Quote:
Originally Posted by sentinel
Thanks for clarifying!
|
It's just incredible that there is such an egregious misinformation campaign going on about this. These people claim if someone is charged with a bunch of types of felonies that they can't be held in any circumstance. It's just so false - not only does it lay it out that it's for any forcible felony, but that clause was in there already. The current rule on which felonies are possibly "detainable" stays the same. And they've added new charges to the list that are detainable including stalking, domestic battery, aggravated discharge of a firearm (i.e. shooting someone), unlawful sale of firearms/ammo, etc etc.
The bill is covering even more "ground" in what charges can lead to someone being detained up through their trial today. It basically leads to freeing up people from being held by charges like possession of a controlled substance, theft (i.e. shoplifting, pickpocketing, etc of certain amounts), etc and expands the ability of a judge to hold people pre-trial for the same violent offenses as today PLUS expanded ones like I mentioned above.
That part is almost literally the opposite of what that BS infographic indicates. Anybody with a brain and reads these sections of the bill can see this.
The only thing open is how it changes from "the defendant poses a real and present threat to the safety of any person or persons" to "the defendant poses a real and present threat to the safety of a specific, identifiable person or persons." Does that mean that if someone is robbed, that the victim has to be known by identity or just merely "we have a person and evidence that some person was robbed, and therefore their safety is in danger."