- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: BR convicted killer out on bond, behind the wheel during deadly police chase Monday.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 2:49 pm to SMD
Posted on 9/22/22 at 2:49 pm to SMD
quote:
Hahahha. All he sees is money. He doesn’t live or interact with anyone he defends outside of court. It’s the typical lib mindset. Don’t care if it doesn’t mess with mine.
I’m sure I’m naive but I would hope even money/power hungry people would be invested in protecting the ones they love. Hell maybe they all have an agreement with the criminals to be left alone?
I am glad Josh is responding though. I knew things were messed up but if you can’t even consider the fact that a repeat offender has murdered someone when setting a bond for a new offense then there’s no hope.
1
Posted on 9/22/22 at 2:50 pm to Joshjrn
I apologize if my tone has been rude in my responses to you. That was not my intent. I am genuinely curious about this.
To a lay-person, this seems legit insane.
Who decides this? How much greater is this presumption, than the level of proof required to go to trial?
To a lay-person, this seems legit insane.
quote:
“presumption of guilt is great”
Who decides this? How much greater is this presumption, than the level of proof required to go to trial?
Posted on 9/22/22 at 2:54 pm to Swoozie
quote:
Swoozie
I’ve been able to check in on this thread off and on, but I genuinely don’t have time at the moment to give that entire post the attention I would want. I’ll reply either later this evening or tomorrow
Posted on 9/22/22 at 2:56 pm to Swoozie
quote:
I am glad Josh is responding though. I knew things were messed up but if you can’t even consider the fact that a repeat offender has murdered someone when setting a bond for a new offense then there’s no hope.
You can absolutely consider it. There are simply *also* other prongs that need to be met if you want to hold an individual without bond.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 2:59 pm to Joshjrn
quote:
But I didn’t intend to be aggressive in my last post. I apologize if that’s how it came off
You're a sassy MFer and mean to people here. But you a meek lil bitch in the real world.
Adorable meek lil bitch.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 3:00 pm to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:
Who decides this? How much greater is this presumption, than the level of proof required to go to trial?
Depends on what you mean by “go to trial”. If you mean it literally, no proof is required for that at all. If you mean to be convicted, which requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt, I would say that’s what this presumption is speaking to. That the evidence presented to the magistrate when setting bond is clearly sufficient to prove guilt at trial.
What I’m trying to explain is that a prior manslaughter conviction alone wouldn’t be sufficient proof to convict in the new case, so it wouldn’t meet the burden for the presumption.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 3:01 pm to mikelbr
quote:
You're a sassy MFer and mean to people here. But you a meek lil bitch in the real world. Adorable meek lil bitch.
You’ve never met me in the real world. You just get your panties in a bunch because I don’t fight with people on Facebook for your entertainment
Posted on 9/22/22 at 3:06 pm to Joshjrn
quote:
You can absolutely consider it. There are simply *also* other prongs that need to be met if you want to hold an individual without bond.
Lol I’m going to have to remember that I’m an average person talking to an attorney and be very specific. If you have committed a serious crime against someone and offend again THAT should be all of the information you need to decide to hold them as a threat to the community. Other conditions having to be met (that according to what you’re saying is nearly impossible) is legit insane as another poster said.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 3:09 pm to Swoozie
quote:
Lol I’m going to have to remember that I’m an average person talking to an attorney and be very specific. If you have committed a serious crime against someone and offend again THAT should be all of the information you need to decide to hold them as a threat to the community. Other conditions having to be met (that according to what you’re saying is nearly impossible) is legit insane as another poster said.
And to nitpick again, that arguably would be sufficient evidence to meet the dangerousness prong. But yeah, you also have to meet the presumption of guilt prong in the instant case, and that’s a bitch
Ultimately, this entire debate has at its core that the presumption of innocence is at the core of the American criminal legal system. That’s why the right to pretrial bail is enshrined in both the US and Louisiana constitutions. And overcoming constitutional presumptions are, and should be, steep uphill battles.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 3:12 pm to Joshjrn
How often are bond decisions overturned, whether due to no bond, too high bond or too low bond.
