Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[scriver]

I didn't know it worked that way either. What happens it you don't show up for trial, though?

[10ebbor10]

I didn't know it worked that way either. What happens it you don't show up for trial, though?

Assuming it works similiar to the old Roman Law system, you loose your bail and the Police has to search you again.

[Dutchling]

So you get the money back?
The more you know..

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Yes. After you've been arrested, you remain in holding until a Magistrate has a hearing to officially charge you with whatever you were arrested for, set a trial date, and set bail. The general interpretation of the Constitution demands that this happens fairly quickly, as in under a week. If the police hold you longer without officially charging you and then charge you anyway it can be used as an argument in trial and upon appeal that your case was handled unconstitutionally and is therefore invalid. The longer they wait, the more likely this is to work. If the police hold you for an unconstitutional period they are probably not going to end up charging you and just want to make your life difficult.

You also have a right to a speedy trial, though this is usually waved by your defender at the Magistrate's hearing because it does more harm than good for you, as the defense needs time to build their case. Not waiving it is an option that you have a right to take, but it means that the whole thing will probably go down very quickly with neither the defense nor prosecution prepared at all to make their case. That can be a rather high-stakes gamble.

The Magistrate will then decide whether or not to set bail and what the cost of that bail will be. The Constitution demands that reasonable bail be set, though it has been interpreted by the judiciary that no bail may be set in cases where there is a reasonable belief that allowing the accused to walk free has a high chance of them hurting someone, hurting themselves, or fleeing. Usually bail is set, however, as not setting it when it should have been is another thing that can be used against the state in trial and upon appeal. The severity of the accusation usually determines the bail, small things like disturbing the peace will probably be in the hundreds, felony murder can be in the millions. Ultimately it is all up to the Magistrate, but once again, doing something like setting a 10 million dollar bail for graffiti will probably get the case thrown out of court.

Upon the setting of bail you are returned to police custody until such a time that the trial date comes or your bail is paid by your funds, or more likely a third-party. A bail bonds agent is a business entity that will post your bail for you, in exchange for a much lesser fee from you and a legal promise to attend trial. Accepting a bail bondsman's offer and then not turning up for trial is unwise.

If you are freed on bail, the state holds your bail until the date of trial and you are not allowed to leave the USA until the trial ends. If you show up, the money is returned to you. If you don't, the state takes the money and a warrant is issued for your arrest. Depending upon state law, also screwing over a bail bondsman with this allows them to send a private bounty hunter to apprehend you for the state. The bail bonds entity will then sue you for breech of contract in addition to the additional charges from the state. All in all, very bad for you.

[darkrider2]

Well, there was a vote for a levy in my town to provide the school district with $3,000,000 in state/federal funding, provided a majority of the people agreed to have an extra twelve cents tacked onto their taxes for five years.

It failed.

[Pnx]

Well, there was a vote for a levy in my town to provide the school district with $3,000,000 in state/federal funding, provided a majority of the people agreed to have an extra twelve cents tacked onto their taxes for five years.

It failed.

It's times like these that it helps to remember that the USA was a country founded on the principle of "We don't want to pay taxes." Especially ones on tea that would actually make tea cheaper.

[Truean]

So they chose Romney's running mate.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/paul-ryan-063300661.html
He worked in his family's construction business after earning his degree in economics from Miami University in Ohio. His father died when he was only 16, which prompted soul-searching that led Ryan to discover the works of Rand, who is still a major influence on him.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/08/06/120806fa_fact_lizza#ixzz23F3v7VVp
Ryan won his seat in 1998, at the age of twenty-eight. Like many young conservatives, he is embarrassed by the Bush years. At the time, as a junior member with little clout, Ryan was a reliable Republican vote for policies that were key in causing enormous federal budget deficits: sweeping tax cuts, a costly prescription-drug entitlement for Medicare, two wars, the multibillion-dollar bank-bailout legislation known as TARP. In all, five trillion dollars was added to the national debt. In 2006 and 2008, many of Ryan’s older Republican colleagues were thrown out of office as a result of lobbying scandals and overspending. Ryan told me recently that, as a fiscal conservative, he was “miserable during the last majority” and is determined “to do everything I can to make sure I don’t feel that misery again.”

“The fight we are in here, make no mistake about it, is a fight of individualism versus collectivism.” To me he was careful to point out that he rejects Rand’s atheism.

Beckord drove along the perimeter of the abandoned plant, which stretched across more than two hundred acres. He pointed out a wide plain of asphalt, now sprouting weeds, that had once served as a parking lot for thousands of cars. Through 2007, Ryan regularly requested government money for special projects back home. Earmarks grew out of control during the Bush years, but most of what Ryan asked for, and got, was defensible: four hundred thousand dollars for a water-treatment plant; three hundred thousand for a technical college where G.M. workers could be retrained; seven hundred and thirty-five thousand for Janesville’s bus system; and $3.3 million for highway projects throughout Wisconsin. In 2008, however, Ryan vowed not to request earmarks anymore; he later helped push through an outright ban. I asked Beckord whether Ryan’s libertarianism ever clashed with the needs of his constituents. He hesitated, then said, finally, “I suppose there could have been a full-court press to just cobble together as much federal money as possible on our behalf to make it irresistible for G.M. to keep this plant open.”

When I pointed out to Ryan that government spending programs were at the heart of his home town’s recovery, he didn’t disagree.

The guy grew up with a family business and money. Only worked in gov. /politics. Funded his town recovery with federal earmark money while voting for every bush policy and adding $5 Trillion to the deficit. But now he's distancing himself from that, or trying to make it look that way. He loves Ayn Rand, but is very careful to say he doesn't like her atheism because that'd kill his chance with the religious right.

Translation, we know nothing about him that isn't a contradiction or just saying whatever he has to in order to get elected. [sigh]. This actually is Obama's fault, because Obama directly criticized him and by giving him the time of day catapulted him to the front of the opposition to Obama movement.

[Jervill]

So he chose the social darwinist.  As for Ryan saying whatever he needs to get elected, well, perhaps Romney was looking for someone he could relate to.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I don't know how much they'd really relate. Looking at voting records Ryan seems like a genuine far-right psycho while Romney had been plenty moderate up until it became clear he had a serious shot at getting the nomination.

[Truean]

.

[Moghjubar]

Well, I just now stopped laughing at Romneys pick.

Anyway... its kind of a shame I have to ask this but... does Romney really stand a chance now?  The scum, it is piled so high!

[kaijyuu]

So the vice president nominee is an outright objectivist? Goddamn. The absolute LAST thing we need right no is leaders who reject noblesse oblige.

[sluissa]

I think we're looking at this the wrong way... Vice Presidents aren't chosen on their merits. They probably actually choose the worst scum they can find that'll look decent in front of the senate, just to lower the chance they'll be assassinated by the other side. I mean... Nobody would have taken Cheney as president over Bush. I doubt most people would take Biden over Obama, and if Romney gets elected, who the hell would take Ryan over Romney?

[Truean]

I think we're looking at this the wrong way... Vice Presidents aren't chosen on their merits. They probably actually choose the worst scum they can find that'll look decent in front of the senate, just to lower the chance they'll be assassinated by the other side. I mean... Nobody would have taken Cheney as president over Bush. I doubt most people would take Biden over Obama, and if Romney gets elected, who the hell would take Ryan over Romney?

So Ryan is the very obese girl the plain Jane Romney stands next to so she looks better by comparison?

[Euld]

When you think about McCain and Palin too... yeah that does seem true after all!