Safe-T Act Ruled Unconstitutional

[357]

On 12/30/2022 at 9:08 AM, cybermgk said:

Only as an ancillary effect.  It was designed to make a crisis, so that the State could then take draconian measures (see also every single crisis ever, and Democrat/leftist actions).  NOW, Soros, on the other hand, who funds the groups that push laws like this in blue ran states, simply, and has always wanted a weak US, because a strong US keeps hos dream of a Globalist Utopia from happening.

Primary reason not ancillary, introduced by the Black Caucus after George Floyd. Supposedly "systemic racism" is to blame and criminals are innocent. I agree with you about Soros and the globalists.

[stigz]

https://cwbchicago.com/2022/12/breaking-illinois-supreme-court-puts-end-of-cash-bail-on-hold-until-further-notice.html

[billzfx4]

https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/chicago-politics/illinois-supreme-court-blocks-end-of-cash-bail-on-jan-1-as-state-appeals-judges-ruling/3034171/

 

Just hours before cash bail was set to be eliminated across parts of Illinois, the state's Supreme Court stopped it from taking effect. 

[mikew]

Happy New Year

 

https://chicago.suntimes.com/politics/2022/12/31/23533866/illinois-cash-bail-safe-t-act-appeal-lawsuit-kwame-raoul-supreme-court

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[mikew]

"Pause the Purge"

 

[mab22]

I heard on the news that the Supreme Court said it apples to all the counties state for uniformity, not sure if that is accurate.

[soundguy]

On 1/1/2023 at 10:27 AM, mab22 said:

I heard on the news that the Supreme Court said it apples to all the counties state for uniformity, not sure if that is accurate.

 

Sun Times link provided NYE by MikeW

Quote

 

The Illinois Supreme Court halted the abolition of the cash bail system in the state on Saturday, just one day before that landmark criminal justice reform was poised to take effect. 

 

The bail system overhaul — written into law as the Pretrial Fairness Act and the most controversial provision of the state’s widely scrutinized SAFE-T Act — was thrown off this week when a Kankakee County judge sided with authorities in 64 counties who sued to stop it from taking effect.

In his ruling, Chief Judge Thomas Cunnington wrote that “the appropriateness of bail rests with the authority of the court and may not be determined by legislative fiat.”

 

Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul on Friday appealed to the Illinois Supreme Court to overturn Cunnington’s decision, which would only have affected the counties that brought the suit.

Meanwhile, state’s attorneys in DuPage and Kane counties asked the top court to issue an order providing clarity with the state seemingly headed into the new year with more than half the state maintaining the old cash bail system and the remaining 38 counties — including Cook — ushering in a cashless bail era.

 

The state Supreme Court ordered on Saturday that the Pretrial Fairness Act won’t go into effect until further notice “in order to maintain consistent pretrial procedures throughout Illinois.” 

It’s unknown how long the temporary stay will remain in place: The Supreme Court has not set a date to hear arguments on Raoul’s appeal and it wasn’t clear when the justices would take up the case.

 

 

[Euler]

I think it's worth pointing out that the action of the IL Supreme Court is temporary. It's just ordered that things stay the same until it hears the case.

[Flynn]

On 1/1/2023 at 4:12 PM, Euler said:

I think it's worth pointing out that the action of the IL Supreme Court is temporary. It's just ordered that things stay the same until it hears the case.

 

I personally don't see how the no bond clause can stand, the Illinois Constitution has a victims rights section, I would argue anyday this new law violates these rights.

 

Quote

 SECTION 8.1. CRIME VICTIMS' RIGHTS.

.

.

(8) The right to be reasonably protected from the accused throughout the criminal justice process.

(9) The right to have the safety of the victim and the victim's family considered in denying or fixing the amount of bail, determining whether to release the defendant, and setting conditions of release after arrest and conviction.

 

[soundguy]

On 1/2/2023 at 2:23 AM, Flynn said:

personally don't see how the no bond clause can stand, the Illinois Constitution has a victims rights section, I would argue any day this new law violates these rights.

 

Quote

 SECTION 8.1. CRIME VICTIMS' RIGHTS.

.

.

(8) The right to be reasonably protected from the accused  throughout the criminal justice process.

