A suspect in a murder case had his bond set at a quarter of a million dollars. His attorney argued that it should be lowered because of the man's ties to the community, his work record, and his lack of a serious criminal record. In refusing that request, the judge labeled the suspect a flight risk, saying, “The fact of the matter is his family has vehemently, vehemently argued he is not guilty and deserves to be let free.” [source]
The man, of course, is Adrial White. The judge is our own Charles Constantine. And the lunacy is just another day in Racine's criminal justice system.
Adrial's bond cannot be lowered because he protests his innocence too much. If only he would admit some guilt, then maybe he could be released on bond. Such is the reasoning in the twilight zone of Racine County Circuit Court.
The sooner the feds investigate Racine's courts, the better.
Judge (I use the term loosely) Constantine also pointed out that Adrial has been convicted of murder once, even though he (Constantine) vacated that very same judgement. Constantine threw out the guilty verdict, but then used that verdict against Adrial in the proceedings. WTF? So Adrial is presumed guilty until proven innocent, in direct violation of constitutional law.
ReplyDeleteMaybe when the good old boys get together this evening to throw back a few they can come up with something that doesn't quite insult our intelligence so much.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete(sorry--tpyos on the previous)
ReplyDeleteI'm no lawyer, but I think a new trial can be ordered without vacating the verdict. Since he did admit to shooting, coupled with the defense attorney not presenting expert counter testimony, the retrial may result in the charge being reduced from first degree intentional homicide. I would think to totally vacate the verdict would then trigger a double jeopardy situation.
Maybe the community will get together and post bail? Everything concerning this case has been off the wall... someone saving face or holding a grudge or just blatent racism? I can't figure it out.
ReplyDeleteWhen I served on a jury, I was astounded that the circus was allowed to continue when the suspect was overtly guilty. The lawyers stretching the truth one way and the opposite stretches made by the DA were insulting to the intelligence of the jury members. I think they just puff themselves up for the ego lift without concern for what is right or wrong.
The job of the defense attorney is not to determine if his or her client is guilty or not, that's the prosecutions job. Their job rather is to get their client off the hook. You don't ask the questions if they are going to produce answers you don't want to hear. Lawyers aren't supposed to stretch the truth, but they do manipulate it to get it to work on their behalf.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure that Adrial was made an example of, to discourage vigilantism. There was concern that appearing to go easy on him would be taken as tacit approval of his actions, or at least admission that his actions were understandable.
ReplyDeleteAs for the racist angle, all you have to do is read the comments on the Journal Times' site.
It's interesting to note that the two sides on the Adrial issue are as hardened and polarized as those during the recent elections. If you're pro-Adrial, you automatically condone murder, whereas if you're anti-Adrial, you're probably a criminal yourself.
Industry moving out of Racine, people getting laid off every week, just read the paper, and here’s a guy in jail that people are offering him jobs....am I missing something?
ReplyDeleteI do question the first degree murder charge, but he DID take a gun out side, it didn’t just jump into his hand, and he shot and killed someone. That’s been pretty well established.
A quarter million bail, why is he even being considered for bail? I guess I’m really confused, I guess it’s some of that “arrogant” lawyer talk KK mentioned and I do agree with Orbs on the vigilante thing.