Why was yet ANOTHER bail set for Waukesha killer?

Well you referred to judges making wrong decisions and abusing their power, so I thought that you were implying that this happened in this case.

 

I apologize. I didn't read the entire thread and read the second post before I posted that. Your initial post (due to ignorance about the actual details of the story) set a misleading tone.

 

I was simply wondering how it could be the case that ANY bail was set for a piece of human WASTE like that. Even if it's such a high amount that it's unlikely to be able to be paid. It's theoretically possible. I wouldn't be surprised if those scumbags over at BLM raised the funds to get him out!

 

you can ask the da that if you wish

some da's do and some don't, it depends on if they think someone will raise the bail for them or not I suppose

we will see if the da is right or not, let me know if he posts bail

 

The judge violated the State constitution by imposing an excessive bail ($5,000,000). But that should be expected in America, the country based on slavery.

 

Again, you're assuming that there's nothing in the law which allows for discretion in certain special cases. What you quoted could be what is GENERALLY the case.

 

That is so 1857 Dred Scott case thinking.

 

Whatever the case, you're assuming that there's nothing in the law which allows for discretion in certain special cases.

 

As I said before, you are the one making the claim that there is such a provision in Wisconsin law. Therefore, will you please post it for our education? Other States have such provisions clearly written in their State constitutions. Why have you been unable to find such a provision in Wisconsin law? It may well exist so get busy, find it, and post it and you will rack up a win on this issue. Right now you are losing big time.

 

When exactly did I make that claim?

 

Bill is only denied if there are multiple penal code violations, or if the person escaped from jail or if they are a flight risk.

It doesn't really have anything to do with this severity of the crime. In order to hold somebody until their court date without adjudication you need a reason better than the crime they're accused of.

I'm personally I would say violating previous bail should be enough to deny bail because that is a penal code violation.

 

"Multiple penal code violations." This guy is a piece of human waste with a rap sheet longer than your arm, but you may not have been aware of that.

 

Penal code violations are violations in laws regarding penalty.

I would say committing crime while you're out on bail qualifies but apparently not in Wisconsin.

 

Cite the specific section.

 

Was this guy on bail when he committed this crime?

 

I thought so but now I'm not sure.

 

What's an example of a violation in laws regarding penalty?

 

If you violate your parole or you escape from jail.

 

Yeah obviously those two. Any others?

 

I can't think of any examples.

 

For a multi-time violent felon whose sentence has never fit his crimes, and who has already been convicted of jumping bail like 8 or 10 times, I'd say $5,000,000 is no longer excessive for a parking ticket. Rather than disbarred, give the Judge a medal for being the first one ever to give this guy a high enough bail to ensure he is there for trial. I only regret that held in lieu of bail is not an option in WI. But I'll bet that changes soon!

 

Actually, sadly, I don't think that's an option for Judges in WI. Seriously...

 

Actually you can be held without bail in Wisconsin, but it is for a specific time period and for specific conditions.

Section 8
Text of Section 8:
Prosecutions; Double Jeopardy; Self-Incrimination; Bail; Habeas Corpus

(1) No person may be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process of law, and no person for the same offense may be put twice in jeopardy of punishment, nor may be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself or herself.

(2) All persons, before conviction, shall be eligible for release under reasonable conditions designed to assure their appearance in court, protect members of the community from serious bodily harm or prevent the intimidation of witnesses. Monetary conditions of release may be imposed at or after the initial appearance only upon a finding that there is a reasonable basis to believe that the conditions are necessary to assure appearance in court. The legislature may authorize, by law, courts to revoke a person's release for a violation of a condition of release.

(3) The legislature may by law authorize, but may not require, circuit courts to deny release for a period not to exceed 10 days prior to the hearing required under this subsection to a person who is accused of committing a murder punishable by life imprisonment or a sexual assault punishable by a maximum imprisonment of 20 years, or who is accused of committing or attempting to commit a felony involving serious bodily harm to another or the threat of serious bodily harm to another and who has a previous conviction for committing or attempting to commit a felony involving serious bodily harm to another or the threat of serious bodily harm to another. The legislature may authorize by law, but may not require, circuit courts to continue to deny release to those accused persons for an additional period not to exceed 60 days following the hearing required under this subsection, if there is a requirement that there be a finding by the court based on clear and convincing evidence presented at a hearing that the accused committed the felony and a requirement that there be a finding by the court that available conditions of release will not adequately protect members of the community from serious bodily harm or prevent intimidation of witnesses. Any law enacted under this subsection shall be specific, limited and reasonable. In determining the 10-day and 60-day periods, the court shall omit any period of time found by the court to result from a delay caused by the defendant or a continuance granted which was initiated by the defendant.

(4) The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended unless, in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety requires it
https://ballotpedia.org/Article_I,_Wisconsin_Constitution#cite_note-wi-1

 

10 days, 60 days, it's a joke. Held without bail until trial ought to be an option for extreme, violent cases of a person with this scumbag's history. I find the amount completely acceptable, not excessive, and I only wish it were more. Still, I very much doubt he will be able to bond out, unless some racist group such as BLM comes to his aid, which is the ultimate goal. The only time he should ever see anything but the inside of a jail is when they're transporting him back and forth from his trial. I do hope the death penalty is on the table, for if anyone deserves it, it is this thug.

I find your support of him despicable, and a very negative indicator of your own character.

 

It is disappointing that you, an American citizen, do not believe in the American creed that all people are innocent until proven guilty. Maybe that explains why so many innocent people have spent years and years in prison for crimes they didn't commit. The mob assumed they were guilty because the Slave Patrol arrested them.