Jump to content

Mmy

Members
  • Content Count

    8
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. not all the time. usually when its an open/shut case (for example, finding meth on the person of the offender, or finding a gun on a convicted felon, or finding a gun with filed off serial numbers on the person of an individual) there is no reason not to press charges immediately. what would possibly justify the delay?
  2. My fiances little brother left drugs in his car. his brother is known heroin addict. my fiancé gets drug tested for work. brother admitted to crime. charges no longer an issue for fiancé. BUT...i am concerned about the practice of the prosecutor. Since this is common practice and a very low income area in California. If people miss the letter and miss court bevcause they got charged a year later and didn't know it, they get a new charge. it gives the prosecutor leverage. Charges are delayed on 90% of the cases in this county (after offenders are arrested and booked)
  3. Things would be different/should be different in deciding when/if charges will be pressed if its a felony or misdemeanor?
  4. What if they don't charge. Wouldn't it be considered false imprisonment? You cant just go around arresting willy-nilly without charging people (I would expect).
  5. In our county possession is a misdemeanor. What I meant with my statement "these are pretty basic charges" is that they are very open and shut cases. What more do you need to know to press charges on possession? Guy drives in car. Guy gets pulled over. Cop sees drugs in center concil. Cop arrests guy. Guy gets booked. Guy posts bail. Guy goes to court. Prosecutor doesn't show up. Judge says he is exonerated. Guy gets letter 300+ days later saying he is being charged after all and must return to court. I don't know what would validate the delay in such a simple case. The evidence is there. Its very obvious what Guy should be charged for. Almost every case is done this way in my county (county is in California). BTW, I asked around and this is a common practice for the people that are arrested and don't bail out, too. They are OR-ed without charges. Leave. Get letter in mail. In this county there are a lot of vacation homes, in one City there are a lot of empty houses. There is a very large homeless population and a lot of addicts. They tend to squat in whatever bank-owned or empty house they can. plus there are a lot of areas that don't have mailboxes, only PO Boxes. Those that cant afford the PO Box share PO Boxes. It is hard for people like this to successfully receive important mail. When they don't get the "Surprise, we decided to press charges after all for your very obviously-chargeable case" letter they end up missing court and getting an extra charge. They get a warrant, are arrested later, then the prosecutor uses the extra charge of missing court as leverage. The prosecutors know the demographic in this county. Also, 88% of the alleged offenders end up missing the court date that is assigned in the "Surprise you have charges after all" Letter. They only send one letter. If they did bail out originally then there is still a possibility of missing the letter (since there are few jobs in this county and most people work out of the area) and getting a warrant. Which means new bail is posted if they get arrested on a warrant. Which means the likely working class individual now has to pay for another bail bondsman to get him out- being forced to post bail for the same event. Also, if they don't press charges then its almost equivalent to a false imprisonment or something. The law enforcement can just go around arresting people and not charging them? The whole thing seems wrong to me. Is this normal or legal practice on the side of the prosecutor?? I can imagine one or two delays here and there, but 90% of the cases shouldn't have the charges delayed for up to a year later or not get charged at all after being arrested. Does anyone else see an issue with this practice? (Also, my fiances brother had left drugs in his car. He admitted it and turned himself in for the crime since. My fiancé gets drug tested all the time for work. Im asking about this because I the criminal system in this county/the DA's practice of delaying charges for nearly every case that comes before the court is strange and I think it might be an ethical issue.)
  6. So they can sit back and hope he gets in trouble again for the duration of the statute of limitations for the sole purpose of not having enough evidence initially? After asking other people that had been arrested in this county, it appears they never press charges after people Are arrested and released. They wait for a year then mail them the charges in a letter. Sometimes they dont get the letter (if they moved, for example) and a warrant goes out for their arrest when they miss court. They dont realize it until They are pulled over for a traffic violation and are arrested. And these are for very basic crimes: possession, felon with a firearm, etc. Should be open and shut cases. No ethical reason to wait on the charges because the evidence is there or they wouldnt have been arrested.
  7. But he was arrested, paid a bailbondsman to bail him out, only to find out he wasnt charged. Why arrest him if he wasn't getting charged? Can we sue for the money we paid to the bail bondsman? You can't just arrest people without charging them, can you? Can they delay charging someone they already arrested and released on bail?
  8. My fiance was arrested, booked, and was let go on bail. Upon release they set a date for him to be in court. He showed up to court on the required day and no one showed up from the DAs office. The judge said that no charges had been filed and set another court date. The judge also said that if they didn't charge him by that date then he would be exonerated. The public defender said that even if he was not charged, they still might charge him later and that exonerated was referring only to the bail. Does this make sense to anybody??? Is this legal??? I thought the bail was based on the charges.
×
×
  • Create New...