Have the Blog e-mailed to you

Friday, February 17, 2017

California has a Pro-Arrest Policy for PC 273.5 Charges
Bail For Domestic Violence 510-760-9409
PC 273.5 – Domestic Violence
DV arrest in Fremont
510 Bail Bond is constantly reviewing our underwriting policy as it regards to old and new laws. As more laws are added to the books the more likely you will need our services. The domestic violence laws in California is a good example of 510 Bail Bond policy of easy underwriting and approval when charged for domestic violence PC 273.5. We know that most cases were blown out of proportion by the arresting agency and you simply want your loved one out of jail. Simply stated, give us a call and we will bail your loved one from jail.  
In a report titled, “California response to domestic violence:” Dated June 2003 from the California Senate office of research. 
"To encourage law enforcement to take more decisive action when responding to a domestic-violence call, Senator Hilda Solis authored SB 591 (1995) and SB 1944. (2000). SB 591 requires law-enforcement agencies to carry out policies that encourage arrest in domestic-violence cases." The law discourages the arrest of both parties, instead encouraging officers to make reasonable efforts to determine the primary aggressor. Because of concerns about law enforcement arresting both abuser and victim or having trouble sorting out who was the primary aggressor, Senator Solis authored SB 1944 in 2000 to change the term “primary aggressor” to “dominant aggressor.”
First off as a strong supporter of freedom I am generally against any new laws from the stand point, more laws = less freedom, more chance of you being arrested. At some point we will not have any freedom and will be subject to arrest at the governments will as more laws are put on the books.  Having stated the above lets take a look at what this new law has done. Again from the same above mentioned report.  
"The most recent research on the effectiveness of pro-arrest (the policy that California has) and mandatory-arrest policies “found good evidence of a consistent and direct, though modest, deterrent effect of arrest on aggression by males against their female intimate partners. Between 1990 and 2000 under Section 273.5 --  the percentage of arrests of females more than doubled.
Still, more than 80 percent of arrested suspects were male."
I don't know how this report can claim that the domestic-violence laws had a deterrent effect of arrest when more arrest have been made. As far as a deterrent, no law has been a deterrent against crime. Crime will happen at a steady rate, laws are in place to punish those who break the laws. As more laws are put on the books, more people will be subject to arrest.  
Now I don't know if this bill righted a wrong against men with regards to domestic violence but I can assure you that was not the intent of the bill. More woman have been arrested for domestic violence and the bail for a domestic violence charge also increased to $50,000.00. Before the domestic violence laws came into play one would of been arrested for an assault or some other lower level crime as far as fees were concerned. The domestic violence laws on the surface seem like good reform but in fact have led to higher arrest rates of women and more fees required of the arrested to pay.
"The bottom-line from this San Diego County study, is that 33 percent of domestic-violence cases resulted in an arrest and 17 percent of cases resulted in a guilty plea or a conviction."
The following is a recent call from a client regarding a domestic-violence arrest of her spouse. The wife was upset with her husband and was waiting out side in their driveway when her husband drove up. The wife started arguing, their voices become louder, neighbors noticed, the husband did not want to deal with this outside so he "pushed" his wife aside to enter the house. It was more of a slow wide swim move of one arm but was described as a push to the police during questioning. If the couple remained silent and did not comment on the charges there might not of been an arrest.  The issue was settled inside without violence, about fifteen minutes later the couple was making diner when the police arrived at their door wanting to questioning them regarding the incident. The police received a call from a concerned neighbor regarding a domestic dispute. After investigation the police determined that the husband was the primary aggressor based on the statement that he pushed his wife, he was arrested for domestic-violence under current California law. Bail was set at $15,000.00. This is considered a low bond amount for domestic-violence charges, usually we see bail set at $50,000.00. This was a clear case of an arrest that did not need to happen. Not using their fifth amendment right and the couples lack of mastery of the English language were the main cause of arrest, not the domestic-violence that was charged.  
The real story is that 83% of people charged with domestic-violence cases are bonded out at higher bail rates then before, spend time in jail, pay an attorney and have their cases dropped. Not much of reform if you ask me.  
For your Bail Bond needs in the city of Fremont and throughout the State of California, give us a call.
Bail - It's what we do. 


