in the NJ kid's neighborhood at 144K. Considering how much one pays in property taxes alone to live there, that's really not that much. Matter of fact, there's a lot of people living in those neighborhoods that have never lived ''beyond their means'' but are forced to sell and move because of sky-rocketing property taxes.

I think there should have to be some greater indication of flight risk to set bails this high. And it's basically extortion of the parents, because these KIDS don't have that kind of money!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12415388/

Bond fee is 15%. I bet you might consider $60K a lot o f money Dave!

Where does it say that bonds are based on net worth? Bail is what gets you out of jail and bonds are to ensure that you show back up to court

What is considered by the Court in fixing the amount of the bail?

The amount of the bail is first and foremost within the scope and discretion of the judge or magistrate, with only two general limitations: First: The purpose of bail is not to penalize or punish the defendant, but only to secure the appearance of the accused, and it should be set with that in mind. Second: Excessive bail, not warranted by the circumstances or the evidence at hand. Is not only improper but a violation of constitutional rights. In fixing the amount of the bail, the court takes into consideration the seriousness of the charge, the defendant's previous criminal record, and the probability of the defendant appearing at the trial or hearing.

Additionally, if public safety is an issue, the court may make an inquiry where it may consider allegations of injury to the victim, danger to the public and/or to the defendant him/her self, threats to the victim or a witness, the use of a deadly weapon, and the defendant's use or possession of controlled substances. A judge or magistrate setting bail in other than a scheduled or usual amount must state on the record the reasons and address the issue of threats made against a victim or a witness. The court must also consider evidence offered by the detained person regarding ties to the community and ability to post bond. The bail amount set by the court must be within the minimum range amount of bail that would reasonably assure the defendant's appearance. NOT the Maximum!

http://www.bailyes.com/bailbonds101.htm#How%20Judges%20Decide%20Bail

http://www.bailyes.com/faq.htm

Judges typically make the decision based on a few major factors listed below. No one particular factor will decide the issue.

Ties to the Community (good)

If an accused has significant ties to the community he is likely to get a ROR bail set for misdemeanor and less serious crimes. For felony crimes he is likely to have a smaller amount of bail set than does who have not so good ties. Ties to the community come in many forms but judges typically respond well to the following:

The Severity of the crime

screaming about "net worth"....

you want i should c&p the rest?



.

Court Rules

Rule 67 - Criminal Cases

Rule 67.1.3 - Implementation of Supreme Court Rule 33 Relating to Bail and Sureties


Rule 67.1.3 ? Implementation of Supreme Court Rule 33 Relating to Bail and Sureties

1. The policy announced by this Rule is to implement applicable statutes and Supreme Court Rule 33. As used herein surety shall include any individual, company or corporation licensed as a general bail bond agent by the State of Missouri through the Department of Insurance.

2. Whenever a person is admitted to bail for his/her appearance upon a citation, complaint, information or indictment charging him/her with the commission of a felony, misdemeanor, infraction or ordinance violation, the conditions of the bond shall conform in every respect to Supreme Court Rule 33.01(c). The forms used for such bonds shall be either Form No. 26 or Form No. 27 of the Criminal Procedure Forms, Missouri Rules of Court, and as such, their terms, conditions and obligations assumed thereby shall be continuing in nature from the municipal judges and associate judges to the circuit judges.

3. No person shall be accepted as an individual surety upon any bail bond unless such person possesses all those qualifications required by Supreme Court Rules and applicable statutes. Individuals who desire to act as a surety without compensation should file in the case file of the defendant for whom they wish to make a bail bond two affidavits: one, demonstrating they are qualified under Supreme Court Rule 33.17, and a second in accordance with Missouri Criminal Procedure Form No. 23, GENERAL AFFIDAVIT OF QUALIFICATIONS OF BONDSMEN.