(9) The right to have the safety of the victim and the victim's family considered in denying or fixing the amount of bail, determining whether to release the defendant, and setting conditions of release after arrest and conviction.

 

It's possible I haven't been paying attention.

 

It seems to me that No Cash Bail  takes wealth out of the equation. If a crime is really bad, murder and other horribly violent things, you are not getting out until you are acquitted or have served your sentence after conviction. If its not that bad, perhaps in some fictional future you are caught with a couple high capacity magazines in your cup holder, you will be released while awaiting your fate. Flight risk, a greater possibility with greater wealth, is among the things which can be factored into the decision to release or hold a suspected offender.

 

In very many jurisdictions in America, and with great certainty in Cook County, there are men and women being held awaiting trial for fairly petty offenses because they cannot come up with even small amounts of cash to make bail.

 

In my early morning reasoned opinion, having possibly not been paying attention, No Cash Bail seems to mesh just fine with Victims Rights.

 

Cheers,

Tim

[cybermgk]

On 1/2/2023 at 7:20 AM, soundguy said:

 

It's possible I haven't been paying attention.

 

It seems to me that No Cash Bail  takes wealth out of the equation. If a crime is really bad, murder and other horribly violent things, you are not getting out until you are acquitted or have served your sentence after conviction. If its not that bad, perhaps in some fictional future you are caught with a couple high capacity magazines in your cup holder, you will be released while awaiting your fate. Flight risk, a greater possibility with greater wealth, is among the things which can be factored into the decision to release or hold a suspected offender.

 

In very many jurisdictions in America, and with great certainty in Cook County, there are men and women being held awaiting trial for fairly petty offenses because they cannot come up with even small amounts of cash to make bail.

 

In my early morning reasoned opinion, having possibly not been paying attention, No Cash Bail seems to mesh just fine with Victims Rights.

 

Cheers,

Tim

So, if the alleged perp is just released until trial, and the victim of the crime is the only witness, and thus only means to convict said alleged criminal, you don't see a possible problem, of a released alleged criminal now having access to intimidate, or worse, the one thing/person that can convict them?

Edited January 2, 2023 at 04:18 PM by cybermgk

[soundguy]

On 1/2/2023 at 10:18 AM, cybermgk said:

So, if the alleged perp is just released until trial, and the victim of the crime is the only witness, and thus only means to convict said alleged criminal, you don't see a possible problem, of a released alleged criminal now having access to intimidate, or worse, the one thing/person that can convict them?

 

That's the gloom and doom "purge"  version of it. In practice, it isn't gonna work that way... not everyone will be released while awaiting trial.

 

Quote

 

Advocates for bail reform say the criminal justice system is inherently unfair when people with money can get out of jail, even if facing serious charges, while poorer people can end up spending months behind bars for minor crimes.

Under the law, judges will hold detention hearings where prosecutors and defense lawyers argue whether a person poses too much danger to the public to be released or is considered a flight risk.

No one will have to put up money to get out, resolving a basic inequality that has come with considerable social cost, argues Insha Rahman with the Vera Institute of Justice.

 

 

 

Edited to add a link and text from September 14, 2022:

BLOCK CLUB
 

Quote

 

CHICAGO — Viral videos and infographics circulating on social media misrepresent a new Illinois law that will eliminate cash bail, legal experts and public policy advocates said.

 

 

 

Here’s the key: The law does not mean judges cannot keep people in jail.

The law eliminates cash bail as a standard, but a judge still can detain someone depending on the criminal charges, or if they think a person poses a danger to the community or may flee.

 

A post earlier this month from WFCN News — a small, conservative outlet in Southern Illinois, according to WGN — wrongly claims the law will create “non-detainable offenses” such as aggravated battery or driving under the influence, arson, second-degree murder and kidnapping.

 

Republican gubernatorial candidate Darren Bailey, who has repeatedly called Chicago a “hellhole,” seized on the issue, saying at a West Loop news conference that “Chicago is living the purge.” Bailey has an apartment in the John Hancock Center, according to the Sun-Times.

 

 

 

 

The "According to WGN" link:

 

The graphic from WCFN News, referenced above and at the WGN link.

The information contained within the graphic below is false.

