Monday, August 29, 2011

Monroe County Bail Amounts Make No sense


It's NOT What You Do ... It's WHO You Know ;)
 
Case #1 ~~ Ryan Weidel, 26 yr. old worked at Sam's bakery: Charged with second-degree criminal trespass, second-degree harassment & fourth-degree criminal possession of a weapon (a stun gun which is illegal in NY State). Bail set at $200,000 cash, $500,000 property bond. (The excuse for the high amount was that he cashed out his 401K! WHO are we kidding?)

Case #2 ~~ Russell Liberti, 47 yr. old: Araigned on first-degree reckless endangerment, third-degree criminal possession of stolen property, unlawfully fleeing a police officer, DWI, reckless driving and several other vehicle and traffic violations. Bail was set at $25,000 cash or $50,000 bond.

SCATS ~~ So if you steal a car ... then flee police after getting pulled over for not wearing a seatbelt, then commit a DWI before crashing into another person's vehicle it's not as serious as having possession of BB & stun guns, trespassing and harassment? There just has to be some prima donna girlfriend (i.e. politically connected female, maybe a cop's kid?) involved in Case #1! Even Tia Gerstener didn't get treated so poorly after murdering her friend in a drunk driving crash.
  

41 comments:

Anonymous said...

If you only knew, you'd be frightened!

Lets not forget the Pscyc Detainer!

Happy Jails to you, till you're on the street again!
Politicians builds em, we fills em.


Monroe County Bail, as close to Preventive Detention as we can get without annoying the Feds about that silly Constitution thing.

Anonymous said...

"It's NOT What You Do ... It's WHO You Know"

Please post something to prove this statement.

Anonymous said...

As usual you are misinformed. Ryan's bail was not set that high because he cashed out his 401 K. Get the facts before you go off on your rampage like you always do. How would you feel if that kid was your daughter's ex? Your tune would definitely change.

SCATS said...

To 9:38AM ~~ As usual, YOU are telling me I'm wrong, but YOU FAILED to show us what is "right." Here's what it says in the link posted (just one of several sources): "In Greece Town Court on Wednesday, bail was set at $200,000 cash. The prosecutor argued for bail to be set high because he felt Weidel was a flight risk. Weidel had just cashed out his 401K days earlier."

SCATS said...

To 7:44AM ~~ Feel free to research & compare how Tia Gerstner's or even Chad Rahn's case was handled. Then look at Roderick Scott's case.

Anonymous said...

9:38: Whose ex he is?

Anonymous said...

What does this matter when once it gets to the DA's office, they will do their best to mess it up anyway? Mike Green is to busy to be bothered with what's going on over there.

Anonymous said...

The ex is WELL connected and that is only half the story. The police are withholding MANY pieces of evidence and what the intentions were, the bail was high due to more circumstances that were not released. Bring that together with a well connected ex-girlfriend and the police and viola! You destroy a young youths life because the ex messed with him but she had the law on her side as best friends. Boom, roasted.

Anonymous said...

Gonna have to disagree.

Think there's more to this than initially reported in the YNN story.

He was found in the parking lot of his ex's church with handcuffs, duct tape, a stun gun and an airsoft gun -- which is a replica of a real gun.

Sounds like a good time of kidnapping and torture was planned. Another BTK in the offing.


I'm thinking potential BTK2 is a hella bigger threat to public safety than a boob that tried to get away from a traffic stop and crashed 90 seconds later.

Pertinent piece: "The prosecutor argued for bail to be set high because he felt Weidel was a flight risk."

It's the flight risk part that made bail so high.

Having bags o' cash on hand from the 401K gave Weidel the opportunity to flee. Needing to use that cash for bail reduces the opportunity.

Anonymous said...

There is one and only one reason for bail - that is to assure that the accused will show up for trial. The judge sets a high bail if it is felt the accused is a flight risk and a lower bail if there are reasons to assume this is not likely (ties to the community etc). If the individual is deemed a danger to them-self or the community then remand to custody.

SCATS said...

To 12:01PM ~~ What you say sounds very plausible. Can you provide us with any more details?

To 12:21PM ~~ I posted a link to WHAM's story, not YNN's ;)

As far as I'm aware, going to the church of an ex is NOT illegal. Neither are possessing a BB gun or duct tape. The stun gun is illegal in NY but not many other states. What he was going to do with them is likely something that will never be proven, because NO ONE KNOWS EXCEPT WEIDEL. And he wasn't talking. From WHAM's story: "He's not talking so we don't know truly what he intended to do," Mancuso says. "We can speculate, but we don't want to."

As for the high bail amount, do you really think that the 401K from working in Sam's Club's bakery to age 26 would yield "bags o' cash on hand"? There's no way his 401K yielded even a fraction of the $200,000 bail amount, so your idea makes NO SENSE AT ALL ;)

SCATS said...

