S09.E27: Bail Reform

[PrincessPurrsALot]

Main: Bail Reform 

Also: Liz Truss's ouster, the lettuce challenge, and the fall of her team; new British PM Rishi Sunak; Newscasters' "Full disclosure"; Tamron Hall's "full disclosure" 

Original air date 2022.10.30

[Annber03]

"I'm fucking furious and I don't fucking care anymore!"

Someone else shared that quote at another site I go to as well. And like I said there, honestly, I feel like this is kind of a big mood? 

But seriously, what even is going on with the UK right now? Good lord, what a mess. 

Those "newspaper" photos being passed out. Wow. Also, it really should be illegal for police to say, "Just plead guilty to this crime and you'll get to go home." It's insane they're allowed to get by with pulling that kind of shit. 

I also love that the GOP is freaking out about stuff like this and trying to act like they're the party who really cares about crime, while conveniently ignoring the criminals within their own party, and encouraging and trying to pass laws that allow everyone to walk around armed to the teeth (yes, it's bail reform that's leading to more shootings, and not, y'know, laws that say, "Hey, any halfwit who wants a gun can get one now!"). Almost like they're fostering the very things they're railing against, or something...

(Seeing Chris Christie argue in favor of bail reform was quite the (pleasant) surprise., though.)

I loved John pointing out, too, that people like Weinstein aren't the sort of criminals who are affected by these issues (and good freaking lord, that Tonys clip. WOW). 

Oh, god. Poor Kalif Browder :(. Oof. 

Full disclosure: I do not care about any of these people's full disclosures. 

[cuppasun]

1 hour ago, Annber03 said:

"I'm fucking furious and I don't fucking care anymore!"

I cheered, and then (because I'm old, and truly wonder if anyone else went there) heard Peter Finch's voice in my head, from Network, bellowing "I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore!" It's about time... and I kinda wish we'd start hearing it this side of the pond, too, from the folks with power. I used to mutter "fuck off and die" a LOT in response to so much of the monstrous crap from all sides in the last few years...and lately it's "fuck off and die in an actual fire." But I'd rather hear someone in a platform position pulling no punches about how furious and fed up they are!

Quote

Oh, god. Poor Kalif Browder :(. Oof.

That broke my heart.

I've been a poor person jailed (just from arrest, not trial, for crime I didn't commit, blah blah U.S.criminaljusticeisbscakes) way back in the cretaceous when I was young. Consider myself lucky I'm here. Kind of blows my mind that the discussions about it sometimes seem...as if it's new info no one ever thought of before. Sigh. See first quote above re: every time someone says we need to be patient and understand that change happens slowly.

[ahisma]

“Full disclosure, there’s an action figure of me in my office made of fondant.”

…. What?

[swanpride]

Maybe from an old birthday cake made for him? 

Is the German accent really THAT bad? The jokes are getting kind of old. 

Also, what does he think, that all the toys are making themselves? Everyone knows that Santa is busy the whole year, didn't he watch Rise of the Guardians? 

Why am I not surprised that again Fox News is fearmongering over something which makes life easier instead of admitting that the rise of crime might, just might, be connected to the rise of poverty (and whose policies are responsible for THAT). 

[peeayebee]

As if I had enough to be angry and depressed about these days. 

The mayor of Chicago saying accused people are GUILTY?!??! And then saying they're presumed innocent?!??! How the fuck did she get away with saying that? Even leaving out the second part, saying accused people are guilty is indefensible. 

That poor guy killing himself. Jeez. Not only that, but to spend 3 YEARS in jail without a trial is obscene. To spend 11 months in jail is obscene. 

And then I get pissed off at the general public who buy all the lies being put out there about "rising crime" and the reasons for it. 

It all makes me sad. At least Bolsonaro lost. Hopefully no violence or major election denials will result from that.

[Welshman in Ca]

2 hours ago, peeayebee said:

It all makes me sad. At least Bolsonaro lost. Hopefully no violence or major election denials will result from that.

He's already said he won't accept the result if he loses & has not conceded as of this time. We all know where this is going.

[Lugal]

It's really interesting to hear the contempt from the usual suspects when they talk about incarcerated Americans or even the poor really, on both sides of the Pond.  But the Mayor of Chicago deserves a special prize: all the accused are guilty?  The presumption of innocence is word service, the founding principal of the American legal system is guilty until proven rich.  The thing to remember about all the people pushing for harsher laws:  They don't think it will ever effect them.  And for many it won't, but it shows how atrophied some people's sense of empathy is.

