Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Redrob
This was on the www.freechris.org website when I got home:
In a move not suprising to some, Chris? bail has been revoked, and he has been put back in Jail. We don?t have a lot of details at this time, but apparently none of the motions were heard in court, and despite Chris not residing in polk county, or having porn on NTFU, the bail was revoked anyway
He didn't get his hearing concerning if the content is, in fact, obscene and has been denied his First Amendment right of Free Speech. This judge's actions appear to me to be inconsistent with standard legal practices.
Help Chris out and donate a few bucks. |
I do not know the specifics of this case...but usually the way the system works is...
One is arrested by law enforcement.
The legal reasons for the arrest are presented to the Prosecutor.
The Prosector goes over these reasons and looks for two things...was the arrest legal...is there sufficient evidence to go to trial with the expectation of obtaining a guilty verdict. If he thinks this criteria is met he then officially indicts.
An arraignment hearing is held before a Judge. At this hearing the defendent is read the charges against him/her and asked to enter a plea of guilty or not guilty. No evidence is presented at an arraignment.
At the arraignment the amount of bail is established and if bail is granted the judge may or may not place conditions with the bail and a court date is set.
If the defendent lives up to the condition of bail and appears for his court date...then the trial will begin and motions by the defense and/or prosecutor can be heard about the evidence in the case. It is at this point that the defense can challenge the evidence.
It is my understanding that this fellow did not live up to the conditions of his bail thus his bail was revoked.