 

 

 

Cheers,

Tim

 

 

 

Edited January 2, 2023 at 05:01 PM by soundguy

[Yettiblood]

New America: Where the “black and brown”criminals are the victims. Disgusting.  United we stand, delusional we fall. 

[Smallbore]

On 1/2/2023 at 2:23 AM, Flynn said:

 

I personally don't see how the no bond clause can stand, the Illinois Constitution has a victims rights section, I would argue anyday this new law violates these rights.

 

 

This pretty well nullified the old "innocent until proven guilty".

I don't have a just solution for all parties. Maybe speedy trials and sheriff Taylor's jails?

For sure the victim should not be prevented by any statute from having any and all means of weapons for self defense.

[Flynn]

On 1/2/2023 at 7:20 AM, soundguy said:

Flight risk, a greater possibility with greater wealth, is among the things which can be factored into the decision to release or hold a suspected offender.

 

I know that is parroted all the time but is it really true?  Of the people that post bail is there really a correlation on their wealth vs their risk of flight?  Obvious those that can't post bail pose no flight risk and this includes many 'wealthy' if and when the judge adjust the bail approprietly, but if one was to look at the actual data of people who fail to appear, would it actually show the rich are the ones doing it more often than the poor?  I would argue that except in some high profile cases, the claim that the rich pose a higher risk of flight when out on bail is likely false, I'm betting the data actually shows the reverse...

[Flynn]

On 1/2/2023 at 10:37 AM, soundguy said:

Under the law, judges will hold detention hearings where prosecutors and defense lawyers argue whether a person poses too much danger to the public to be released or is considered a flight risk.

 

Only applicable if you put the chicken before the egg, under the law as written most will not have those hearings before a judge as the law dictates the LEO "shall issue a citation in lieu of custodial arrest" unless the officer determines they are a threat to themselves or others or have mental issues, the law also clearly states "a  presumption in favor of pretrial release shall by applied"

 

That means in most cases it will be the officer on the scene deciding who may or may not pose too much danger to the public, not a hearing in front of a judge, and that officer must under the law give favor to immediate release from detention vs arrest.

 

Quote

Sec. 109-1. Person arrested; release from law enforcement custody and court appearance; geographical constraints prevent in-person appearances.

...

(a-1) Law enforcement shall issue a citation in lieu of custodial arrest, upon proper identification, for those accused of traffic and Class B and C criminal misdemeanor offenses, or of petty and business offenses, who pose no obvious threat to the community or any person, or who have no obvious medical or mental health issues that pose a risk to their own safety. Those released on citation shall be scheduled into court within 21 days.

(a-3) A person arrested with or without a warrant for an offense for which pretrial release may not be denied may, except as otherwise provided in this Code, be released by the officer without appearing before a judge. The releasing officer shall issue the person a summons to appear within 21 days. A presumption in favor of pretrial release shall by applied by an arresting officer in the exercise of his or her discretion under this Section.

 

[soundguy]

On 1/2/2023 at 2:28 PM, Flynn said:

 

I know that is parroted all the time but is it really true?  Of the people that post bail is there really a correlation on their wealth vs their risk of flight?  Obvious those that can't post bail pose no flight risk and this includes many 'wealthy' if and when the judge adjust the bail appropriately, but if one was to look at the actual data of people who fail to appear, would it actually show the rich are the ones doing it more often than the poor?  I would argue that except in some high profile cases, the claim that the rich pose a higher risk of flight when out on bail is likely false, I'm betting the data actually shows the reverse...

 

Flight risk is just one of many reasons a judge may hold a suspect until trial. It doesn't matter what Flight Risk of Wealthy vs Poor data shows. It is irrelevant here.

 

Bail set just a little bit too high, just a little bit out of reach, might as well be an order by the judge to hold the offender until trial. This obviously affects those of meager means more than those of wealth.

 

If the crime charged is serious enough to keep a suspect in custody because there may be a danger to the community, victims or continuation of the trial if the suspect flees, why offer high bail for release?

 

If the crime is not that serious and release poses little or no risk to the community, victims or continuation of a trial... why require bail at all?

 

Cash/Bond Bail doesn't really make any sense. Keep them until trial because you must, or let them out based on their word they will appear before the court.