Bail - It's what we do. Any Jail Any Bail www.510Bailbond.com

Thursday, February 16, 2017

Mistakes on Social Media

Need Bail
510-760-9409

Everything you post, pin, tweet, text, share on social media sites are being tracked and recorded to create a profile of you for many different uses. Companies are using the information to market goods and services to you and making decisions to hire or not, all based on your actions on social media. When you send a text, or post to a social media site the contents are no longer under your control. They can be re-tweeted, shared or even changed and posted somewhere else. It does not end there, it will still be linked to you.
"The biggest mistake that people make on social media is that they let their post live forever." Said Mark Cuban in an youtube video. Mr. Cuban even goes as far as to state that your posts on social media may lead to your arrest. You need to have 510 Bail Bond programed into your contact information for easy retrieval when needed at a moment's notice. Your freedom and way of live needs to be protected at all times. 
Take a look at this video by Mark Cuban through this link from 510 Bail Bonds . How times are changing. 
There are thousands of new laws put on the books each year. Many of you may think that is a good thing, but in realty that means there will be a thousand more ways you could be arrested. Think about that for a minute. The land of the free is becoming smaller and smaller each year as the government finds more ways to arrest and to control the public. Our jails house more people than any other country in the world does. If you value your freedom visit our contact bail bond page and program in your call to freedom. 
510 Bail Bond services the Fremont Jail, Hayward Jail, Santa Rita Jail, San Francisco Jail, San Jose Jail - all jails from San Francisco out to the Sacramento Jail. If you're in jail we have your bail. Give 510 Bail Bond a call to set your loved one free.
#FremontJail #SantaRitaJail #Haywardjail #SanJosejail #SanFranciscojail #SacramentoJail
See the seven mistakes made on social media that required the need for bail.

Bail - It's what we do. 



Bail - It's what we do. Any Jail Any Bail www.510Bailbond.com

Excessive Bail

Excessive Bail

The eighth Amendment is where your right to bail at a reasonable rate is set. Having the right to bail and not having it set at a reasonable amount is the same as not having bail. The 8th Amendment as it pertains to bail:
"In England, sheriffs originally determined whether to grant bail to criminal suspects. Since they tended to abuse their power, Parliament passed a statute in 1275 whereby bailable and non-bailable offenses were defined. The King's judges often subverted the provisions of the law. It was held that an individual may be held without bail upon the Sovereign's command. Eventually, the Petition of Right of 1628 argued that the King did not have such authority. Later, technicalities in the law were exploited to keep the accused imprisoned without bail even where the offenses were bailable; such loopholes were for the most part closed by the Habeas Corpus Act 1679. Thereafter, judges were compelled to set bail, but they often required impracticable amounts. Finally, the English Bill of Rights (1689) held that "excessive bail ought not to be required." Nevertheless, the Bill did not determine the distinction between bailable and non-bailable offenses. Thus, the Eighth Amendment has been interpreted to mean that bail may be denied if the charges are sufficiently serious. The Supreme Court has also permitted "preventive" detention without bail. In United States v. Salerno United States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739 (1987), the Supreme Court held that the only limitation imposed by the bail clause is that "the government's proposed conditions of release or detention not be 'excessive' in light of the perceived evil." In Stack v. BoyleStack v. Boyle, 342 U.S. 1 (1951), the Supreme Court declared that a bail amount is "excessive" under the Eight Amendment if it were "a figure higher than is reasonably calculated" to ensure the defendant's appearance at trial.1"
Bail - It's what we do.

Bail - It's what we do. Any Jail Any Bail www.510Bailbond.com