To take a look at the numbers around incarcerated people, see this.

[swanpride]

Which is btw way too much even if you consider the seize of the US. If you go by capita, the US has more people in prison than ANY other country in the world, nearly double as many as Russia, and way, waaaaaaaaaaay more than any EU country. 

[TexasGal]

On 10/31/2022 at 12:04 PM, peeayebee said:

The mayor of Chicago saying accused people are GUILTY?!??! And then saying they're presumed innocent?!??! How the fuck did she get away with saying that? Even leaving out the second part, saying accused people are guilty is indefensible. 

When I was in law school, one of my classmates actually said "If they have been arrested, they must have done something."  Ummmm....thank god she didn't pursue criminal law is all I can say.

[JustHereForFood]

Some reform is clearly needed if some people can stay at home while the investigation is ongoing, some are held in jail and some can switch from one to another based on how rich they are, and this does not reflect what danger they pose to others. One of those guys they interviewed for example seemed like he was locked up longer than he would have been if he was convicted. Meanwhile, there are some really dangerous people, like those who stalk and threaten their exes, who aren't even arrested and everyone just waits until they commit a violent crime. 

No clip with Weinstein (or Wine stain as he has been called) ages well.

That being said, I think sometimes people like John who bring attention to these topics, can go far too much in the other direction. Like, what was that clip of the woman who was unable to say "yes" supposed to tell us? I'm sorry, but if someone can't answer a yes/no question after being repeatedly reminded that it's yes or no, I can totally see how someone could see it as contempt of court. I wouldn't be surprised if there was a legal requirement to have a clear answer.

Edited November 3, 2022 by JustHereForFood

[paigow]

9 hours ago, swanpride said:

nearly double as many as Russia,

Maybe a lot of people there kill themselves or die accidentally before a trial happens...

[peeayebee]

11 hours ago, JustHereForFood said:

Like, what was that clip of the woman who was unable to say "yes" supposed to tell us? I'm sorry, but if someone can't answer a yes/no question after being repeatedly reminded that it's yes or no, I can totally see how someone could see it as contempt of court. I wouldn't be surprised if there was a legal requirement to have a clear answer.

I agree with John. It was clear that the woman was answering in the affirmative. The judge knew that but was just being a dick by repeating the "yes or no" question. If I had answered "Yeah" and the judge repeated, "Yes or no," I would of course answer, "Yes." But some people don't see the distinction betw Yes and Yeah. Maybe they never pronounce "Yes" in their entire life. There was no good reason for the judge to try to belittle her. 

[swanpride]

Honestly, it looked like she was still a little bit stoned. She basically was able to put together a coherent thought. Plus, "Yeah" means "Yes", insisting that it has to be "Yes" is just dickish. 

[angora]

6 hours ago, peeayebee said:

There was no good reason for the judge to try to belittle her. 

Or to DOUBLE the amount of her bail. What does saying "yeah" have to do with the chances of her being a flight risk or endangering others?

[heatherchandler]

On 10/31/2022 at 12:04 PM, peeayebee said:

As if I had enough to be angry and depressed about these days. 

The mayor of Chicago saying accused people are GUILTY?!??! And then saying they're presumed innocent?!??! How the fuck did she get away with saying that? Even leaving out the second part, saying accused people are guilty is indefensible. 

Lori Lightfoot is an absolutely disgusting person, the people of Chicago loathe her.

[JustHereForFood]

8 hours ago, peeayebee said:

I agree with John. It was clear that the woman was answering in the affirmative. The judge knew that but was just being a dick by repeating the "yes or no" question. If I had answered "Yeah" and the judge repeated, "Yes or no," I would of course answer, "Yes." But some people don't see the distinction betw Yes and Yeah. Maybe they never pronounce "Yes" in their entire life. There was no good reason for the judge to try to belittle her. 

I don't think it's hard to say "Yes". I learned English as a foreign language and Yes and No were among the first words I learned. I get it the first time, since she was probably under a lot of stress (or drugs), but after he told her repeatedly to say Yes or No, it sounds like she was the one being deliberately dickish. I can imagine that in court they often get to interact with real criminals and assholes, so it's not that hard to see that they have no time for people being obtuse.

