Bleacher Bums Forum

I have a border collie that insists he is a who.

Has anyone noticed Fox "News" isn't on Dishnet any more? Evidently it is a contract thing. Probably, and unfortunately, temporary.

I notice that Fox is paying for advertisement on Dishnet channels featuring Blowhard Bill claiming Dishnet is "censoring the news".   I find that sort of humorous on couple levels.

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/12566473/man-accused-punching-ex-st-louis-cardinal-curt-ford-telling-go-back-ferguson

This is sad.  I spent time with Curt Ford a few summers ago in Springfield when he was managing the wood bat college summer league team.  He's a class act and all the kids on the team who happened to be white, showed nothing but respect for him and became better ball players.  Sorry to see this.  Even if he was a Cardinal.

Anyone know how bail works?  Specifically, one of the accused policemen in Baltimore has been left out on 350 thousand dollar bail.  Does he get that money back when he shows up in court?

Does the Government keep any of it?

Not sure what wikipedia says, but the process varies from state to state, but in general it is as follows:

1) If the accused uses a bail bondsman, he gets NOTHING back of what he pays to the bondsman, who is not giving anything to the courts UNLESS the defenant fails to appear in court.  At that time the bondsman is given a period of time to produce the defendant before the court or the bondsman is required to pay to the court the entire amount of the bond.  This is consistent with the entire idea of bond -- that it is not intended to punish, but merely to assure the defendant shows up fr trial.  Generally bondsman reguire the defenant to pay them (the bondsmen) 10% of the amount the court set for the bond in order for the bondsman to make the bond.  Sometimes, for any variety of reasons, a bondsman might make a bond without being paid anything (or agreeing to take considerably less than 10%) and other times a bondsman might require more, or might require some further security in case the defendant fails to show (though this practice is generally frowned on by courts, sometimes is prohibitted by statute, and can result in a court removing a bondsmna or bonding company from the approved list of bondman).  The bonding company is essentially an insurance company, insuring that the defendant appear in court when required.
2) If the accused uses a cash bond, the accused deposits the money with the clerk of the court and gets every cent back if he appears in court at all times as required.  If he fails to appear, the court keeps the money.
3) If the accused uses a property bond, the accused executes what amount to conditional deeds to the court clerk for real estate appraised at a value as great as or greater than the bond amount, and he gets it back if he appears.  If he fails to appear, he, or the foolish relative or friend to put up their home, loses the property to the court.

The bonding system is subject to considerable abuse, and some jurisdictions are trying to get rid of it.  The abuses include courts of requiring bonding companies to pay up when a defendant fails to appear, bondsmen being given what amount to police powers (and sometimes more) when going to get a defendant to appear in court (sometimes after the bonding company failed to inform the defendant of a court date); and a cozy relationship between bonding companies and judges such that some judges consistently set bonds far higher than appropriate in order to enrich the bonding companies.... who often are the largest contributors to judicial campaign funds.

Frequently decent judges will set lower bond amounts for cash or property, or will set lower bonds if the defendant has hired private counsel since that is taken as an indication the defendant is more likely to appear in court as required.

A couple of points for you to consider, davep --

1) In THIS case it is unlikely that any of the six cops actually had to put up anything for their bond.  Just as bonding companies court favor of the judges with campaign contributions, often they do favors for other folks in making bond (I had a bondsman twice bond ME out of jail at no charge when I had no cash on me to make bond and had to either wait until morning when I could have someone bring cash or wait until a court appearance and an O.R. bond), and in the case of police officers bonding companies will sometimes curry favor with police by either making their bonds without payment (or assurance of payment) or with a heavily compromised charge.  And more importantly fellow officers would almost certainly have quickly rallied together to put up property bonds so no one lost anything -- three modest homes would be more than enough to cover a $350K bond, and it would be very surprising if there were not that many officers owning their homes free and clear in Baltimore and eager to help their brother in blue.

2) That is frequently NOT true for schmucks like Freddie Gray who get arrested, often on utterly bullshit charges, such as the bogus "switchblade knife" charge the officers in this case filed against Gray.  Those folks, freguently poor and with no one in their family or among their close friends owning real estate or having mush cash themselves, frequently are unable to make even relatively modest bonds of perhaps $5,000, and when they have to await trial in jail, often knowing it will be a year or more before they go to trial on a charge when they might face a maximum of 11 months and 29 days in jail if they were convicted, did not get probation and served every last day in custody (something very unusual, and on misdemenor charges in many jurisdictions those convicted of misdemenors serve no more than 50% of their sentence even if they are a repeat offender), you have tremendous coercive pressure on pervectly innocent defendants to plead guilty at a preliminary hearing or initial appearance or a status conference when he comes to court and learns that if he just pleads guilty right then and there he will be immediately released, though remain on probation.  This is the way a great many poor folks in general, and poor, black, inner-city kids in particular, end up with ugly criminal records, often without actually even engaging in the behavior for which they were charged and pled guilty.

My understanding is that in the Freddy Gray case, he had at least 18 arrests between 2007 and 2015 (and since he was only 25, that would have only been his ADULT arrest record, with his record before age 18 likely sealed and unavailable, but also likely to have reflected even more arrests):
    March 20, 2015: Possession of a Controlled Dangerous Substance
    March 13, 2015: Malicious destruction of property, second-degree assault
    January 20, 2015: Fourth-degree burglary, trespassing
    January 14, 2015: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance, possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute
    December 31, 2014: Possession of narcotics with intent to distribute
    December 14, 2014: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance
    August 31, 2014: Illegal gambling, trespassing
    January 25, 2014: Possession of marijuana
    September 28, 2013: Distribution of narcotics, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance, second-degree assault, second-degree escape
    April 13, 2012: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance, violation of probation
    July 16, 2008: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance, possession with intent to distribute
    March 28, 2008: Unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance
    March 14, 2008: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to manufacture and distribute
    February 11, 2008: Unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance, possession of a controlled dangerous substance
    August 29, 2007: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute, violation of probation
    August 28, 2007: Possession of marijuana
    August 23, 2007: False statement to a peace officer, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance
    July 16, 2007: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance (2 counts)   
http://nation.foxnews.com/2015/04/30/freddie-gray-arrest-record-criminal-history-rap-sheet
http://www.snopes.com/politics/crime/freddiegray.asp

With that many arrests, and as little time as he served in prison as a result of them, there are some reasonable conclusions:
A) He likely was arrested multiple times on utterly bullshit charges where there was little to no evidence and the prosecution ended up unable to prove its case, the kind of thing which frequently happens when cops make utterly unwarranted arrests;
B) He likely spent a fair amount of unwelcome, and undeserved, time sitting in jail waiting for cases to get before judges who dismissed them after a minimal review of the evidence;
C) He ended up spending a significant sum of money paying bondsmen;
D) It is perfectly reasonable that he would run from police if he saw them, even if he was doing nothing at all wrong at the time.

In civil cases, the loser should pay reasonable court costs.  In criminal cases, the Government that fails to win a conviction should make the person whole.

I am not disagreeing with your position on reimbursement of bond costs, and would even extend it to reasonable reimburcement of legal costs, even when they would be large sums, but the difference between civil and criminal cases is not just the burden of proof, but also that in civil cases the party being forced to pay a judgment actually feels it and therefore has an actual incentive not to bring unwarranted actions, while in criminal cases government is not known for similar sensitivity to cost concerns.  There is no difference to believe it would make the slightest difference in the number of bad arrests made or bogus charges or the number of times prosecuting attornies pursued to trial cases they should never have allowed to appear in court for an initial appearance.