Under What Conditions Is Bond Acceptable?
A woman facing murder charges in Clarke County has been released on bond. Should bond be granted to someone facing such serious charges?
An 18-year old woman facing murder charges has been granted bond by a Clarke County Judge. Although Wilma Scott didn’t pull the trigger herself, prosecutors say she is responsible for the death of one of her cohorts in a botched robbery in Athens four months ago.
According to Athens Online, Scott set up the attempted robbery of an alleged drug dealer by two of her accomplices, one of them armed. The victim wrestled the gun from the assailant and shot the second suspect dead. They are all now facing murder charges, including Scott for her role in it. She has, however, been granted bond of $40,000 and will remain under house arrest with an ankle monitor. It was argued by the defense that she does not have a criminal history and is not a flight risk. She was initially charged with armed robbery, but murder charges were filed after a grand jury investigation.
Many argued that bond should not have been granted to George Zimmerman in the Trayvon Martin case.
Our question here is should bond be granted when someone is facing charges as serious as murder? Under what conditions to you think bond is acceptable?
Andrew Burnett
9:27 am on Friday, August 3, 2012
The US Constitution, Amendment VIII sets forth: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. The Georgia Constitution, Paragraph XVII sets forth: Bail; fines; punishment; arrest, abuse of prisoners. Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted; nor shall any person be abused in being arrested, while under arrest, or in prison.
Although "excessive" has been open to interpretation over the years, The U.S. Supreme Court found in Stack v. Boyle, "that a defendant's bail cannot be set higher than an amount that is reasonably likely to ensure the defendant's presence at the trial.” The Bail Reform Act of 1966 and then 1984 also tried to regulate bail under the "public safety", which was upheld in United States v. Salerno, 481 US 739 (1987).
In my opinion the SCOTUS has it wrong, everyone is entitled to a non-excessive bail. If they fail to appear, then they could be considered unbailable. This person is SUSPECTED OF MURDER, not guilty of murder. We have so gotten away from the tyrannical preventing measures of the Constitution, we now have a soft police state. Good job America!
Marne M
9:34 pm on Friday, August 3, 2012
As a police officer, it's a part of our job to bring a criminal history to every first appearance hearing so that the judge can consider bail (this process varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but it's how we do it where I work). I think that the average person would be amazed to find out how often it occurs that the person being charged is already out on bail for other crimes. And I'm not talking minor things, like drug charges or traffic offenses, but burglary, robbery, assault, etc. Quite often, there's also quite a lengthy history as well. It's frustrating.
$40,000 isn't a terribly high bond, for murder, and I don't find an ankle monitor to be particularly unreasonable. This woman apparently had no criminal history, so I'm not sure why that decision was made, but both the prosecution and the defense are allowed to speak their argument as to the matter of bond, and the decision is made by a judge, who is neutral, so it's not like the police can game the system. I often find that the judges set bonds that seem almost infuriatingly low.