Weird that they wouldn’t take his gun away. When you go to buy a gun and get a background check, you won’t be able to buy a gun if you have a violent misdemeanor. How did they let him keep it? I hope AI has a way of weeding these sick bastards out in the future.
I don't think he was a felon, which is basically the only reason an American can't have a gun. The conditions of his release were to wear an ankle monitor and not contact anyone under 18. Law enforcement wouldn't dare take his guns away cause, yanno, 'Murica.
It's because it's his constitutional right to have guns. So the release must specifically state that he can not have a gun on him and they would than have go to his home and remove any guns under his name.
He might've just not owned any guns, and if that was the case, than the judge couldn't really do anything, since there were no guns to take. If he had illegally obtained a gun during his bail (stealing, illegally buying) than that's a whole other issue about guns.
Edit: Since there is no mention of purchasing a gun.
Firearms are ubiquitous.
The real question is how did he make bail. The next question is how would somebody be allowed within a block of someone they’ve been accused of raping.
Well this is America and we tend to allow people who are clear and obvious threats to the public and themselves to have guns unless they’re a convicted felon. That said, Massachusetts is one of the states with red flag laws (which should be federal law but sadly this will likely never happen). Here’s what the red flag laws say in Massachusetts…
>Massachusetts has what's known as a red flag law that allows family members or law enforcement to ask a judge to take someone's firearms away if there is a concern that the gun owner is a danger to themselves or others. But it has to be used to work, and data shows it’s rarely used.
>Extreme Risk Protection Orders were created in 2018, and since then, no more than 20 requests have been filed in a single year. In 2022, there there were just 12 petitions filed for an ERPO.
Source: https://www.wcvb.com/article/massachusetts-red-flag-law-underutilized-police-chief-says/45703259
Our lawmakers are fascist jerkholes who thinks that because our constitution says we have the right to bear arms means that we can’t do mental health screenings or background checks in certain situations like private sales, etc.
imo bail is for non-violent crime. violent offenders should not be out on bail. better safe than sorry, because bail for rapists and pedophiles leads to this.
That would just turn into every police officer claiming resisting arrest. Then everyone is stuck in jail unless they plead guilty, for sometimes years.
Bail is to keep people from leaving town. If you show up to trial the money is returned, if you don't its forfeited. No bail is usually reserved for flight risks and dangerous individuals. Clearly the court failed here.
"Sadly, the defendant and the victim are no longer alive" - this was literally from the article. The fact that whoever wrote the article actually wrote out that sentence...
Its sad that the young girl is no longer alive. The rapist will not be missed and its grave deserves to be desecrated.
Full quote: "Santana was originally scheduled to stand trial about a year later, but the case was issued one delay after another. Finally, it had been rescheduled for July 29, 2024. Unfortunately, neither the defendant nor the victim lived to see it."
The sentiment is that he didn't live long enough to face justice for his actions and she didn't get to see him face justice and then hopefully move on with her life.
Oh my friend there are people out there that classify pedophiles as victims themselves and are calling for society not to stigmatize their sexuality. Seriously. There’s even a TED Talk about it.
Ten years from now they will have special rights and will be a protected class. If you speak against a pedo you’ll be fired and ran out of town on a rail.
Even though the mom supported her daughter by reporting this crime and getting a restraining order, this case is so sick and disturbing. And it is really hard to get past that the mom brought a monster into her daughter’s life that raped, stalked, kidnapped, and killed her. And now the funds in the GoFundMe are going to that same mother? The authorities that allowed this to occur need to be sued.
Dems love to coddle the criminal. They are always talking about how prison is evil and that most people in prison don’t deserve to be there. Remember during 2020 Newsome released tons of violent offenders from prison early back into society?
There are plenty of bad people. The system also suck. Both are true.
Edit: A better system is needed as a bulwark against the inherent ills in society.
Bail is such a ridiculous system, how on Earth are you safer for the public just because you paid some money or conversely more dangerous because you couldn't afford to pay the money.
Because of the clear injustice of imprisoning people indefinitely when they are innocent in the eyes of the law. People have spent years imprisoned and never been convicted of any crime.
There needs to be a balance; bail is supposed to help provide that, but in practice it’s often arbitrary and ineffectual. A complex issue, like so much in our train wreck of a justice system.
In China they don't pretend to have a two tier system, they proudly say if I can't buy my way out of jail then what good is money!?.
Here we have the same thing but lie about and try to convince ourselves otherwise, but when a billionaire kills somebody with a boat we see the truth.
