After non-profit paid his bail, this guy killed his wife

www.nydailynews.com... reN4fBhCB21SXG_1DyBn-wNqdGMnj1XdDMawk5-lm5fXu1zTX6E

A Missouri man is accused of killing his wife just hours after a nonprofit group posted his $5,000 bail in a domestic violence case involving his spouse.

Here's the rundown.
Guy beats wife
Guy gets arrested and put in jail.
Non-profit posts his bail and he is freed.
He goes and kills his wife.
Nonprofit claims how could they know

Soooooooooooo. Is the non-profit responsible for her murder. I know the guy physically did it, but he wouldn't have been able to if he couldn't make bail. The St. Louis Bail Project were the group that paid for his release. They claim that nobody could have known this would be the outcome.
I beg to differ. If this guy was put in jail for beating up his wife, he is obviously violent. It could easily be assumed he would do it again. And he did.

May his wife rest in peace and may this monster get what he is due. The question should be if the non-profit should have any repercussions for their actions?

originally posted by: JAGStorm
www.nydailynews.com... reN4fBhCB21SXG_1DyBn-wNqdGMnj1XdDMawk5-lm5fXu1zTX6E

A Missouri man is accused of killing his wife just hours after a nonprofit group posted his $5,000 bail in a domestic violence case involving his spouse.

Here's the rundown.
Guy beats wife
Guy gets arrested and put in jail.
Non-profit posts his bail and he is freed.
He goes and kills his wife.
Nonprofit claims how could they know

Soooooooooooo. Is the non-profit responsible for her murder. I know the guy physically did it, but he wouldn't have been able to if he couldn't make bail. The St. Louis Bail Project were the group that paid for his release. They claim that nobody could have known this would be the outcome.
I beg to differ. If this guy was put in jail for beating up his wife, he is obviously violent. It could easily be assumed he would do it again. And he did.

May his wife rest in peace and my this monster get what he is due. The question should be if the non-profit should have any repercussions for their actions?

They most certainly are responsible.... Unfortunately, a lot of these do gooder organizations never really see the big picture. They latch on to say one instance of someone being unfairly arrested and try to apply it to the 99 others who actualyl should have been arrested and in jail.

a reply to: Edumakated

I wonder if the wife didn't take safety precautions because she thought "he'll never post bail".

originally posted by: JAGStorm
a reply to: Edumakated

I wonder if the wife didn't take safety precautions because she thought "he'll never post bail".

Who knows. I sometimes don't have a lot of sympathy as some of these women stay with these losers even after getting their as* beat multiple times.

From the article:

“No one could have predicted this tragedy,” Bail Project Executive Director Robin Steinberg said in a statement. “It’s important to remember that had he been wealthy enough to afford his bail, or bonded out by a commercial bail bond agency, he would have been free pretrial as well. In times like this, we must come together for this family and keep sight of the need to transform the larger systems that create poverty, racism and violence, including the pretrial bail system.” The Bail Project is a national organization that bails out people who are jailed awaiting trial if they are unable to post the release money. It has been operating in St. Louis for more than a year.

So basically, the organization is trying to help people who can't afford to make bail. I can kind of see some good in what they are doing as there are some people who can't make bail for rather innocuous / non-violent offenses and they shouldn't have to sit in jail because they can't come up with say $500... the cash amount is usually 10% of the bail IIRC.

On the other hand, WTF are they thinking bailing people out who have violent charges? The liability alone would make anyone think twice about that....

They are screwed.... will be sued into oblivion by that woman's family.

a reply to: JAGStorm

Or, how about this. Rather than blaming the ''non-profit'' organization for bailing him out or for not anticipating that he would be a threat to her,,,,,how about wondering why he was given bail AT ALL. Why is it that if he could so easily be seen as a threat to his wife and or the community, WHY WAS HIS BAIL SET AT ONLY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS.

Yeah because all men will do the same
Let them all rot

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: JAGStorm

Or, how about this. Rather than blaming the ''non-profit'' organization for bailing him out or for not anticipating that he would be a threat to her,,,,,how about wondering why he was given bail AT ALL. Why is it that if he could so easily be seen as a threat to his wife and or the community, WHY WAS HIS BAIL SET AT ONLY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS.

