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

originally posted by: seagull
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.

I agree, so they posted bail for an idiot. Parents and families do it every hour of every single day. What about in those instances?
Say my son gets busted selling drugs. I bail him out. He goes back to selling drugs. Am I also selling drugs? If he gets caught again should I also go to jail? Of course not. It is a shame that people even ask this question. A murderer is rarely "forced" to murder anyone. They do so due to their own choice. Well unless they were MKULTRA students - that's a different story.

Star for seagull!

Sounds like this outfit has zero regard for victims. Shame it's a big political news day so most won't notice this. Who in their right mind bails out a domestic abuser?

a reply to: JAGStorm

personally - i hold the court accountable

they actually granted bail - and set the bond - $5k

its not really the " job " of people posting it to analyse - his threat level

thats the courts job - thats why they can deny bail - and remand him

so - no

a reply to: JAGStorm

I don't get it why would a non profit bail out a piece of sheet like him?

a reply to: DukeMisterio

Righto. Yeah, it does seem that the woman did not stand up for herself as she might have. So it may be as simple as others here have suggested that she was one of those women who think, or thought, that if she antagonized him further it would go worse for her. But then, maybe she did but the bail was set low anyway. Not enough info for me to make any conclusions other than trying to point out that, even though the OP attempted to place all the blame on the non-profit bail group, the real reasons here are better understood looking at other things.

originally posted by: TexasTruth

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.

So, let’s say you stop and help a stranded motorist, you get his car started and he gets on his way....... to murder a family of nuns. Is what he did your fault?


Your random good deeds are not tarnished by the actions of those you try to help. The individuals who commit atrocities are the only ones responsible for those actions. And I guarantee that you don’t want to live in a society that blames you for what people near you are doing.

a reply to: JDmOKI

Because a person's freedom should not be dependent on material wealth. Especially when they are still technically considered to be innocent in the eyes of the law.

How is trying to blame this organization for this man's actions any different than blaming a gun store/manufacturer for the actions of a mass murderer?

Non profit will use $16 million bail fund to free people

The Bail Project has a goal of freeing 160000 people in five years. ... The program's proponents say it will save hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars now spent to ... “We're going to hopefully get these people out, get them into the ... of a crime, and many are facing only low-level, nonviolent charges.

Yes, the St Louis Bail Project is responsible for that woman's death. They should have stuck to only giving bail to nonviolent arrestees. I mean domestic violence, come on. Their naivety and ignorance claim is over the top off the scale. Idiots.

originally posted by: Edumakated

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.

Fee-fi-fo-fum,
I smell the blood of a red piller,
Be he alive, or be he dead
I'll grind his bones to make my bread