Hey, there! Log in / Register
Two cops under investigation for lack of action that might have prevented Hyde Park murder
By adamg on Fri, 11/06/2015 - 7:22am
The Globe reports police are investigating why the two failed to try to corroborate Stephanie McMahon's assertion she had a restraining order against her boyfriend on Nov. 16 of last year. They took him to a detox center instead of to a lockup; now he's charged with returning the next day and beating her to death.
Updates:
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
This case is pretty unusual,
This case is pretty unusual, but only because the police are actually investigating. Women are killed every day by their partners/exes and nobody ever really cares, so good on BPD for hopefully making some changes.
do yer job.
What about all the judges who
What about all the judges who let violent people off only to have them commit more violent crime or worse? Do judges not have any accountability?
If you are talking about bail ...
I would suggest that you look up how that works.
Otherwise, they are often working with minimum sentencing as it is.
no...
I believe the above person was talking about Massachusetts judges who repeatedly tell criminals "ok, you've been arrested 8 times for the same offense - here's 2 years of unsupervised probation, please don't do it again".
Not bail. Bail is what is set prior to being convicted or sentenced while awaiting trial. I'm sure they know how bail works, I'm not sure you do by your response. You side with criminals and people doing the obvious wrong thing far too often on here in order to prove you are the ultimate "PC" person, congrats.
All anons are the same person
So she obviously just knows that anon knows what bail is.
Not like we have any anons here who don't.
Sorry Swirls
But when a judge issues a bail that is at odds with the prosecution's recommendations (like letting an assault suspect out on $1K bail when the prosecution recommends $10K), they should be required to provide a written justification FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD as to why they made their decision.
I would suggest you look up "accountability" and "transparency".
Yeah right
Because you are qualified to be a judge yourself and know how the world should be run.
No, I'm not qualified to be a judge
(not that I'd want that job anyway). However, in my line of work, much of what I do involves making hard recommendations and decisions based on standards, rules, and input from others. When I make a recommendation or decision that deviates from any of those standards or rules, or totally contradicts the input I get, I have to provide a written justification supporting said recommendations and decisions for the record.
It amazes me that people continue to consider it so unreasonable to require the same from judges, especally when most judges consistently and totally disregard the prosecutor's recommendations. And I'll repeat what I've said countless times before: While bail is primarly viewed as a promise to pay, it should also reflect the severity of the charges against the person.
Bail shouldn't directly relate to the severity of charges.
It should relate to the risk of flight. That's what bail is, that's what bail is for. A monetary guarantee to appear before the court.
The severity of a charge has an affect on the risk of flight, but the charge itself should not advise bail directly.
Governors Council
You could always run for governors council.
Also, there is a difference between dealing with things and dealing with humans. Perhaps you should look into that.
Why are you so opposed
to requiring judges to be publically accountable for their decisions on important HUMAN matters like bail and sentencing? And why do you consider it so unreasonable that, when a judge totally disregards a prosecuter's recommendations by granting $1K bail to a violent crime suspect instead of the $10K the prosecution recommended, that the public should know the rationale for that decision?
But I guess in your world, accountabilty and severity of crime only apply when the incident involves a motor vehicle.
For the record, Governor's Council is another of those things I have no interest in aspiring to .
Quick quiz
What is the default for bail?
If the prosecutor cannot prove than anything greater than that is warranted, the judge's answer is whatever bail is.
There was a lady down in Texas who killed herself after being locked up for a week on $500 bail because, basically, she mouthed off to a cop and refused his orders. She would not have been locked up in Massachusetts, and that is a good thing.
Judge Dougan
'nuff said.
No accountability for judges.
No accountability for judges. Even if the officers had arrested this nut, he would've been released. In this state, you will now be held for six hours after a domestic violence arrest, but then you can be released, and unfortunately, this guy was going to kill her one way or another. Plus, the officers weren't mandated to arrest. The BPD rule states that arrest is "preferred". Their own wording will work against them in trying to punish the officers.