4. Upon first making application, each individual surety, surety company or surety corporation who shall charge and receive compensation for the signing of a bond for a defendant charged with the commission of a felony, misdemeanor, infraction or ordinance violation shall present the items set out below. These items shall be submitted to the Office of the Court Administrator before the first time any such individual, company or corporation will be allowed to receive compensation for the signing of a bond. The items to be submitted are:
A. An affidavit of justification showing that the surety possesses the qualifications specified in Supreme Court Rules 33.17 and 33.20 in the manner provided by Supreme Court Rule 33.18;
B. A power of attorney listing all individuals acting as attorneys-in-fact for the surety;
C. A true copy of the surety?s licensing and the licenses of all attorneys-in-fact from the State of Missouri, Division of Insurance;
D. A list of all surety bail bonds in the State of Missouri or in any federal court written by the surety upon which the surety?s obligation remains undischarged. The list shall detail the amount of each bond, the name of the principal or defendant, the offense charged, the court in which the bond is pending and the name of the attorney-in-fact writing the bond on surety?s behalf, if any. The list shall provide a total amount of the bonds listed at the end and, if more than one page, shall provide a subtotal of the amount of bonds listed on each page;
E. An affidavit from each individual acting as an attorney-in-fact for the surety :

i. Showing that the individual possesses those qualifications required by
Supreme Court Rule 33.17;

ii. Acknowledging the accuracy of the surety?s list of bail bonds (as detailed

above in subparagraph D.) written by the individual as attorney-in-fact,

and

iii. Stating that there are no outstanding forfeitures or unsatisfied judgments on any bail bond for which he/she acted as surety or as attorney-in-fact for the current or any other surety.

F. Any surety seeking to qualify under Supreme Court Rule 33.20 shall provide:

i. A certificate from the State of Missouri, Department of Insurance,

acknowledging that the corporation, association or company formed for the purpose of making surety insurance is qualified to act as surety on any bail bond;

ii. A current financial statement from the insurer;

iii. A current power of attorney to the surety and to each of the surety?s

proposed attorneys-in-fact for the purpose of acting on behalf of the insurer in issuing bail bonds.

G. Any surety seeking to qualify under Supreme Court Rule 33.18 must provide real estate situated in the State of Missouri or personal property consisting of cash or assets which are the equivalent of cash such as checking or savings accounts or certificates of deposit or other timed deposits with a federally or Missouri insured financial institution or bonds or stocks nationally and publicly traded. To establish net worth, the surety shall provide:

i. For real estate:
(a) An accurate legal description of the real estate together with a description of the improvements located thereon, and the location of the property by street address if it is located in a city or town;

(b) A current title report at the time the realty is added to the monthly affidavit and an updated report through June 15th and through December 15th at the time of filing the submission to qualify in each July and January, respectively, for so long as the realty is used;

(c) The latest assessed value and fair market value determined by the County Tax Appraiser in the county where the realty is situated;

ii. For cash or assets which are the equivalent of cash:

(a) an accurate description of the asset which shall include the number of any account or certificate, the name and address of any financial or brokerage institution issuing or holding the asset;

(b) monthly verification of the value of the asset and its title which may be in the form of a monthly statement from the financial or brokerage institution.


5. Once any person, company or corporation and its attorneys-in-fact have been approved by the Court in the manner and for the purposes designated herein that person, company or corporation shall be eligible to serve as surety and attorney-in-fact for the surety in any criminal or ordinance violation pending before any municipal judge, associate judge or circuit judge of this circuit.

6, After initial approval, in order to be placed on the Court?s Approved list for all months except January (see paragraph 7, below, for the qualification requirements for January), each individual company and corporation wishing to continue to write bonds in the Sixteenth Judicial Circuit shall submit to the Office of the Court Administrator, between four business days before and no later than the first business day (courthouse open) of each calendar month only the following:
A. An affidavit attesting that the surety possesses the qualifications specified in Supreme Court Rules 33.17 and 33.20 in the manner provided by Supreme Court Rule 33.18;
B. The power of attorney listing all individuals acting as attorneys-in-fact for the surety;
C. A list of all surety bail bonds in the State of Missouri or in any federal court written by the surety upon which the surety?s obligation remains undischarged. The list shall detail the amount of each bond, the name of the principal or defendant, the offense charged, the court in which the bond is pending and the name of the attorney-in-fact writing the bond on surety?s behalf, if any. The list shall provide a total amount of the bonds listed at the end and, if more than one page, shall provide a subtotal of the amount of bonds listed on each page; and
D. An affidavit like those submitted pursuant to 4E above but only for those attorneys-in-fact for whom no affidavit has been submitted by that surety.
E. An affidavit reciting any other material changes in the information submitted in the yearly packet, e.g., changes in the property or other assets used to collateralize outstanding bonds.