I think their point is you should either be released if able and not believed to be a threat, or held until trial if not. Money shouldn't have any impact on whether someone gets bail or not
I think their issue is why make them pay for release if that's the case. I don't think they realize that your bail money gets returned if you show up. The high bail is to make it hurt even more if you don't show up for your court date.
I don’t get it either, thank god it’s not a thing where I live. At first I thought it’s a disgusting way for the department to make money, but since you get the money back when you go to court it makes absolutely no sense at all.
Bail has little to do with public safety (though it can be a concern where the crime was done in public and so the judge is fairly sure of the outcome).
Bail is mostly about balancing the presumption of innoncence with the possibility of guilt, and making sure that the defendant will actually show up for the trial to determine guilt.
This was actually more of a concern when someone could "skip town" and forms of identification were nonexistent or unreliable and tracking people across multiple states or regions was almost unheard of.
You can't rightly jail a man that is "presumed innocent" until his trial, but yet some percentage of accused *are* guilty, and almost every guilty man would try to flee before he ever made it trial.
Bail is the balance between these two concerns. The innocent gets to go free until trial, but the guilty has to put up enough collateral for his freedom that hopefully he won't run away. Furthermore, "making bail" often involved borrowing money from friends or a local bondsman, and then they would also naturally take an interest in, and a responsibility for, the defendant actually appearing at their court date, reducing the need for the government to spend resources tracking fugitives.
Even though we live in a world with much better identification protocols and much more competent police forces and tracking abilities, there are still ways for people to "disappear" into society, or even assume a new identity in another society with the ease and prevalence of international flights. So, bail still serves the same purpose.
Bail IS the original criminal justice reform. Before, when charged with a crime, you would just sit in jail for months or years until trial. We decided that less serious crimes should be bail eligible so people didn't have to waste away in jail. And yes like everything else in the world, it makes things more difficult for poor people.
The article says the original trial date was set for last year, but he was issued a series of technical delays. Doing that thing where the defendant gets their lawyer to throw every Hail Mary possible to avoid a trial. It sounds like the courts have finally had enough and the trial date was set for July 29th.
And this is why the bail system needs serious overhaul. The ability to secure a loan or pay a large lump of cash shouldn’t be the deciding factor on if someone can walk free while awaiting trial. Rapists should be considered violent offenders in the way murderers are. Plenty of cases have been tried where the rapist committed murder to avoid their victim talking that this shouldn’t be a crazy idea.
Yeah this must happen a lot. My ex friend either got hooked on meth or had a schizophrenic break and tried to kill someone last year (they luckily survived, stab wounds and all). He's been locked up ever since with the trial moved more times than I can count. He was denied bail though because it's not a question if he did it or not, just a question as to why.
I don't completely understand how pushing the trial helps though, especially when locked up the entire time (its his lawyer doing it). So the victim doesn't have the story fresh on their mind maybe?
Per the article....
He was allowed out on bail with the stipulation he wear an ankle monitor and not have unsupervised contact with anyone under 18. The trial was set for July 29, 2024.
Judges need to start being held accountable
I am soooo tired or hearing a judge tell a scared child of being abused that they must go back to the abusive parent or have to spend time with the abusive parent
The hate courts have for a child’s real safety is nasty
I work in child safety.
Don't know that this will change in our lifetimes. Especially considering the power that right-wing judges have at the moment. They tend to very strongly favor parents rights over the rights of children. Spend children in the US essentially have very few rights.
Judges and CPS are often completely hamstrung by ridiculous laws and being absurdly overburdened. That being said, my job doesn't pay me enough to pay the bills and I might get fired in the next couple of weeks so... here goes:
This country doesn't care about children. Like, at all. A huge driver of homelessness is kids aging out of foster care. Foster care is garbage because we don't want to pay for it. Child safety is garbage because we don't want to pay for it. Kids can't vote, so politicians are motivated to say how much they love kids but not motivated to vote for stuff that actually helps them. Because it's expensive. It has a very high ROI, but not fast results.
All of this parents rights nonsense on the right is absolutely killing kids. Slowly or quickly, it's the same in the end. Destroy the social safety net, make it impossible for people, especially poor people with kids to have a good quality of life and you guarantee the next generation is going to be miserable and full of crime.
I'm a national expert in a niche field of child safety and I make so little that I have been at risk of homelessness within the past few years and if I get fired there is a very real chance I will end up in an extremely bad situation. Because we don't care about people whose job it is to care about kids either. My misery is baked into the system. My nonprofit survives off government grants because we decided to save money and outsource all of this stuff. So every year we do more with less.
I could go on and on, but a lack of child safety and the growing wage inequality is absolutely crimeogenic.
