Illinois's Safe-T Act - Chicago will burn

This is one of those things where I’ve been given straight up proof and part of me still thinks it’s bullshit and y’all are somehow missing some details, as I just can’t fathom that this is actually happening and I’m not dreaming.

5 Likes

Body cameras should be a law for every law enforcement officer. It protects them and shows what the bad ones are doing.

3 Likes

I’m curious what parts of the bill specifically anyone is opposing. Nearly every part of it seems to be either redundant, codifying things that were already in existing law, or things that almost everyone agrees on.

Maybe I missed a part… what is bad about this?

I know what they need.

image

I would buy a subscription.

20220909-103710.jpg

1 Like

No cash bail for 2nd degree murder (and other) charges seems like a bad idea. And cash bail is replaced by a system that presumes release.

2 Likes

any of those charges where a person would previously have been held without bail - the person can still be held without bail. the process is just different now, the burden is higher on the police/prosecution and the time table for things to take place is shorter, maybe too short.

Why don’t they write a list of detainable offenses. It would be shorter.

I feel for people that truly are trapped there in some form and don’t want this.

3 Likes

In most states anything aggravated is a felony, and sometimes not eligible for bail.

1 Like

What i read was that bail would be decided using a system based on severity of the crime, likelihood to victimize people further and likelihood to return for court… which is essentially the way it was always supposed to function. All I can interpret is that now the state has to make the case for why someone should not be released or bail should be high, because the default is that they are free to go if none of those exist… which is exactly how it was always supposed to be.

correct - except its either held or released, there is no “high bail” because there is no more cash bail at all. i believe.

The issue is the standard used to release the defendant.

Defendants are presumed to be released unless the State can show by clear and convincing evidence that (1) the proof is evident or presumption great that the defendant has committed one of a list of crimes, (2) the defendant poses a real and present threat to a specific identifiable person, and (3) no conditions can mitigate the real and present threat to the safety of any person or persons, or the defendant’s flight.

So, I get into an argument with my neighbor and shoot him, killing him. I am allowed out.

I rob a senior citizen but the State can’t produce clear and convincing evidence (as opposed to probable cause) within 48 hours. I get out.

I rob a senior citizen (it’s on video), but it was a random victim. I get out.

Could you have gotten out for these by paying bail before?

i believe this has been changed to include “community”

Thanks, I’ll take a look. I’m not sure it really matters, however, if the practical effect is to force prosecutors to present “clear and convincing” evidence within hours/days of an arrest.

ILLINOIS LEADS U.S. FOR PEOPLE MOVING OUT: 8TH YEAR OF LOSS

this is just the tip of the iceberg for that shithole excuse of a state. Fuck that place.

1 Like

Clever workaround …

The initiative is an agreement with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) that would make two Orland Park police officers part-time ATF agents, Pekau said.

1 Like

i’m okay with the Safe-T act

lets see how it affects Chicago … if it works, implement it elsewhere

cash bail makes no sense … the only reason people should be kept in jail is if you think they are a flight risk … money has no reason to be in the equation

1 Like