What I am saying is, I can and do have the opinion that OJ is a murderer. I am also intelligent and open minded enough to know that if called as part of a jury, my opinion is irrelevant and my duty is to follow the specific instruction of the judge and base a finding on what was presented.

Just like Bail and due process are different animals, the finding of a jury and FACTS and or OPINIONS are two different animals.

quote:

Just like Bail and due process are different animals, the finding of a jury and FACTS and or OPINIONS are two different animals.

I believe Bail is a part of due process. None the less, while I feel the bail was low, I don't know how much or how little evidence they had on the individual charged. Perhaps, you do.

If they arrested him on the say so of some twelve year old that thought seeing him put in jail would be great sport, $100,000. is too high. If they have concrete evidence with even a mild motive, I suspect it is far too low.

Do the people posting here know more than what has been put on this string? Maybe.

I don't think you can judge a country by how it treats it's most upstanding and wealthy citizens, but by how it treats its most undeserving and poor. I'm not impressed by those who toss a dollar into the guy's hat on a street corner, what do they do when no one can see whether they are generous or selfish. Maybe this seems like a stretch... not to me.

I looked back; while to some this may be way off topic, I find it an important part of the conversation... even for those who, looking at exactly the same facts, may arrive at an entirely different point of view.

quote:

I believe Bail is a part of due process.

Could you please expand on that? Bail is not guaranteed to anyone. The 8th Amendment forbids cruel and unusual punishment which excessive bail is considered at times.

quote:

If they arrested him on the say so of some twelve year old that thought seeing him put in jail would be great sport, $100,000. is too high. If they have concrete evidence with even a mild motive, I suspect it is far too low.

If they arrested him they had probable cause. Probable cause is not a matter of degrees. It is like being pregnant, you either are or you are not. It is the seriousness of the offense and the flight risk that determine bail.

Bail is not part of due process. In Washington State, if you commit certain DV crimes you are denied bail until you see a Judge.

That's probably the case in most states.

gaylord,

Start taking your meds and stop posting your crap here. They do not need prove anything to arrest him. All they need is probable cause. Being arrested and convicted are different animals. Even though bail is a part of the legal system it has nothing to do with Due Process. I know this for a fact as I was a Bail Bondsman in Washington State for almost 4 years. Given the severity of the crime his bail should have been more. Although the judge is free to do what he/ she wants in many cases.

I wish you would disappear no one wants to hear your whining.

quote:

Originally posted by gaylordstevens:

quote:

Just like Bail and due process are different animals, the finding of a jury and FACTS and or OPINIONS are two different animals.

I believe Bail is a part of due process. None the less, while I feel the bail was low, I don't know how much or how little evidence they had on the individual charged. Perhaps, you do.

If they arrested him on the say so of some twelve year old that thought seeing him put in jail would be great sport, $100,000. is too high. If they have concrete evidence with even a mild motive, I suspect it is far too low.

Do the people posting here know more than what has been put on this string? Maybe.

I don't think you can judge a country by how it treats it's most upstanding and wealthy citizens, but by how it treats its most undeserving and poor. I'm not impressed by those who toss a dollar into the guy's hat on a street corner, what do they do when no one can see whether they are generous or selfish. Maybe this seems like a stretch... not to me.

I looked back; while to some this may be way off topic, I find it an important part of the conversation... even for those who, looking at exactly the same facts, may arrive at an entirely different point of view.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Infantry32,

Just in case any of you were wondering...bail is not only determined by the offence or degree of such. The judge makes his determination of the amount of bail, if any, based on the individual's income. If you go back through some of the archives about this story, you can see that this (bail amount) was a sore subject for the community in Corpus the day he was released on bail. I could really care less if he was released or not on bail, as long as he is brought to justice. Then you can send him to the wolves!


Thanks Mighty, I type slower than I think....

Actually, yes bail is in part set by the alledged offense, suspects income AND resources, and on several other items such as community connections, flight risk, history. Bail has one purpose, and one purpose only and that is to ensure the appearance of the person at future hearings. The bail is intended to be set at a range that would make the person choose apearance over flight. As the potential punishment risk increases, the bail to offset the risk vs gain choice normally goes up.

quote:

I can and do have the opinion that OJ is a murderer.

I always his son did it

Dizz,

I have long held that opinion. I believe the son did it and OJ covered it up. After discussing it for years with other criminologists, I attended a conference in Seattle and two of the top forensics people in the country presented just that case and it sounded convincing.

What is bail hearing
The right to bail is not explicitly stated in the Constitution. The 14th Amendment, however, states that an individual may not be deprived of life or liberty without due process of law. Loosely stated, an individual may not be confined for a prolonged time period without being properly charged and convicted of a crime. As a result, in a criminal prosecution, the accused is entitled to make an application for bail. If an application for bail is made, then a hearing must be held to determine whether bail will be granted. If bail is granted and the accused puts up the bail money, he will be released from jail.

Doesn't Everyone Have The Right To Bail?
As stated above, the right to bail is not explicitly guaranteed by the Federal government. Some states, however, have enacted Constitutions or laws that require bail for certain offenses. In states where there is no Constitution or law guaranteeing bail, a court will usually entertain the setting of bond without a motion by the accused. If, however, there is no motion by the court, the accused may request a bail hearing.

A bail hearing does not mean that the accused will be released on bail. A hearing merely provides the accused the opportunity to determine whether bail will be set. In most instances, if the crime is not a capital offense and the individual does not pose a threat to society or present a flight risk, then bail will usually be available.


How Much Time Is There Between Arrest And A Bail Hearing?
Although there may be several bail hearings throughout the criminal prosecution process, the most common is the bail hearing before trial. There is no fixed time when this must occur, but usually more than 72 hours after arrest is considered a violation of due process. Typically, a bail hearing occurs at the arraignment, but may vary from state to state.