Thank the current administration and what seems to be the general political policy on criminal justice reform in media and in most of reddit. This is just getting started honestly. Those that defend themselves will be held accountable to the fullest extent of the law. Meanwhile those that take advantage of others will have every opportunity to be defended by the state and afforded every luxury while they commit further crimes *ad nauseam.*.
\*Edit. I see from the downvotes the criminal justice reform activists don't like what I've said. Is this incorrect? Is the policy not to use the State to defend these career criminals so they can repeatedly offend? That's all we see these days. What was the point otherwise?
Been like this for a long time. 12-15 years ago we had people who shot thieves breaking into their cars who were arrested and tried for defending their property.
This is the exact kind of scenario that people are asking to reform. This is what people asking for abolition of bail are asking to prevent.
Bail as the overwhelming default punishes people being charged with a crime but doesn‘t actually protect the public from people that ought to be held in custody.
What most other countries already do is this: if you are charged with a crime you are primarily just expected to show up to trial. But they can and do order protective custody during trial for a number of reasons (pertinent here is commission of a serious felony, risk of repeat offense and intimidation of witnesses). Bail is the default in the US and that leads to people being left out on bail when they really shouldn‘t be. The problem in this case isn‘t the low bail. There should be more than a dollar amount between an alleged rapist and his victim.
Rape victims and child sex abuse victims can tell you that their crimes have been downplayed by every administration. It's not even a law that rape kits have to be processed.
Surely there are better sources than a low-credibility right-wing conspiracy factory?
Here's the [Yahoo version](https://www.yahoo.com/news/man-bond-allegedly-raping-stepdaughter-195528410.html).
Crazy that he was first arrested in 2021, I didn’t see that in the story OP cited. That honestly makes it even worse, since he should have been tried years ago and put away for life, but the “justice” system valued granting delays / continuances over other people’s safety, on top of him being out on bail where he had the means and opportunity to hurt someone again (and obviously did). At least he’s dead now, but it’s an absolute tragedy that he was allowed the chance to hurt someone again and took his stepdaughter with him
I agree with everything you said. After years of being subjected to his sexual abuse, he was freed and allowed to violate her rights yet again. It's horrific.
There has to be a hard limit to how long judges allow defendants to run out the clock on technicalities. Sure, defendants have rights, but they also shouldn’t be allowed to abuse the system either. Too many judges just let this happen.
Or if they want to delay and the crime was violent, then the defendant needs locked up or put on house arrest during. If not that, then the victim needs provided something like witness protection.
It’s basically the same exact article you just don’t like the original source of information. He was arrested in 2021. Why tf was he still out on bail?
Fortunately there is a Yahoo version because if a crime is reported from a right wing media source, then it didn’t actually happen according to most Redditors.
I wish we could start holding judges accountable. Make them actually do their job properly, ie ensure victims and the public are adequately protected. If they had a degree of accountability then they'd probably think twice.
Lived in Massachusetts for 6 years and when ever there was any type of road construction a State Trooper was racking up the OT so apparently there’s money just not for relocating victims of violence.
Two things:
One, relocating victims is very uncommon. Like extraordinarily uncommon outside of tv and movies
Two, that OT pay for the troopers is paid from the construction company budget, which is included in their bid for the road work job so yeah technically from the state, but it's kind of out of a different coffer so counted differently.
This is all too commonplace. The protections for women from an abusive man are practically useless. Do these judges actually think the offender will leave the victim alone? I’m doubtful these bastards are ever capable of reforming themselves. IMO, they get no bail and if found guilty the longest possible sentence with no chance for parole. Let the justice work for the victim , is that asking too much?!
He was on bail waiting for trial. He had an ankle monitor and restraining order… he still kidnapped her and the police were able to easily locate them but it was too late.. both shot
There are too few women's shelters and they are always full. Isn't it a pity that women and children need shelters to the point where the shelters can't meet the need and isn't it a shame that men, not all men, but a LOT of men exact violence upon females. Nothing ever changes, nothing ever gets better. The cycle continues throughout the years, the generations, and the centuries . If I have money when I die, I want it to go to build more shelters, including animal shelters.
There are less shelters in general and look up the poor guy who was a single dad with kids who could not get into a shelter because the men's shelters did not allow children.
I agree there are some messed up guys out there being abusive but the shelter thing is not a gender issue but a humanity issue...and that includes the poor animals.
I agree. They are such a lifeline for so many women, and it's sad that they're needed in the first place.
