teenytinyvoid

teenytinyvoid t1_j2i4r4a wrote

Reply to comment by knobbly in College Freshman by Nugget_4758

This sketches some people out but Big Lots also carries a ton of random, quality and interesting foods for cheap. There’s one in Northampton, as well, but I haven’t been in close to a decade. So I can’t speak to the selection/prices anymore.

13

teenytinyvoid t1_iuimd3m wrote

To your first point: yes. Equality for everyone means… even rapists. Sorry, dude. I don’t like it any more than you do. The law applies equally is the concept we’re supposed to be all behind, yeah? I’m not picking and choosing my “I like that this one locks up the poors” when it benefits me.

Because I say it again: if the people using the pretrial risk assessments agreed that he could post bail, meaning he scored lower than a certain number on their 1-6 PRA algorithm, which takes into account prior convictions and flight risk and risk of future violent offenses, then it is NOT on a bail fund to know any better. They (rightfully, in my opinion) see someone who would have freedom but the price tag is too high.

The case you bring up sucks. I’ll give you that. But we can’t point get so hyperfocused on an anomaly when we’re trying to overhaul such a complicated system.

To the rest… I have a spent years researching the horrific coercive nature of our criminal legal system, including cash bail and pretrial detention, and I currently work for a national org supporting reform in the system but honestly, John Oliver does my job better: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xQLqIWbc9VM

10

teenytinyvoid t1_iuibb9v wrote

This is an issue with that person being eligible for bail then, no…? Wealthy people post bail on sexual assault charges routinely.

How could the MA Bail Fund have known that he was going to reoffend any better than the people charged with determining if he was safe for posting bail in the first place?

15