I suspect that if it was presented from the other perspective and the person was someone like Alex Jones being rude or sassy, there would be cheers for the judge from the same people who complain about thim now.

[swanpride]

That is a BIG whatsaboutism. For one, Alex Jones has a history for being deliberately rude to court, and two, there is a big difference between saying "Yeah" instead of "Yes" or not answering at all or going off a tangent like Alex Jones does in such situations. Not to mention that Alex Jones would actually be able to afford that kind of bail. 

[peeayebee]

The judge insisting she say Yes instead of Yeah was simply unnecessary and demeaning. It was like correcting someone's grammar or dialect. He came across as someone who likes to feel superior to others, who has no sympathy for people who come before him in court, which probably means he assumes they're guilty. It looked like he just likes to throw his weight around and uses powerless people to make himself bigger.

If someone appeared before the judge displaying an attitude, then I would cut the judge some slack and probably applaud him. The woman didn't seem to be doing that. 

[Lantern7]

I think those who would support bail reform could just tell people that they might need bail one day. If you get arrested, you risk falling into a hole with little to no way out. I'm thinking that the people who talk shit about it could probably afford it if they ever got into trouble

On 10/30/2022 at 11:38 PM, Annber03 said:

Oh, god. Poor Kalif Browder :(. Oof.

I bet the air got sucked out of the studio when John brought him up.

Man, the UK political system is weirder than that in the US. Three Prime Ministers in that short a time is absurd, and that's even if you don't bring up the head of lettuce with a wig that wound up getting projected onto the Parliament Building.

[Wilbur Whateley]

59 minutes ago, Lantern7 said:

Man, the UK political system is weirder than that in the US. Three Prime Ministers in that short a time is absurd, and that's even if you don't bring up the head of lettuce with a wig that wound up getting projected onto the Parliament Building.

100% disagree! The Westminister parliamentary system is immensely superior to the US Presidential system. If we had Truss as President, we would have been stuck with her for at least four years; but with Westminister, they got rid of her ASAP.  If they're not working, kick 'em to the curb - not absurd at all! Other good elements include immediate change of power after an election and much shorter campaigns. If I had a genie, I would use one of my wishes to switch the US over to a parliamentary system.

[paigow]

1 hour ago, Wilbur Whateley said:

If I had a genie, I would use one of my wishes to switch the US over to a parliamentary system.

Move to Canada bro...

[Welshman in Ca]

12 hours ago, Wilbur Whateley said:

100% disagree! The Westminister parliamentary system is immensely superior to the US Presidential system. If we had Truss as President, we would have been stuck with her for at least four years; but with Westminister, they got rid of her ASAP.  If they're not working, kick 'em to the curb - not absurd at all! Other good elements include immediate change of power after an election and much shorter campaigns. If I had a genie, I would use one of my wishes to switch the US over to a parliamentary system.

You forgot the part about no actual political ads but rather equal time for everyone & short time at that. The money needed & used in US politics is obscene to say the least and open bribery without consequences at its worse.

[andromeda331]

On 11/3/2022 at 7:25 AM, peeayebee said:

I agree with John. It was clear that the woman was answering in the affirmative. The judge knew that but was just being a dick by repeating the "yes or no" question. If I had answered "Yeah" and the judge repeated, "Yes or no," I would of course answer, "Yes." But some people don't see the distinction betw Yes and Yeah. Maybe they never pronounce "Yes" in their entire life. There was no good reason for the judge to try to belittle her. 

He really was. Watching Court Cam there's quite a few judges who are complete dicks.  

Edited November 8, 2022 by andromeda331

[heatherchandler]

On 11/4/2022 at 8:21 AM, peeayebee said:

The judge insisting she say Yes instead of Yeah was simply unnecessary and demeaning. It was like correcting someone's grammar or dialect. He came across as someone who likes to feel superior to others, who has no sympathy for people who come before him in court, which probably means he assumes they're guilty. It looked like he just likes to throw his weight around and uses powerless people to make himself bigger.

If someone appeared before the judge displaying an attitude, then I would cut the judge some slack and probably applaud him. The woman didn't seem to be doing that. 

I was in a court room all day a few months ago, and I heard over and over "you must say yes or no."  I figured it is an actual rule because the judge was very kind, but very firm about this.  If the person said "yeah," he would not accept it and told them over and over to say yes or no.  So, there are courts that insist on this.  It does not behoove anyone to not do as ordered in a court.