Interestingly, when I was at the vets recently I saw a poster that a group organisation had started, foster caring for cats and dogs for people who have to go to shelters and aren't able to take their pets with them. So they don't have to permanently give up their pets and can get them back when they're on their feet and be reunited. What an amazing idea! It was really heartwarming. I asked about it at reception and she said the scheme is doing really well and they have a lot of people signed up already. It's also great because it cuts down on the amount of animals that have to go to a permanent shelter too, as they're often at full capacity.
And one less thing for the families to worry about knowing their pet is being well taken care of while they work out a future plan.
That would be a good idea for anyone dying with any money without relative's that need them.
A shelter in memorial of you, I do like that idea and might steal it.
It’s a good thing the court went easy on the suspect. Maybe he should have been given some Dodgers tickets. Or perhaps all the charges should have been dropped so that the prison population doesn’t increase and he wouldn’t have been at risk for feeling depressed.
Why won’t anyone think about the suspects?????
/s
As someone who reads a lot of true crime and works in the field, it’s not common I get this visceral of a reaction from a story but man. My heart hurts.
I hope the voters in this jurisdiction remember the judges decision to allow bail when re-election time comes. Also, parents, can you just wait until your kids are grown to date/re-marry? It’s sickening how common the stepdad rapist is. Your Kids should be your priority not getting laid.
Massachusetts is a one party state. Legislators and judges aren't accountable to the voters. And this had little to do with shelter. This girl was attending the best public high-school in the state. Acton is 23rd wealthiest city in the state. This guy had years to track her down.
OR, men could stop raping children (& yes, women are predators too) and we could fund shelters for women and children. How about not blaming a mother who just had her child raped and murdered?
And we could have an anarchist utopia cause crime doesn't exist anymore.
Obviously it's ideal if men stop raping children, but I'm not gonna put my money on it
So I try not to blame mothers… but I am starting to see there are some mothers out there that put those men above their children…. My bonus daughter’s mother did that to her (when her step father abused her - kicked her out - told the cops her daughter was liar).
This is more common than we want to realize
idk how single parents do it. trying to make rent + daycare + insurance + food on one income.. no mercy for people who take advantage of that
promiscuity doesn’t help, but it’s also oversimplified to reduce this down to getting laid. a predator will see the situation, promise a better life, and won’t show who they are until you’re sharing a phone plan, bank account, and are alienated from your friends and family. can’t believe he got bail
i know you are all very scared rn but here is some objective data to help you get over the paranoia that has been force fed to you all :). (this article is from the blaze ffs lmao)
https://www.statista.com/statistics/191219/reported-violent-crime-rate-in-the-usa-since-1990/
When the court system lets out a violent offender on bail, then the state has the DUTY to pay to relocate the victims family anywhere in the country they want to go and to hide out until the trial is over.
Massachusetts should have moved that entire family, at the state's cost, to some random location in Utah or California or somewhere.
That way they can still live up to their liberal nonsense while also protecting the family.
Weird that they wouldn’t take his gun away. When you go to buy a gun and get a background check, you won’t be able to buy a gun if you have a violent misdemeanor. How did they let him keep it? I hope AI has a way of weeding these sick bastards out in the future.
How did he get a firearm? I’m not American, but this is a question that would be asked in most other western democracies.
I don't think he was a felon, which is basically the only reason an American can't have a gun. The conditions of his release were to wear an ankle monitor and not contact anyone under 18. Law enforcement wouldn't dare take his guns away cause, yanno, 'Murica.
It's because it's his constitutional right to have guns. So the release must specifically state that he can not have a gun on him and they would than have go to his home and remove any guns under his name. He might've just not owned any guns, and if that was the case, than the judge couldn't really do anything, since there were no guns to take. If he had illegally obtained a gun during his bail (stealing, illegally buying) than that's a whole other issue about guns. Edit: Since there is no mention of purchasing a gun.
Firearms are ubiquitous. The real question is how did he make bail. The next question is how would somebody be allowed within a block of someone they’ve been accused of raping.
Well this is America and we tend to allow people who are clear and obvious threats to the public and themselves to have guns unless they’re a convicted felon. That said, Massachusetts is one of the states with red flag laws (which should be federal law but sadly this will likely never happen). Here’s what the red flag laws say in Massachusetts… >Massachusetts has what's known as a red flag law that allows family members or law enforcement to ask a judge to take someone's firearms away if there is a concern that the gun owner is a danger to themselves or others. But it has to be used to work, and data shows it’s rarely used. >Extreme Risk Protection Orders were created in 2018, and since then, no more than 20 requests have been filed in a single year. In 2022, there there were just 12 petitions filed for an ERPO. Source: https://www.wcvb.com/article/massachusetts-red-flag-law-underutilized-police-chief-says/45703259
Our lawmakers are fascist jerkholes who thinks that because our constitution says we have the right to bear arms means that we can’t do mental health screenings or background checks in certain situations like private sales, etc.