To 12:43PM ~~ So please tell us what are his ties to the community? We're all dying to know :)

Anonymous said...

So who was the judge that set the bail at $200,000?
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/15/nyregion/15judge.html

Is there a right to fair bail? Did this young man have a lawyer? Was one appointed to him? Is he in the mental health facility?

Anonymous said...

here is an article on "excessive bail"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excessive_bail

The judge needs to make more than a case of "flight risk" for this bail. Anyone is a flight risk. But how could his family ever come up with that kind of money. And we are innocent until proven guilty.

The community needs an explanation. And scats is probably right about the family of the victim ex-girlfriend being very connected.
Why is her identity being protected? There is no minor involved here. There is no sex crime alleged.

Anonymous said...

Some questions answered about bail etc.

http://criminal.lawyers.com/Criminal-Law-Basics/Posting-Bail-What-Are-Your-Options.html

It seems the 8th amendment to the constitution protects us from excessive bail but there are times when the judge can hold without bail if the person is a great risk or danger to the community.

What are we not being told about this case? Or did this young man try to challenge one of the elite families of the community?

Anonymous said...

Young youth-he is 26. It's about time he take responsibility for his own actions!!! When will he grow up?

Anonymous said...

SCATS if there was an order of protection, then he could very well not be allowed in that church parking lot.

Anonymous said...

You are only touching the iceberg on this one old friend. A similar case happened to someone you are rather familiar with. Do a little research my dear friend and the things you will uncover.

SCATS said...

To 2:17PM ~~ Yes, there is a supposedly a legal concept of what constitutes "fair bail" but it doesn't appear to be used in this case.

You raise a good question about WHO is his lawyer. No name was ever mentioned, but I did note he gets to sit in jail for 2 weeks BEFORE his next hearing date. That's the same sort of crapple they pulled with Roderick Scott after they shackled him & paraded him about in his jail uniform. They made him wait to even get his bail hearing.

To 2:22PM ~~ Re: Innocent until proven guilty ... that's my exact point here! He gets an unrealistically high bail amount set for some rather low level crimes: trespassing, harassment & possesion of a stun gun. They think he's a flight risk because of his pittance from his Sam's Club 401K but the guy who ACTUALLY FLED THE COPS is seen as a lesser flight risk after being slammed with several felony charges. This makes NO SENSE AT ALL.

SCATS said...

To 2:36PM ~~ Your opinion is nearly valueless since you don't state anything specific to argue your position. Typical ... ;)

To 2:38PM ~~ My understanding is that the order of protection came during the hearing to set bail: "The judge signed an order of protection for Weidel's ex-girlfriend and ordered a mental health evaluation for Weidel."

To 2:43PM ~~ I appreciate the support but without stating which case you are referring to, it doesn't give me much help. Care to share more by email?? I'm sure you know what you're talking about, but I need a bit of direction.

Anonymous said...

Rodderick Scott waited two weeks for his bail because a town judge can not set a bail for a murder charge. That is the law. He had to wait until he was either arraigned in County/Supreme Court or submitted a bail application to a County/Supreme Court Judge. You can not compare these two cases.

SCATS said...

To 3:59PM ~~ Oh please! Is that your best excuse for the foot dragging while they tried Scott in the court of public opinion? I believe there was hope his case would draw attention away from Rahn's crew who were under fire at that time. They clear other cases through the courts much faster than that. I know because I've been watching various cases over the years. There's no way that politics didn't have a role in it.

SCATS said...

For what it's worth, Roderick Scott's bail was much less than Weidel's ;)

Anonymous said...

Scat, You are getting away from your own topic. Your topic is BAIL. I was merely stating the obvious facts that you apparently are unaware or perpetuating your own beliefs to make your blog look better. I am not going to comment on the case because I don't care about either. If you have heard info why his bail was so high then state it. BTW, I don't even know what Greece Judge set the bail in Weidel's case. I would bet that it was Campbell. Because the Mental Health Eval that was a condition of bail. That is HIS way of keeping people in jail longer so the DA has enough time to indict people.

Anonymous said...

I missed you second post...Scott's bail was much lower...Because it was set in County/Supreme Court. It was not set by a town judge. That is the difference. I will repeat myself again. A town judge can not set bail in a murder case. Again your topic is about bail being set in Greece by a town judge.

SCATS said...

To 5:55PM ~~ My topic is bail and comparing cases where different crimes have resulted in an apparent disparity with what "reasonable bail" is. It doesn't matter which court when MURDER yields a fraction of the bail that trespassing & other lesser charges get! There's SOMETHING WRONG WITH THIS SYSTEM, and the fact that the reporters don't actually go to court and tell us details like WHO THE JUDGE IS makes it easy for these folks to get re-elected without having their record examined.

