I thought that in our legal system you are innocent until PROVEN guilty. When suspects get arraigned sometimes the judge does not set bail and forces the suspect to stay in prison. That is horrible because nothing is proven yet. I think that if that happens to somebody and they are proven innocent, they should get money or something from the courts for forcing them to stay in jail! The easiest way is to just set a bail in every case and not show favoritism to some suspects and treat others poorly.
2007-08-12 07:35:57 · 4 answers · asked by LSU 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
The simple answer is the 8th Amendment -- which allows people to be held pending trial as long as the bail is not "excessive".
The practical answer is that the bail hearing is based on how likely the subject is to flee the jurisdiction before trial -- if there was a way to guarantee that the subject does not flee, then remand would be in appropriate -- that's the whole point of bail, to give someone a financial incentive not to flee.
And you are incorrect that "nothing is proven yet" at a bail hearing -- what is proven is the likelihood that the defendant will flee -- absent proof of that likelihood of flight, the court cannot set bail or remand.
2007-08-12 07:43:10 · answer #1 · answered by coragryph 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Generally when there is insufficient evidence to release them on their own Recognance - or they are a flight risk. Judges DON'T take these decisions lightly, and often they are aware of other circumstances/crimes pending or spent that the general public aren't, or that aren't admissible.
2007-08-12 07:40:56 · answer #2 · answered by Sal*UK 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It has to do with the heinousness of the crime and the likeliness they will try and flee from prosecution.
2007-08-12 08:54:05 · answer #3 · answered by California Street Cop 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Don't know, the court system is wrong for doing things like that though.
2007-08-12 07:40:55 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