States Force Prisoners to Pay for Stay

#101
#101
Rickyvol77 said:
Ok so a sitting president gets impeached for an obvious crime i.e. Nixon, the feds spend $20 million taxpayer money for the trial, the defense attorneys also get $20 mill in taxpayer money?

Michael Vick, OJ, Trump, Clinton, Ray Lewis, Snoop Dogg anyone should just get free taxpayer covered defense attorneys and expenses? Which by the way are a lot more than any DA spends on a case

How about someone who is arrested for a drive by shooting for the 4th time? Same cost every time or just that case?
Click to expand...
Why not? They are innocent until proven guilty no matter the assumptions you make.
 
#102
#102
LouderVol said:
We the society set the standard, police the standard, judge and sentence based on the standard, but we shouldnt pay for the results of said standard?

As long as the government sets the stay they shouldnt not be able to charge for the stay. That's some shady junk going on.
Click to expand...

Shouldn’t the criminal be charged for not meeting the standard?

Civil court literally exist due to someone not meeting a set standard.
 
#104
#104
Ok Ricky how about this?

If someone is put on trial and found not guilty should the state be responsible for reimbursing the defendant for his defense and any lost wages?
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and VolStrom
#106
#106
NEO said:
Shouldn’t the criminal be charged for not meeting the standard?

Civil court literally exist due to someone not meeting a set standard.
Click to expand...
Civil is not criminal, aka no government.

If you want the prisoner to pay for his costs, figure out what the sentence length is, average value, and then fine him at sentencing as well.

Dont backdoor payments upon release that werent part of sentencing. It's not justice to administer more punishment than what is assigned at sentencing.

In case you missed it some states have these laws for people in jail, awaiting trial. Yeah your innocent butt could theoretically be billed for the government falsely accusing you and sitting you in jail for 6 months. The article didnt mention that ever happening, but considering it's perfectly legal, in those states, and you have people like Ricky out here, it's scary that it exists. At all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
#107
#107
hog88 said:
Ok Ricky how about this?

If someone is put on trial and found not guilty should the state be responsible for reimbursing the defendant for his defense and any lost wages?
Click to expand...
Hmm, can you sue a state if falsely accused?

Lost wages, ruined career, slander. Seems like there is a civil case there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#108
#108
LouderVol said:
Hmm, can you sue a state if falsely accused?

Lost wages, ruined career, slander. Seems like there is a civil case there.
Click to expand...

I don't think you can unless there was some kind of malfeasance by the prosecution and then I'd bet it's hard to recover any money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#109
#109
lawgator1 said:
In my work representing Florida Sheriffs I am very familiar with how this really works. The statute allows a county for example to recover $50 per day of an offender's sentence. The statute also allows the Sheriff to assert the right to recover the fee as a counterclaim for a civil claim by the inmate.

For example, we have inmates suing over slip and falls in the jail. We counterclaim for costs of incarceration to offset it. I can tell you a lot of them are not very bright. These common areas of cells are on video. We've had a couple obviously set up the slip and falls and it's pretty obvious. Have one now where two inmates are at a table and one gets up and walks away, then with this exaggerated action "slips and falls." His accomplice then casually spilled water in the area.

Not saying they are all like that, but you have to realize that a substantial majority of the people in jail are, in fact, criminals and willing to take advantage and lie whenever they can make a buck.

I have no problem asserting counterclaim against them.

I've also never in 25 years, heard of a Sheriff actually collecting a cent of it, by targeting those who can pay or otherwise.

Many things to complain about with criminal justice system. I agree on drug offenses for example. This ain't one of them.
Click to expand...

Makes you wonder if those guys have played or are college football fans.
 
#112
#112
VolStrom said:
I didn't say the resources of the FBI, I said equal technology. Someday maybe someone you know will get charged with a crime and the government unloads their resources against them, trust me you better have a bunch of money to make it painful for the government.
Click to expand...
Or maybe I just won’t you know, commit felonies
 
#113
#113
LouderVol said:
Where did you say the most expensive? I would say the public defenders need to come from the batch considered for AG/DA. You want to serve your government as the prosecution you start with time as a public defendant.
Click to expand...
I’m more acceptable with this concept but never for taxpayer money to go for someone’s defense who could afford it
 
#114
#114
Rickyvol77 said:
Ok so a sitting president gets impeached for an obvious crime i.e. Nixon, the feds spend $20 million taxpayer money for the trial, the defense attorneys also get $20 mill in taxpayer money?

Michael Vick, OJ, Trump, Clinton, Ray Lewis, Snoop Dogg anyone should just get free taxpayer covered defense attorneys and expenses? Which by the way are a lot more than any DA spends on a case

How about someone who is arrested for a drive by shooting for the 4th time? Same cost every time or just that case?
Click to expand...
That isn't how this works at all. Nixon would get the same as Billy Bob if he didn't pay for his own attorney. Tax payer covered defense is a right if you don't or can't pay for your own.
 
#115
#115
Rickyvol77 said:
Yea I’m definitely the one off the rails for not wanting taxpayer money to go to career criminals several times
Click to expand...

Bet you think Ben Franklin was an idiot off the rails guy.

That it is better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer, is a Maxim that has been long and generally approved. - Ben Franklin
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol
#116
#116
hog88 said:
What if your uncle had tits would he be your aunt?
Click to expand...
You are the one who comes up with insane and impractical scenarios based on your feelz. Lol you clearly don’t understand how these processes work and never will. But keep tilting at windmills on crazy ideas that will never ever happen
 
#117
#117
825VOL said:
we already have that now, it’s called being forced to use a public defender because you are poor.
Click to expand...

So maybe if you are poor, you should keep out of trouble? For the record, I believe white collar and other non-violent crimes are or can be far worse to victims than a guy holding up the corner market; and they should absolutely be prosecuted and punished far more than happens currently. There's always a victim - with white collar crimes, usually many victims; but it's apparently like Joe Stalin said about one death being tragic but thousands just being statistics.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#120
#120
hog88 said:
Bet you think Ben Franklin was an idiot off the rails guy.

That it is better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer, is a Maxim that has been long and generally approved. - Ben Franklin
Click to expand...
I agree. However the great great majority of those in prison aren’t innocent. Not even close
 
#122
#122
Rickyvol77 said:
You are the one who comes up with insane and impractical scenarios based on your feelz. Lol you clearly don’t understand how these processes work and never will. But keep tilting at windmills on crazy ideas that will never ever happen
Click to expand...

The innocent getting a proper defense is not an impractical scenario based on "feelz". I do understand how these processes work, all you have to do is look at the number of people exonerated post conviction to understand.
 
#123
#123
hog88 said:
Ok Ricky how about this?

If someone is put on trial and found not guilty should the state be responsible for reimbursing the defendant for his defense and any lost wages?
Click to expand...
Not unless something was done illegal. Just because OJ Simpson or Caycee Anthony was found innocent doesn’t mean the prosecution shouldn’t have happened
 
#124
#124
hog88 said:
The innocent getting a proper defense is not an impractical scenario based on "feelz". I do understand how these processes work, all you have to do is look at the number of people exonerated post conviction to understand.
Click to expand...
Your ignorant definition of “proper defense” is the issue here.
 
#125
#125
Rickyvol77 said:
I agree. However the great great majority of those in prison aren’t innocent. Not even close
Click to expand...

I would agree but 1 innocent person in prison is too many. Plus this conversation wasn't about those already convicted.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top