 

 

Cheers,

Tim

 

 

 

[soundguy]

On 1/2/2023 at 2:52 PM, Flynn said:

That means in most cases it will be the officer on the scene deciding who may or may not pose too much danger to the public, not a hearing in front of a judge, and that officer must under the law give favor to immediate release from detention vs arrest.

 

Does the officer then require cash bond for release?

 

 

Cheers,

Tim

[Flynn]

On 1/2/2023 at 2:53 PM, soundguy said:

Flight risk is just one of many reasons a judge may hold a suspect until trial. It doesn't matter what Flight Risk of Wealthy vs Poor data shows. It is irrelevant here.

 

Entirely relavent here, as under this law it would not be considered by a judge in most cases, as the person would not be arrested in the first place, and the law does not even allow the officer to consider flight risk when deciding if they person should be arrested.

 

Quote

If the crime charged is serious enough to keep a suspect in custody because there may be a danger to the community, victims or continuation of the trial if the suspect flees, why offer high bail for release?

 

Because except in a very limited prescribed category of crimes, bail is both a State and Federl Constitutionally protected right of the accused.

 

Quote

If the crime is not that serious and release poses little or no risk to the community, victims or continuation of a trial... why require bail at all?

 

If the crime is not that serious, then it should be a petty offense that carries not penalty of jail at all, no?

 

Because the Illinois Constitution says the the victim has a right to have their and their families safety considered when setting bail or release, this is essentially not done under the black and white text of the law that mandates release as primary unless there is an obvious reason at the time...  This is why it was ruled unconstitutional after all, the court found that the legislature and/or ultimently the law enforcemnt officer is not the body of government that is empowered with deciding pre-trial release conditions, that is a power of the judiciary...

 

 SECTION 8.1. CRIME VICTIMS' RIGHTS.

.

.

(8) The right to be reasonably protected from the accused throughout the criminal justice process.

(9) The right to have the safety of the victim and the victim's family considered in denying or fixing the amount of bail, determining whether to release the defendant, and setting conditions of release after arrest and conviction.

Edited January 2, 2023 at 10:12 PM by Flynn

[Flynn]

On 1/2/2023 at 2:55 PM, soundguy said:

Does the officer then require cash bond for release?

 

No,it's not the officers job to consider pre-trial conditions, that is up to the court, that is literally why officers simply arrest people and tell them to argue their case in front of the judge not them...

[mab22]

So the reason we are at this point is because the Jails and Legal systems are pretty much ____ed up.

 

This is what happened in New York, I think there is also of another story  possibly in Illinois and the same thing happened.

Please read the article, it will open your eyes a bit and while this might not be the answer, innocent people are getting caught up in a mess.

As an example if you have followed what happened to the Jan 6 people, held for a year or many months without hearings etc. AND NO ONE HAS BEEN CHARGED WITH OVER THROWING THE COUNTRY SO LETS NOT DIVERGE THE TOPIC.

It's been said that on a federal level you will wish for something like the no cash bail taking into account things like Jan 6 people, even general Flynn case and what happened with Roger Stone.

 

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/10/06/before-the-law

 

https://www.pretrialpartnership.org/project/he-spent-1100-days-in-rikers-island-a-legally-innocent-man-his-story-changed-new-yorks-bail-laws/

 

So the kid in the story gets arrested, gets stuck in jail waiting for the attorneys and court dates to get worked out and it goes on FOR 1100 DAYS, he is innocent, and they found that there was not enough evidence at the pretrial hearing to convict him. They couldn't locate the witness either, think deported. He gets out and commits suicide later due to the hit show he has been through.

The jail, Rikers Island DETENTION , is apparently a third world hit show,  similarly we have cook county holding which is another 3rd world hit show.

Why would the holding jails be 3rd world heck holes, this should be addressed?

 

So imagine your wrongly accused and you can plead guilty to end the nightmare now or you may wait for YEARS to be found not guilty.

 

The no cash bail is the progressives answer to fixing the solution.

 

Maybe we shouldn't have 3rd world heck holes for people pending trial, it should be a safe place while their case works out shouldn't it?

Maybe they should go a little deeper into the case before bail or no bail?