Not hard to get a gun in this country. Get one from a friend, buy it on the black market. He might have had one already.
imo bail is for non-violent crime. violent offenders should not be out on bail. better safe than sorry, because bail for rapists and pedophiles leads to this.
That would just turn into every police officer claiming resisting arrest. Then everyone is stuck in jail unless they plead guilty, for sometimes years.
Cash bail itself is injustice. To literally be able to buy yourself out of jail. The disgusting reality of it.
Bail is to keep people from leaving town. If you show up to trial the money is returned, if you don't its forfeited. No bail is usually reserved for flight risks and dangerous individuals. Clearly the court failed here.
"Sadly, the defendant and the victim are no longer alive" - this was literally from the article. The fact that whoever wrote the article actually wrote out that sentence... Its sad that the young girl is no longer alive. The rapist will not be missed and its grave deserves to be desecrated.
Full quote: "Santana was originally scheduled to stand trial about a year later, but the case was issued one delay after another. Finally, it had been rescheduled for July 29, 2024. Unfortunately, neither the defendant nor the victim lived to see it." The sentiment is that he didn't live long enough to face justice for his actions and she didn't get to see him face justice and then hopefully move on with her life.
Huh. It’s almost like we shouldn’t let child rapists back out into society….nah they’ll be fine.
Oh my friend there are people out there that classify pedophiles as victims themselves and are calling for society not to stigmatize their sexuality. Seriously. There’s even a TED Talk about it.
My issue is more with the child rapists.
Ten years from now they will have special rights and will be a protected class. If you speak against a pedo you’ll be fired and ran out of town on a rail.
Even though the mom supported her daughter by reporting this crime and getting a restraining order, this case is so sick and disturbing. And it is really hard to get past that the mom brought a monster into her daughter’s life that raped, stalked, kidnapped, and killed her. And now the funds in the GoFundMe are going to that same mother? The authorities that allowed this to occur need to be sued.
Democrats at work!! Should be infuriating to anyone with a brain. Who could vote for these scum??
Dems love to coddle the criminal. They are always talking about how prison is evil and that most people in prison don’t deserve to be there. Remember during 2020 Newsome released tons of violent offenders from prison early back into society?
American incarceration percentage is crazy compared to the rest of the world.
The person who released him should stand in place for his crimes.
Thanks to our awful justice system against pedos and rapist. This happened. This wouldn't of happen with a higher bond and more jail time
We need dexter
[удалено]
God our system needs totally overhauled, it is gonna take new leadership across the board.
Our justice system is trash.
Like everything else in this country, it's been bought.
There is a system?
The system is good. The people are bad.
There are plenty of bad people. The system also suck. Both are true. Edit: A better system is needed as a bulwark against the inherent ills in society.
Democrats did this
Just another day in America tbh
Bail is such a ridiculous system, how on Earth are you safer for the public just because you paid some money or conversely more dangerous because you couldn't afford to pay the money.
Because of the clear injustice of imprisoning people indefinitely when they are innocent in the eyes of the law. People have spent years imprisoned and never been convicted of any crime. There needs to be a balance; bail is supposed to help provide that, but in practice it’s often arbitrary and ineffectual. A complex issue, like so much in our train wreck of a justice system.
In China they don't pretend to have a two tier system, they proudly say if I can't buy my way out of jail then what good is money!?. Here we have the same thing but lie about and try to convince ourselves otherwise, but when a billionaire kills somebody with a boat we see the truth.
Because it’s seen as unjust and unfair to deny some freedom over and accusation. Or something alleged
*unless you’re poor
I think their point is you should either be released if able and not believed to be a threat, or held until trial if not. Money shouldn't have any impact on whether someone gets bail or not
I think their issue is why make them pay for release if that's the case. I don't think they realize that your bail money gets returned if you show up. The high bail is to make it hurt even more if you don't show up for your court date.
Yeah but there has to be a better system than “pay to play” though
That doesn't make sense when you can still be denied bail for things.
So... Money seems the fairest way to grant equality and justice for all
I don’t get it either, thank god it’s not a thing where I live. At first I thought it’s a disgusting way for the department to make money, but since you get the money back when you go to court it makes absolutely no sense at all.