I see judges giving ridiculously low bonds for hardened, repeat criminals. How often are these challenged?
Or does this just go one way?
I see judges giving ridiculously low bonds for hardened, repeat criminals. How often are these challenged?
Or does this just go one way?
Posted on 9/22/22 at 3:14 pm to Joshjrn
quote:
Ultimately, this entire debate has at its core that the presumption of innocence is at the core of the American criminal legal system. That’s why the right to pretrial bail is enshrined in both the US and Louisiana constitutions. And overcoming constitutional presumptions are, and should be, steep uphill battles.
It should be for law abiding citizens. It shouldn’t be for killers back in custody. One look at his social media tells you he would never reform so IMO our laws need to reform. I don’t see how we can continue on like this and remain a civilized society. I would argue BR and NOLA are teetering on the verge of being uncivilized if not already there. I don’t want to say it can’t get worse because it absolutely can and will.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 3:15 pm to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:
How often are bond decisions overturned, whether due to no bond, too high bond or too low bond. I see judges giving ridiculously low bonds for hardened, repeat criminals. How often are these challenged? Or does this just go one way?
Judges are given a staggering amount of deference in the bond amounts they set, both low and high. Far less deference when holding someone without bond. Either way, those decisions can only be “overturned” by the appellate courts.
What happens vastly more commonly is that a bond is set by the judge that’s on duty that week, but the case ultimately gets allotted to a different section of court. That judge now has sole discretion over the bond, regardless of what the initial judge set, and can modify it as they see fit. Modifications for reductions are more common, as more information is provided to the Court, but increasing bond, or later holding someone without bond, isn’t exactly what I would call uncommon, either.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 3:18 pm to Joshjrn
quote:
Ultimately, this entire debate has at its core that the presumption of innocence is at the core of the American criminal legal system. That’s why the right to pretrial bail is enshrined in both the US and Louisiana constitutions. And overcoming constitutional presumptions are, and should be, steep uphill battles.
I think our current DOJ skipped criminal procedure in law school
Posted on 9/22/22 at 3:18 pm to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:
I see judges giving ridiculously low bonds for hardened, repeat criminals. How often are these challenged? Or does this just go one way?
This is exactly what I hope Josh and anyone else in the know will answer. Is there anyone in BR fighting to protect the innocent people or are they all either on the defensive side or too lazy to put up an argument? Or even worse receiving some benefit for not putting up an argument?
Posted on 9/22/22 at 3:26 pm to Swoozie
quote:
This is exactly what I hope Josh and anyone else in the know will answer. Is there anyone in BR fighting to protect the innocent people or are they all either on the defensive side or too lazy to put up an argument? Or even worse receiving some benefit for not putting up an argument?
It would be on the State to present evidence and argue for a higher bond/being held without bond, and Hillar has been fairly vocal in the media about it.
But ultimately, I think your frustration is likely grounded in that, while a bond can be “unconstitutionally high”, it can’t really be “illegally low”, outside of some specific instances, like allowing a sign out or RoR for an offense that is statutorily excluded. So if a judge sets a bond “too low”, the recourse is going to be fairly limited by the very design of the system that is intentionally created to prefer people to be out until actually convicted.
This post was edited on 9/22/22 at 3:26 pm
Posted on 9/22/22 at 3:47 pm to jbgleason
Where did this guy come up with $300k bail money?
Does not appear to be a property owner.
Even the $30k 10% cash to a bail bondsman seems like a stretch.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 3:49 pm to Tigerbythetale
I think Josh explained that somewhere in this thread but his Instagram shows him with wads of cash that I’m sure he made from his very legitimate 9-5 job and not from selling drugs, armed robbery, etc.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 3:51 pm to Tigerbythetale
Bond shouldn't been $1 million at least. Make him come up with 6 figures.
Page 7 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News