Of course tell it to the Judge doesn't help coming to the police either?

 

Ever dealt with the legal system, judges are out and their fill it "doesn't want to screw anything up for them" so they are pretty much there to just issue extensions.

Then there are the attorneys who are "busy" and their schedule might be booked and can't sync with the prosecution so now your looking at more delays, weeks and possible months. Been there with an estate.

 

 

 

[Euler]

The idea under this law that judges can hold more people without the opportunity of release is really just a bigger opportunity for selective enforcement, which is pretty much always political, or for incompetence to swallow the innocent. People who shouldn't be let out will be let out. People who shouldn't be held will be held. Forcing only the extreme possibilities guarantees that injustice will be maximized. Assuming that the law will make things better requires more than ever that judges be flawless in their virtue and unceasing vigilant in their attention to detail. Judges haven't been perfect in the past. Why would the law make them perfect now?

[Tip]

Question — does anybody have a list (or clue) what offenses are detainable and which are not?

We see Aggravated Battery listed as a non-detainable offense on the above posted list.

Is Aggravated Assault also non-detainable or is it an offense that is detainable?  - It’s not on the list…

 

According to what I can find is this:

”Under Illinois law, however, assault and battery are completely separate criminal offenses. Whereas battery requires physical contact of a harmful or provoking nature, assault can happen based on mere words or conduct.”

 

So in Illinois Aggravated Assault seems to actually be a lesser crime than Aggrevated Battery yet it seems as the greater crime is non-detainable but the lesser is detainable….

 

WHAT AM I MISSING HERE.

 

[soundguy]

On 1/2/2023 at 8:49 PM, Tip said:

Question — does anybody have a list (or clue) what offenses are detainable and which are not?

We see Aggravated Battery listed as a non-detainable offense on the above posted list.

Is Aggravated Assault also non-detainable or is it an offense that is detainable?  - It’s not on the list…

 

According to what I can find is this:

”Under Illinois law, however, assault and battery are completely separate criminal offenses. Whereas battery requires physical contact of a harmful or provoking nature, assault can happen based on mere words or conduct.”

 

So in Illinois Aggravated Assault seems to actually be a lesser crime than Aggrevated Battery yet it seems as the greater crime is non-detainable but the lesser is detainable….

 

WHAT AM I MISSING HERE.

 

The list I posted was created by people who wish to scare you. 
 

No criminal offenses are non-detainable. 
 

 

Cheers,

Tim 

[2A4Cook]

On 1/2/2023 at 8:49 PM, Tip said:

Question — does anybody have a list (or clue) what offenses are detainable and which are not?

We see Aggravated Battery listed as a non-detainable offense on the above posted list.

Is Aggravated Assault also non-detainable or is it an offense that is detainable?  - It’s not on the list…

 

According to what I can find is this:

”Under Illinois law, however, assault and battery are completely separate criminal offenses. Whereas battery requires physical contact of a harmful or provoking nature, assault can happen based on mere words or conduct.”

 

So in Illinois Aggravated Assault seems to actually be a lesser crime than Aggrevated Battery yet it seems as the greater crime is non-detainable but the lesser is detainable….

 

WHAT AM I MISSING HERE.

 

These Dems are freaking nuts!  Aggravated battery is a serious offense.  Some of the aggravating factors can be use of a weapon (fine line to attempted murder), battery upon an elderly, disabled person or a minor, etc.  Assault in Illinois is simply putting a victim in reasonable apprehension of receiving a battery.  Anyone who votes Democrat in this state needs to have his (or her) head examined.  They'll cry when they become crime victims, they'll cry when they lose their jobs, they'll cry when they get taxed out of their homes ... then they'll vote Democrat in the next election, and cancel out the vote of a rational person.

[BobPistol]

On 1/2/2023 at 8:23 PM, soundguy said:

The list I posted was created by people who wish to scare you. 
 

No criminal offenses are non-detainable. 
 

 

Cheers,

Tim 

 

So what offenses are non-detainable?

Link please.

 

I'm seeing a lackadaisical attitude toward victim's rights and the safety of others in the SAFE-T act at best and the purge at worst.