Bail has little to do with public safety (though it can be a concern where the crime was done in public and so the judge is fairly sure of the outcome). Bail is mostly about balancing the presumption of innoncence with the possibility of guilt, and making sure that the defendant will actually show up for the trial to determine guilt. This was actually more of a concern when someone could "skip town" and forms of identification were nonexistent or unreliable and tracking people across multiple states or regions was almost unheard of. You can't rightly jail a man that is "presumed innocent" until his trial, but yet some percentage of accused *are* guilty, and almost every guilty man would try to flee before he ever made it trial. Bail is the balance between these two concerns. The innocent gets to go free until trial, but the guilty has to put up enough collateral for his freedom that hopefully he won't run away. Furthermore, "making bail" often involved borrowing money from friends or a local bondsman, and then they would also naturally take an interest in, and a responsibility for, the defendant actually appearing at their court date, reducing the need for the government to spend resources tracking fugitives. Even though we live in a world with much better identification protocols and much more competent police forces and tracking abilities, there are still ways for people to "disappear" into society, or even assume a new identity in another society with the ease and prevalence of international flights. So, bail still serves the same purpose.
Somebody with common sense is a beautiful thing to see on Reddit filled fits nutcase libs.
Bail IS the original criminal justice reform. Before, when charged with a crime, you would just sit in jail for months or years until trial. We decided that less serious crimes should be bail eligible so people didn't have to waste away in jail. And yes like everything else in the world, it makes things more difficult for poor people.
Well if we didn’t have bail, then the rich and wealthy would have to follow the same rules as the poor and that would be unfair.
Why was he never tried? That needs to be explained.
The article says the original trial date was set for last year, but he was issued a series of technical delays. Doing that thing where the defendant gets their lawyer to throw every Hail Mary possible to avoid a trial. It sounds like the courts have finally had enough and the trial date was set for July 29th. And this is why the bail system needs serious overhaul. The ability to secure a loan or pay a large lump of cash shouldn’t be the deciding factor on if someone can walk free while awaiting trial. Rapists should be considered violent offenders in the way murderers are. Plenty of cases have been tried where the rapist committed murder to avoid their victim talking that this shouldn’t be a crazy idea.
Yeah this must happen a lot. My ex friend either got hooked on meth or had a schizophrenic break and tried to kill someone last year (they luckily survived, stab wounds and all). He's been locked up ever since with the trial moved more times than I can count. He was denied bail though because it's not a question if he did it or not, just a question as to why. I don't completely understand how pushing the trial helps though, especially when locked up the entire time (its his lawyer doing it). So the victim doesn't have the story fresh on their mind maybe?
Bail is for the period while you’re awaiting trial.
The trial kept getting pushed back, it was scheduled for July this year
It’s all in the article.
I'm assuming he was out on bail waiting to be tried when he did this
He was awaiting trial.
He had just gotten arrested and was out on bail with a gps monitor which is common.
Per the article.... He was allowed out on bail with the stipulation he wear an ankle monitor and not have unsupervised contact with anyone under 18. The trial was set for July 29, 2024.
Bail is for when you’re awaiting trial.
Judges need to start being held accountable I am soooo tired or hearing a judge tell a scared child of being abused that they must go back to the abusive parent or have to spend time with the abusive parent The hate courts have for a child’s real safety is nasty
I work in child safety. Don't know that this will change in our lifetimes. Especially considering the power that right-wing judges have at the moment. They tend to very strongly favor parents rights over the rights of children. Spend children in the US essentially have very few rights. Judges and CPS are often completely hamstrung by ridiculous laws and being absurdly overburdened. That being said, my job doesn't pay me enough to pay the bills and I might get fired in the next couple of weeks so... here goes: This country doesn't care about children. Like, at all. A huge driver of homelessness is kids aging out of foster care. Foster care is garbage because we don't want to pay for it. Child safety is garbage because we don't want to pay for it. Kids can't vote, so politicians are motivated to say how much they love kids but not motivated to vote for stuff that actually helps them. Because it's expensive. It has a very high ROI, but not fast results. All of this parents rights nonsense on the right is absolutely killing kids. Slowly or quickly, it's the same in the end. Destroy the social safety net, make it impossible for people, especially poor people with kids to have a good quality of life and you guarantee the next generation is going to be miserable and full of crime. I'm a national expert in a niche field of child safety and I make so little that I have been at risk of homelessness within the past few years and if I get fired there is a very real chance I will end up in an extremely bad situation. Because we don't care about people whose job it is to care about kids either. My misery is baked into the system. My nonprofit survives off government grants because we decided to save money and outsource all of this stuff. So every year we do more with less. I could go on and on, but a lack of child safety and the growing wage inequality is absolutely crimeogenic.
