People Accused of Violent Crimes Should Not Be Allowed to Post Bail
People Accused of Violent Crimes Should Not Be Allowed To Post Bail
People accused of violent crimes should not be allowed to post bail and remain out of jail while their trial is pending. There are many reasons to why
I strongly agree with this statement. Many factors are unknown to the public without conducting some sort of extensive research. Whether it is simply reading in the paper about pending trials, or as complicated as researching previous trials. Bail is decided by a judge, and their lives are devoted to handling these types of decisions. There are three solid reasons to why I feel it is necessary to deny bail to those accused of violent crimes. One is that all conditions for release are decided by a judge who is fully aware of the circumstances. Another is that these defendants, since being arrested, should be considered a threat to public safety. My last, and final, reason is that my rationale strongly agrees with denial of bail to the accused. In Nebraska, as written in the Statutes of Nebraska, bail is granted after a judge takes into account the nature and circumstances of the offense charged. This judge looks at the defendants family ties, employment, financial resources, character and mentality, having resided in the community, conviction records, and record of court appearances or of flight to avoid prosecution or failure to appear. A judge, when deciding if bail is to be granted, does not just flip a coin to decide. He or she looks at all aspects of the situation.
It all rests in the judge's hands. When a judge looks at a person accused of a violent crime, such as murder, a few things are liable to pop into perspective.
One would be to how violent and detrimental the accusations are. Any rational thinking person would realize that if arrested, they are in suspicion.
Therefore, a state appointed judge is also going to realize that this person must be a threat, especially if accused of a violent crime. It does not violate
People accused of violent crimes should not be allowed to post bail and remain out of jail while their trial is pending. There are many reasons to why
I strongly agree with this statement. Many factors are unknown to the public without conducting some sort of extensive research. Whether it is simply reading in the paper about pending trials, or as complicated as researching previous trials. Bail is decided by a judge, and their lives are devoted to handling these types of decisions. There are three solid reasons to why I feel it is necessary to deny bail to those accused of violent crimes. One is that all conditions for release are decided by a judge who is fully aware of the circumstances. Another is that these defendants, since being arrested, should be considered a threat to public safety. My last, and final, reason is that my rationale strongly agrees with denial of bail to the accused. In Nebraska, as written in the Statutes of Nebraska, bail is granted after a judge takes into account the nature and circumstances of the offense charged. This judge looks at the defendants family ties, employment, financial resources, character and mentality, having resided in the community, conviction records, and record of court appearances or of flight to avoid prosecution or failure to appear. A judge, when deciding if bail is to be granted, does not just flip a coin to decide. He or she looks at all aspects of the situation.
It all rests in the judge's hands. When a judge looks at a person accused of a violent crime, such as murder, a few things are liable to pop into perspective.
One would be to how violent and detrimental the accusations are. Any rational thinking person would realize that if arrested, they are in suspicion.
Therefore, a state appointed judge is also going to realize that this person must be a threat, especially if accused of a violent crime. It does not violate