Domestic violence is tricky. Article says he had been previously accused but doesn't make mention of what time frame, nor does it make mention of that prior incident resulted in injuries.

The big issue is that women have abused domestic violence claims and often times men are arrested for DV even though they didn't do anything. Ask any policeman about how women will instigate and even beat up their boyfriend/spouse and then when the guy tries to defend himself he gets accused of domestic violence even if he didn't actually hit the chick. They woman then puts on a Oscar worthy performance...

No one could have known, but just from a pure liability standpoint, seems like the organization was taking a huge risk.

The bail amount may have been fine without knowing the prior history of the guy and the circumstances of his prior accusations.

Was the wife not offered police protection in any way?, and the perps movements were not monitored?, I guess its another example of the value of life, the victim could not afford private protection and the city did not have it in there budget, no safe house for her, no police scheme of putting her number on the highest priority?, so if a call came in from her mobile they would immediatly send a car.

Seems this poor woman was left to be slaughtered as the co$$t was to high to the taxpayer for her protection as a citizen of the city she lived in, just shows the politicians really care about us.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: JAGStorm

Or, how about this. Rather than blaming the ''non-profit'' organization for bailing him out or for not anticipating that he would be a threat to her,,,,,how about wondering why he was given bail AT ALL. Why is it that if he could so easily be seen as a threat to his wife and or the community, WHY WAS HIS BAIL SET AT ONLY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS.

Pretty much the angle I was going to take. If anyone other than the man who committed the act is to blame, it's the court or specifically the judge that set his bail.

a reply to: Edumakated

You are right I guess. They took a risk. But apparently it did not appear to be that great a risk as the bail was set so low,
You suggest that ''on one could have known'' which makes sense to me, more sense than just blaming this non profit organization out right.

a reply to: JAGStorm

This is definitely not the organizations fault. No more than it would be my fault if i had bailed the guy out. It is the guy’s fault. He committed the act, don’t take any of the blame off of him.

originally posted by: Raggedyman
Yeah because all men will do the same
Let them all rot

Susan Blasey-Ford, is that you?

a reply to: MisterSpock

Yup.

originally posted by: Woodcarver
a reply to: JAGStorm

This is definitely not the organizations fault. No more than it would be my fault if i had bailed the guy out. It is the guy’s fault. He committed the act, don’t take any of the blame off of him.

Going to have to say you are right. People are entitled to bail in most cases. Anyone could have paid it, his buddy, his mother, etc. I hate to say it, but the woman decided not to exercise her 2nd and it cost her. Not trying to victim blame here but you are ultimately responsible for your own safety.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire


Anyone can be accused and arrested. That does not make them guilty and that's why we have bail. It is the right to not be punished until found guilty, in theory anyway.

For most things, a judge will decide if an accused person is a flight risk or a danger to the community and set bail accordingly. If a victim goes to a bail hearing and says they are afraid it will have great bearing on the bail and conditions of release.

originally posted by: Woodcarver
a reply to: JAGStorm

This is definitely not the organizations fault. No more than it would be my fault if i had bailed the guy out. It is the guy’s fault. He committed the act, don’t take any of the blame off of him.

I disagree. Bail is set to make sure you don’t leave, and you stay out of trouble. So if this organization is paying for minorities to get out of jail free, with no “skin” in the game, then they can retaliate, run, hide, whatever they want to do.
Theoretically you wouldn’t want to throw away your family, friends or your own bail money. That is why we have a bail system, so you have a reason to return. And if your theoretical buddy or family member was a guilty scum bag then you wouldn’t post bail for them.

The Police are under no obligation to protect an individual only society as a whole. USSC Gonzales vs Castle Rock.

I will go out on a limb and say that this altruistic group focuses on black people that can't post bail. You know, because not being able to post bail somehow causes racism.

a reply to: JAGStorm

No, they're not. No one made him kill his wife, nor gave him means to do so. It's all on him.

Better we ask why he felt it necessary to do this, and why bail was so damned low.

Sounds alot like he was going to kill her regardless he was in jail long enough to get a bail hearing and get a non profit to post his bail and still planed on killing her I doubt the extra time would of made a difference