PLEASE TELL ME WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME YOU SAW ANYONE'S BAIL SET SO HIGH IN A CASE WHERE NO ONE WAS MURDERED/ATTACKED/INJURED?

Anonymous said...

Dorley herself said politics are not involved in the da's office nor should they be. And other assorted fairytales.

Anonymous said...

RE: Again your topic is about bail being set in Greece by a town judge.

Actually the title on this thread is "Monroe County Bail Amounts Make No Sense." I think that covers towns, villages, and Monroe County. Just sayin' ...

Anonymous said...

Yes. My mistake. It does say Monroe County bail....Yet we are not talking about any bails outside of Greece. If Monroe County bails are being talked about then it should stated about Monroe County Court. We are talking about bails that are being set in Greece. Not "Monroe County" court or NYS Supreme Court. Town courts do not equal State Court. That is the difference. Town Courts can not try Felony cases.
Probably a little known fact is a town judge does not even have to be a lawyer. There is a difference between town and State (County) Court.

Anonymous said...

If you get a bail bondsman you only need 10% of the bail amount, which is why you see many inflated bails. It would be interesting to see if the judge broke habit to set an abnormally high bail.

Anonymous said...

Scats. You refuse to post my comments. I am tired of you skewing facts. That is why i reply the way I do. The most important thing that you should know is that if you ran for town justice I would support you. You are right on a lot of things. There are inequities in government. These things that need to be changed come at the highest level.

The worst thing is that you are scared of me because I am right and you refuse to acknowledge it.

SCATS said...

To 10:42PM ~~ Which comments did I refuse to post? The one where you call someone "a nut job?" The one where you "think" you figured out who I am (there's always an implied threat in such remarks which is why a few of you continue to reference it and I continue to delete them) ... after you made several nasty comments asking if I was a special ed student?

Name-calling isn't acceptable. Discussion of my identity is irrelevent. The idea that you would vote for me is beyond ludicrous! I can tell from your remarks that you have no clue about who I am, so your vote won't matter ;)

SCATS said...

To 10:32PM ~~ Yes, it would be interesting to know. In the bigger picture here, I was comparing the two cases for the bail set vs. the actual crimes committed. The much larger bail was set for much lesser acts. It's not illegal to have duct tape in your car. Getting arrested for a crime that wasn't committed (but could only be speculated about, as per Sgt. Mancuso) seems to be quite a stretch of the law.

Anonymous said...

We were friends with both parties. She is not politically connected. If any of you knew this family at all you would be ashamed of speaking of them like this. There is so much more to the story then the media knows. All I am at liberty to say is that the bail was more than fair. This situation was VERY serious, that's why the bail was set that high-period.

SCATS said...

To 6:29PM ~~ So then, you who are somehow a "privileged insider" can't or won't tell us all that we don't know, but can assure us it was fair? WHY would I, should I believe you without any evidence to support your claim? Personally, I'm tired of hearing that we can't be told what's going on in some of these serious cases. Trusting the powers that be is not an option. Their track records are severely tarnished!

Anonymous said...

If you can produce evidence that she is politically connected (like you say) I'll tell you anything you want to know. You probably won't even post this being that there is no evidence of the sort and this will just make you look like you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

SCATS said...

To 9:17PM ~~ First of all, I am NOT "ashamed" of anything I've stated. Secondly, this is Greece. Everyone who has lived here & observed how these kinds of things get handled knows that those who have a certain network of friends get taken care of, those who don't won't. Thirdly, I find it quite amusing that you come out-of-the-woodwork FOUR MONTHS LATER with your panties all in a twist trying to defend her and how things were handled. WHAT IS YOUR MOTIVATION? Don't tell me you have none. I'm not buying it.

Anonymous said...

WOW! You are really twisted that up (without providing evidence, and all the while changing the subject.)My only motivation is the truth, I gain nothing from this. What is your motivation I wonder?

SCATS said...

To 12:54PM ~~ You want me to provide evidence when it is YOU who makes the claim that what was posted here was "wrong" without providing any evidence to back your assertion. Then you begin to try to play the game where you dangle a carrot about knowing so much insider info ... info that you won't share (pulled the carrot away) unless ... kind of a half-hearted attempt to bribe me into telling you what I know. Sorry, I won't play your games. And unless you have something to tell us that sheds light on the topic, you're done commenting here.

Anonymous said...

Thought you may be interested in page 7B of today's D&C.... it will show a little of the truth I am speaking of. Maybe now you can swallow some of that pride and admit you are wrong. Seems like when someone calls you at your game you choose not to print their comments. This blog is pathetic at best!

SCATS said...

To 12:55PM ~~ I haven't subscribed to the printed rag in many years, so I have no idea what's on pg. 7b in today's paper. If you believe this BLOG is "pathetic", why are you reading and coming back?