 

Remember the law of unintended consequences added to the cronyocracy in Illinois = your view seems to mirror the lackadaisical attitude toward public safety that the LWWs who created this terrible law have. 

 

 

Edited January 3, 2023 at 03:57 AM by BobPistol

[mab22]

On 1/2/2023 at 9:55 PM, BobPistol said:

 

So what offenses are non-detainable?

Link please.

 

I'm seeing a lackadaisical attitude toward victim's rights and the safety of others in the SAFE-T act at best and the purge at worst.

 

Remember the law of unintended consequences added to the cronyocracy in Illinois = your view seems to mirror the lackadaisical attitude toward public safety that the LWWs who created this terrible law have. 

 

 

 

Make sure to ask for "facts", not just links.

[Euler]

Under the SAFE-T Act, no criminal offenses are specifically detainable or non-detainable. If a defendant would ordinarily have been eligible for any bail at all, that bail (under this act) must be zero. So, for example, someone who previously would have been held on $5 gazillion bail would now simply be released.

 

Proponents of the act like to say that drug dealers would no longer be able to buy their way out of jail. That's true. If they were eligible for bail before, they would now get out for free. There's no purchase required. (I'm actually a bit surprised that no one in government realized that the act eliminated a revenue stream.)

 

As a separate issue, Class B and lower misdemeanors are no longer arrestable. That part of the act wasn't challenged, so as of Sunday that part of the act is in effect throughout the state. I suppose if someone doesn't appear voluntarily to be arraigned, that's a fairly strong indicator they probably won't appear for trial, either. Meanwhile, no one is going to be looking for them, just like no one looked for bail-jumpers previously.

[BobPistol]

Quote

(I'm actually a bit surprised that no one in government realized that the act eliminated a revenue stream.)

 

Agreed.   Less money for cronies. 

[soundguy]

On 1/2/2023 at 9:55 PM, BobPistol said:

 

So what offenses are non-detainable?

Link please.

 

 

Here's a Link... but you have to read the article to see it. There is a graphic which contains a list of purported to be "Illinois Non-Detainable Offenses". It is false, there is no such change to the law. There is no list. Recent candidate for Governor Darrin Baily embraced "the list" hoping to get people to for him.

 

 

On 1/2/2023 at 11:18 PM, Euler said:

As a separate issue, Class B and lower misdemeanors are no longer arrest-able.

 

Link to info about class B misdemeanors:

 

This article was published May 25, 2021. Before the SAFE-T Act. While I don't know what exactly has changed with the SAF-T Act, it seems like not very much. If someone can post exactly what has changed, that would be good.

 

Quote

To my knowledge, there are no Class B misdemeanor offenses on the books in Illinois that require the judge to sentence the defendant to jail. Instead, the court can sentence a person who is found guilty of a Class B misdemeanor to probation and community service, instead of incarceration.

 

Quote

Which offenses are considered Class B misdemeanors?

Class B misdemeanors are few and far in between. Almost every misdemeanor offense that prosecutors pursue is a Class A misdemeanor – such as domestic battery, driving under the influence (DUI), driving while license suspended for DUI, retail theft, etc.

The following offenses are Class B misdemeanor crimes:

• Criminal Trespass to Land (CTTL). 720 ILCS 5/21-3.
• Telephone Harassment. 720 ILCS 135-1-1.
• Possession of Cannabis (10 to 30 grams) 720 ILCS 550/4.
• Aggravated Speeding (31 mph over the posted speeding limit). 625 ILCS 5/11-601.5. The law changed in 2011, making a speeding ticket for driving 31 mph over the limit a Class B misdemeanor. This type of ticket used to be a fine-only petty offense, but not anymore.
• Computer Tampering. 720 ILCS 5/16D-3.
• Obstruction of Service of Process. 720 ILCS 5/31-3.
• Littering. 415 ILCS 105/8.
• Altering or Defacing a Serial Number on Machinery. 720 ILCS 335/1.
• Picketing a Residence. 720 ILCS 5/21.1-3.
• Simulating Legal Process. 720 ILCS 5/32-7.
• Window Peeking. 720 ILCS 5/26-1.

 

Cheers,

Tim

Edited January 3, 2023 at 02:20 PM by soundguy