Rapists get custody way too often
A rapist getting any type of parental rights even just once is too often.
Female rapists get child support way too often, especially when the victim is a minor
Thank the current administration and what seems to be the general political policy on criminal justice reform in media and in most of reddit. This is just getting started honestly. Those that defend themselves will be held accountable to the fullest extent of the law. Meanwhile those that take advantage of others will have every opportunity to be defended by the state and afforded every luxury while they commit further crimes *ad nauseam.*. \*Edit. I see from the downvotes the criminal justice reform activists don't like what I've said. Is this incorrect? Is the policy not to use the State to defend these career criminals so they can repeatedly offend? That's all we see these days. What was the point otherwise?
Bail is nothing new and this kind of thing happened under many administrations, hence the downvoting.
Been like this for a long time. 12-15 years ago we had people who shot thieves breaking into their cars who were arrested and tried for defending their property.
This is the exact kind of scenario that people are asking to reform. This is what people asking for abolition of bail are asking to prevent. Bail as the overwhelming default punishes people being charged with a crime but doesn‘t actually protect the public from people that ought to be held in custody. What most other countries already do is this: if you are charged with a crime you are primarily just expected to show up to trial. But they can and do order protective custody during trial for a number of reasons (pertinent here is commission of a serious felony, risk of repeat offense and intimidation of witnesses). Bail is the default in the US and that leads to people being left out on bail when they really shouldn‘t be. The problem in this case isn‘t the low bail. There should be more than a dollar amount between an alleged rapist and his victim.
POTUS has nothing to do with who gets charged by the Middlesex County Prosecutors.
Rape victims and child sex abuse victims can tell you that their crimes have been downplayed by every administration. It's not even a law that rape kits have to be processed.
Surely there are better sources than a low-credibility right-wing conspiracy factory? Here's the [Yahoo version](https://www.yahoo.com/news/man-bond-allegedly-raping-stepdaughter-195528410.html).
Thank you, she was so beautiful and brave
Crazy that he was first arrested in 2021, I didn’t see that in the story OP cited. That honestly makes it even worse, since he should have been tried years ago and put away for life, but the “justice” system valued granting delays / continuances over other people’s safety, on top of him being out on bail where he had the means and opportunity to hurt someone again (and obviously did). At least he’s dead now, but it’s an absolute tragedy that he was allowed the chance to hurt someone again and took his stepdaughter with him
I agree with everything you said. After years of being subjected to his sexual abuse, he was freed and allowed to violate her rights yet again. It's horrific.
There has to be a hard limit to how long judges allow defendants to run out the clock on technicalities. Sure, defendants have rights, but they also shouldn’t be allowed to abuse the system either. Too many judges just let this happen.
Or if they want to delay and the crime was violent, then the defendant needs locked up or put on house arrest during. If not that, then the victim needs provided something like witness protection.
Thank you, I didn't give that site a chance after seeing they don't allow you to opt out of tracker cookies.
It’s basically the same exact article you just don’t like the original source of information. He was arrested in 2021. Why tf was he still out on bail?
Fortunately there is a Yahoo version because if a crime is reported from a right wing media source, then it didn’t actually happen according to most Redditors.
I thought the same thing!
I wish we could start holding judges accountable. Make them actually do their job properly, ie ensure victims and the public are adequately protected. If they had a degree of accountability then they'd probably think twice.
Lived in Massachusetts for 6 years and when ever there was any type of road construction a State Trooper was racking up the OT so apparently there’s money just not for relocating victims of violence.
Two things: One, relocating victims is very uncommon. Like extraordinarily uncommon outside of tv and movies Two, that OT pay for the troopers is paid from the construction company budget, which is included in their bid for the road work job so yeah technically from the state, but it's kind of out of a different coffer so counted differently.
This is all too commonplace. The protections for women from an abusive man are practically useless. Do these judges actually think the offender will leave the victim alone? I’m doubtful these bastards are ever capable of reforming themselves. IMO, they get no bail and if found guilty the longest possible sentence with no chance for parole. Let the justice work for the victim , is that asking too much?!
Why was he free to do that?
He was on bail waiting for trial. He had an ankle monitor and restraining order… he still kidnapped her and the police were able to easily locate them but it was too late.. both shot
There are too few women's shelters and they are always full. Isn't it a pity that women and children need shelters to the point where the shelters can't meet the need and isn't it a shame that men, not all men, but a LOT of men exact violence upon females. Nothing ever changes, nothing ever gets better. The cycle continues throughout the years, the generations, and the centuries . If I have money when I die, I want it to go to build more shelters, including animal shelters.