7. In order to be placed on the Qualified List for the first calendar month of each year (i.e., January), the applicant must submit updated documents containing all of the requirements stated in paragraph 4, above.

8. A listing of all aprroved sureties and their attorneys-in-fact shall be disseminated by the Court Administrator or hs/her designee on the Court?s web site and to all divisions of the circuit and to all law enforcement agencies within the circuit.

9.The Court may make such additional investigation concerning all submissions of the applicant surety as is deemed necessary. If it is found that there has been a material misrepresentation in the items submitted by the surety and/or the surety?s attorneys-in-fact, the Court may disqualify the surety and/or its attorneys-in-fact from writing bonds in any court in the Circuit for a period not to exceed one year from the date of submission. In addition, that applicant, or anyone making misrepresentations on his/her behalf will be subject to criminal prosecution for fraud and the obstruction of justice.

10. Nothing contained in this rule shall abridge the right of any person to give bail and execute a bond for his or her own appearance upon complying with the provisions of Supreme Court Rules and applicable statutes. Nor shall it be construed as abridging or otherwise limiting the power of any Judge having jurisdiction over any criminal case to release any person accused on his or her own recognizance or upon any other proper condition of release.


11. An unsatisfied judgment against a surety, entered upon any bail bond in any court of this state or of the United States, shall disqualify such surety for bonds in any cases wherein the defendant is charged with the commission of a crime. Such disqualification shall continue for so long as judgment remains unsatisfied and shall extend to any bail bond agent posting the bond on behalf of the surety and to any other surety with whom that individual is or becomes associated through agency, employment, as an officer or director or stockholder.

12. BOND FORFEITURES-JUDGMENT ON BOND FORFEITURES
A. If there is a breach of a condition of bond, the court in which the case is pending may declare a forfeiture of the bond. The court shall notify the surety and the attorney-in-fact who wrote the bond, if known, of the forfeiture.

B. When a forfeiture on a secured bail bond has been set aside, the Court in which the bond was posted shall ascertain the costs and expenses incurred in returning the defendant to the jurisdiction of the Court and shall deduct said amounts from any funds paid to the Court by the surety for the forfeiture before making a bond deposit refund to the surety. If no payment has been made by the surety, the Court shall forward a bill of expenses to the surety, and the surety shall pay said funds to the Court within seven (7) working days or the surety and the surety?s attorneys-in-fact shall be disqualified from writing bonds in any municipal, associate or circuit division of the Sixteenth Circuit until the same is paid.

C. When a forfeiture has not been set aside, the court shall on motion enter a judgment of default and execution may issue thereon. By entering into a bond the obligors submit to the jurisdiction of the court and irrevocably appoint the clerk of the court as their agent upon whom any papers affecting their liability may be served. Their liability may be enforced on motion without the necessity of an independent action. The motion and notice of such hearing as the court prescribes may be served on the clerk of the court, who shall forthwith mail a copy to each of the obligors.

D. Any failure to pay a judgment entered upon any bail bond in any court of this circuit shall be reported by the clerk of the court in which said judgment was entered:

i. To the Court Administrator of the Circuit Court for Jackson County, or his/her designee. The report shall include the court case number, the style of the case, the name of the surety, the name of the attorney-in-fact posting the bail bond, if known, the amount of judgment, and the date on which the surety was notified of the bond judgment. This report shall be made to the Court Administrator or his/her designee on the 30th day of each month and may be additionally reported as judgments are entered. If the surety refuses to pay said judgment, the Court Administrator, or his designee, shall notify the judge of Criminal Division ?A? who shall remove such surety and the surety?s attorneys-in-fact from the list of qualified sureties for the duration of the failure to pay; and

ii. To the State of Missouri, Department of Insurance, and the Office of the State Court Administrator in whatever form and with whatever accompanying documents as may be required by these offices.

E. Payment by the surety of any previously reported unpaid judgment on a bail bond forfeiture shall be reported by the division of the Court in which judgment was entered to the Court Administrator, or his/her designee, to the State of Missouri, Department of Insurance, and to the Office of the State Court Administrator within three (3) working days of said payment.


only when you can site this from memory can you say "I am well aware of how bail and bond works,"


j/k....