MAGA Terrorist Attacks Nancy Pelosi's Husband With A Hammer

Originally posted by: Roger S

Why shouldn't someone who is accused of a crime be "turned loose"? They haven't been convicted of anything yet, so how do you justify preemptively punishing them?

 

Keep in mind that bail isn't supposed to be punitive; it's meant to assure that the accused shows up for trial.

 

I vote according to whether a candidate supports fundamental human rights--for EVERYBODY. So anyone pontificating that people accused of crimes should be treated as if they were automatically guilty wouldn't get my vote.

These are your words Kevin


Don't be obtuse. Judges have two metrics to use when granting or not granting bail: flight risk and danger to others. Joe Hammer was judged to be both.

 

Someone who is deemed to be neither a flight risk nor a public danger should not and cannot be charged excessive bail.

 

Understand? I doubt it.

Originally posted by: PJ Stroh

The attacker's  social media feed looks remarkably similar to the one David Miller shares here regularly.    Just sayin.


And what did the social media feed for James Hodgkinson and Nicholas Roske look like?  Remarkably similar to the liberal talking points espoused here.  Just sayin.

 

Come on.  A psychotic, nudist activist, Candadian illegal alien in his underwear attacking someone with a hammer?   Just another day on the Lawless Streets of San Francisco.  Nothing to see here.

Don't be obtuse. Judges have two metrics to use when granting or not granting bail: flight risk and danger to others.

 

Thats not what you said last week

 

Why shouldn't someone who is accused of a crime be "turned loose"? They haven't been convicted of anything yet, so how do you justify preemptively punishing them?

 

Keep in mind that bail isn't supposed to be punitive; it's meant to assure that the accused shows up for trial.

 

No, Tom, the purpose of bail isn't to "protect society from criminals" If high bail is imposed, it's because the court thinks the defendant is a flight risk, NOT because the court has a crystal ball.

 

The purpose of bail is to ensure court appearances without the trouble and expense of incarceration of the accused

Originally posted by: tom

Don't be obtuse. Judges have two metrics to use when granting or not granting bail: flight risk and danger to others.

 

Thats not what you said last week

 

Why shouldn't someone who is accused of a crime be "turned loose"? They haven't been convicted of anything yet, so how do you justify preemptively punishing them?

 

Keep in mind that bail isn't supposed to be punitive; it's meant to assure that the accused shows up for trial.

 

No, Tom, the purpose of bail isn't to "protect society from criminals" If high bail is imposed, it's because the court thinks the defendant is a flight risk, NOT because the court has a crystal ball.

 

The purpose of bail is to ensure court appearances without the trouble and expense of incarceration of the accused


Exactly, Kevin is a hypocrite 


Originally posted by: Roger S

Exactly, Kevin is a hypocrite 


According to Roger, the mentally stunted chimp.

First the judge decides whether to grant bail at all. That's when the issues of danger to the public and flight risk come into play. Then, if bail isn't denied, the issue of what amount would not be excessive, while still serving as sufficient incentive for the defendant to appear in court, comes into play.

 

This is easy to understand, but not for Tom the Fool and Roger the Chimp.

Edited on Oct 29, 2022 6:29pm

Another victim of the Rabbit Hole, whose life forever be will be changed for the worse, along side with the 800  or so Jan. 6th defendants, who are saying they wished they had never listened to Trump's lies.

Another victim of the Rabbit Hole, whose life forever be will be changed for the worse, along side with the 800  or so Jan. 6th defendants, who are saying they wished they had never listened to Trump's lies.

Originally posted by: cjen

Another victim of the Rabbit Hole, whose life forever be will be changed for the worse, along side with the 800  or so Jan. 6th defendants, who are saying they wished they had never listened to Trump's lies.


They regret it not because it was stupid and wrong; they regret it because it turned out to have consequences. Who knew?

Originally posted by: Kevin Lewis

According to Roger, the mentally stunted chimp.


No, according to your own words.

Already a LVA subscriber?
To continue reading, choose an option below:
Diamond Membership
$3 per month
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Limited Member Rewards Online
Join Now
or
Platinum Membership
$50 per year
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Exclusive Member Rewards Book
Join Now