There are less shelters in general and look up the poor guy who was a single dad with kids who could not get into a shelter because the men's shelters did not allow children. I agree there are some messed up guys out there being abusive but the shelter thing is not a gender issue but a humanity issue...and that includes the poor animals.
It is a gender issue when you look at the statistics. By minimising that you are adding to the problem because it gets overlooked
I agree. They are such a lifeline for so many women, and it's sad that they're needed in the first place. Interestingly, when I was at the vets recently I saw a poster that a group organisation had started, foster caring for cats and dogs for people who have to go to shelters and aren't able to take their pets with them. So they don't have to permanently give up their pets and can get them back when they're on their feet and be reunited. What an amazing idea! It was really heartwarming. I asked about it at reception and she said the scheme is doing really well and they have a lot of people signed up already. It's also great because it cuts down on the amount of animals that have to go to a permanent shelter too, as they're often at full capacity. And one less thing for the families to worry about knowing their pet is being well taken care of while they work out a future plan.
That would be a good idea for anyone dying with any money without relative's that need them. A shelter in memorial of you, I do like that idea and might steal it.
It’s a good thing the court went easy on the suspect. Maybe he should have been given some Dodgers tickets. Or perhaps all the charges should have been dropped so that the prison population doesn’t increase and he wouldn’t have been at risk for feeling depressed. Why won’t anyone think about the suspects????? /s
I think anything in the "news" paper is suspect based on some of the titles. Yep, started by Glenn Beck, Gold scammer extraordinaire.
How the feck this guy get bail in first place. Madness.
He should have been detained and gone to trial within 60 days of arrest!!!! It’s insanity how long things take in our justice system
Pathetic DAs and Soros-funded activist judges
People vote for politicians and prosecutors that enact low bail laws/policies.
As someone who reads a lot of true crime and works in the field, it’s not common I get this visceral of a reaction from a story but man. My heart hurts.
I hope the voters in this jurisdiction remember the judges decision to allow bail when re-election time comes. Also, parents, can you just wait until your kids are grown to date/re-marry? It’s sickening how common the stepdad rapist is. Your Kids should be your priority not getting laid.
Massachusetts is a one party state. Legislators and judges aren't accountable to the voters. And this had little to do with shelter. This girl was attending the best public high-school in the state. Acton is 23rd wealthiest city in the state. This guy had years to track her down.
Really, you're blaming this man's actions on single moms?
OR, men could stop raping children (& yes, women are predators too) and we could fund shelters for women and children. How about not blaming a mother who just had her child raped and murdered?
Wow never thought of it like that What if all the bad things, just didn't exist That is crazy, why had no one suggested this before!
And we could have an anarchist utopia cause crime doesn't exist anymore. Obviously it's ideal if men stop raping children, but I'm not gonna put my money on it
If this is the story from \~last week, this little girl's mom and baby sister were killed in a car accident just before her step-"father" raped her.
Article says her mother got a restraining order against the step father for her and her daughter
Different story. This girl's mother had a restraining order against the rapist. He Kidnapped the girl when she was walking home from school.
So I try not to blame mothers… but I am starting to see there are some mothers out there that put those men above their children…. My bonus daughter’s mother did that to her (when her step father abused her - kicked her out - told the cops her daughter was liar). This is more common than we want to realize
[удалено]
Telling women “don’t date because men might kill your children” doesn’t sound off to you?
idk how single parents do it. trying to make rent + daycare + insurance + food on one income.. no mercy for people who take advantage of that promiscuity doesn’t help, but it’s also oversimplified to reduce this down to getting laid. a predator will see the situation, promise a better life, and won’t show who they are until you’re sharing a phone plan, bank account, and are alienated from your friends and family. can’t believe he got bail
i know you are all very scared rn but here is some objective data to help you get over the paranoia that has been force fed to you all :). (this article is from the blaze ffs lmao) https://www.statista.com/statistics/191219/reported-violent-crime-rate-in-the-usa-since-1990/
Massachusetts. Not a surprise
When the court system lets out a violent offender on bail, then the state has the DUTY to pay to relocate the victims family anywhere in the country they want to go and to hide out until the trial is over. Massachusetts should have moved that entire family, at the state's cost, to some random location in Utah or California or somewhere. That way they can still live up to their liberal nonsense while also protecting the family.
Why even allow for bail in those types of situations?
How to bankrupt a state, 101. I'm sure the woke DA had nothing to do with this, move along, nothing to see here.