There are a lot of things no explicitly in the Constitution that are a part of due process because the Supreme Court has made rulings that make it so. I believe the post above, taken from legalmatch.com should make what I believe to be the case clear. I'm sorry if there are those who feel my efforts were either wrong or incorrect.

While the personal attacks are interesting, I do wonder less and less about why the personal information you are willing to share is so sparse.

How do you explain a dangerousness hearing? Bail is not guaranteed if a person remains a clear and present danger. Therefore, bail is conditional and not a specific right.

Free speech is guaranteed and is not part of due process. The fact that something is or isn't guaranteed is not the point. Due process is spelled out quite clearly in the 6th Amendment. Take for example the right to counsel. There is the 5thAmendment right to counsel which is not part of due process and the 6th Amendment right to counsel which is.

quote:

Generally, due process guarantees the following (this list is not exhaustive):

* Right to a fair and public trial conducted in a competent manner
* Right to be present at the trial
* Right to an impartial jury
* Right to be heard in one's own defense
* Laws must be written so that a reasonable person can understand what is criminal behavior
* Taxes may only be taken for public purposes
* Property may be taken by the government only for public purposes
* Owners of taken property must be fairly compensated

U.S. Constitution Online

It is a matter of law currently that bail is considered a part of the process. Holding someone who is neither a danger to society or to his or her self is argued successfully time and time again as cruel and unusual punishment.

The fact that someone is arrested has little to do with hom much or how little evidence may exist, or even if ANY exists.

The Judge must weigh all of these issues and determine if bail is a proper thing to extend to that individual.

We, quite likely, all agree on this. The question to me seems to be whether we are willing to rush to judgement. My own opinion is to hold guilt in the backdrop until the evidence has been presented.

It may be fashionable to jump to quick a judgement and assign guilt, but I think it is; bluntly, un-American.

One would think after so many recent cases from the East coast to Texas where arrests have been made and even some cases dragged into court where the individuals were shown to be, themselves, victims, we would all take a step back. If he or she has done nothing but be in the wrong place and the wrong time, we can never retract the things we've said against them. If the party is guilty, there is plenty of time for each of us to take a turn and the needle's plunger... or just cheer at their demise.

I hope who ever is responsible for the death of this Coastie is held accountable.

Why would we not hear about this happening? cgrdcs Posting this was the first thing I've seen. You seem to hear about mililtary members being murder on Nat. news, but nothing on this. Why wouldn't there be news of this within the CG also? We are small, I see people I have met at other places in the CG, been stationed with, or was friends with at one point every where. We lost a shipmate to a murdering POS! I read what I could find on the Corpus Cristi news. Hopefuly they got the right guy and can put him away for along tim. I would think the CG would want every one to know they lost a shipmate be it trying to save a life, DUI, bear attack, on or off duty what ever the case be.

quote:

The fact that someone is arrested has little to do with hom much or how little evidence may exist, or even if ANY exists.

I'm sorry but if your evidence does not rise to the level of probable cause in the eyes of the law and/or a judge, you cannot make an arrest. Arresting someone without probable cause is grounds for a Federal suit.

You say that bail is part of the process. Correct, the overall process but not due process which is s specific issue.

quote:

Why would we not hear about this happening?

There were at least two previous threads dealing with the crime. This one was a follow up.

I still don't understand why we have to depend on Freds Place for finding out about losing a shipmate vs. something from the CG command like email or msg traffic. There may be a vaild reason, I'm just suprised is all and curious what the reason may be. I could understand in a situation like sucide the CG command not wanting to say hey everybody guess what so and so did. But in the case of line of duty, off duty heroics, or murdered loss of life situations why not let every one know?

quote:

I'm sorry but if your evidence does not rise to the level of probable cause in the eyes of the law and/or a judge, you cannot make an arrest. Arresting someone without probable cause is grounds for a Federal suit.

Arrests are made all of the time, regardless of how ilegal they may be. Indeed, I've never heard anyone saying, "they can't do that," other than when it is being done.

The question was about bail. Whether bail is considered directly as a part of due process or indirectly under unusual punishment - we all seem to know what the facts are, and I guess each of us will phrase it as we feel most comfortable.

gaylord,

Why do you insist on pizzing up a tree and trying to make arguments that don't hold water? Though you may not hear about it, if you are arrested and it subsequently comes out that there was no P.C or that someone lied in the affadavit there will be some consequences.

quote:

Originally posted by gaylordstevens:

quote:

I'm sorry but if your evidence does not rise to the level of probable cause in the eyes of the law and/or a judge, you cannot make an arrest. Arresting someone without probable cause is grounds for a Federal suit.

Arrests are made all of the time, regardless of how ilegal they may be. Indeed, I've never heard anyone saying, "they can't do that," other than when it is being done.

The question was about bail. Whether bail is considered directly as a part of due process or indirectly under unusual punishment - we all seem to know what the facts are, and I guess each of us will phrase it as we feel most comfortable.

The case against the alleged murderer of Coast Guard Petty Officer Amy Ignatowski, was presented to the Grand Jury,in Corpus Christi,TX,Thursday,July 31th,2008. The Grand Jury returned an bill of indictment against the accused, according to an email, I received from the Assistant District Attorney, in Corpus Christi, Texas, today.

The alleged killer, Micah Lee Spanutius, 21,has been free on bail, which was continued. A trial date has not yet been scheduled. As information is made available to me, I will in turn post it.


Jack

Living here in MA all I ever hear is how soft we are on crime up here. This man would be locked up in MA until the trial was over. I thought they were tough on crime in TX.