Here are the problems you face:
There are courts to settle cases where laws, rights, parties etc are in conflict.
Every person who comes to court does so with the absolute belief they are right. So does the other side, whether it be the government/people or the other side in a civil litigation.
In virtually every case, each side can quote law that absolutely supports their side. Judges decide who is right, or at least which side will be honored in a specific case.
Every case loser always blames the judge or jury. They never give enough credence to the other side’s case. Now, here on FR and elsewhere, the excuse often is that The Guberment is conspiring against them.
In many ways, Conservatives are victims of this mental masturbation. Take a look at the Alex Jones website. It is a classic example of purposely creating false alarm so he can bring people back to his website, so he can charge advertisers for exposure. It’s all too rare that people depending on Jones look as his prior false doom and gloom predictions.
A current example; the fools who believe that military maneuvers in Texas are a cover for taking over Texas by the military. When it’s all over, who will stand up and say; “I was wrong.” It was all internet-inspired BS, and will happen again the next time too.
Finally, you seem to take offense when I point out what will happen, first because you don’t have the experience or training to fully understand the law, and secondly, because you want to believe your side and your side only.
The bottom line in these bail cases is very simple. If the JP thought these arrestees might be charged by a GJ with “murder by acting in consort,” he doesn’t have to prove to you was right. He doesn’t even have to be right. He just had to think he might be right. That’s the bottom line law.
If the bail was excessive, there was a legal remedy to have it reduced. That was exercised in some cases, but that does not in any way mean the original bail was excessive when it was imposed to the extent JP did anything unlawful.
Finally, as a matter “en practicum,” no JP / Judge is ever going to be charged with a CRIMINAL offense for setting a high bail, unless the STATE could prove that he did it for SPECIFIC PERSONAL GAIN. Judge puts $1,000,000 bail for a local offensive on a guy his daughter is dating who he does not like, judge has a problem.
If Judge says “’At time of arrest, LEOs did not know who fired shots or was in a conspiracy to fire those shots, and arrestees were believed to be members of organization defined by State as an Ongoing Criminal Enterprise, and that Enterprise may have organized that shooting, and arrestees were there at scene and time of crime” Judge has absolutely no criminal problem at all.
Murder by acting in consort is a wide ranging charge, and local LEOs have no responsibilities to cut everyone loose because so many of them were there.
As I said, this becomes federal civil rights class action matter. If you object to predictable outcomes, and to a full understanding of the law, and a full appreciation of the other side’s position in the matter, as opposed to standing on top of (internet) hill and screaming how right you are, so be it.
“50 years ago, we all pitied the Village Idiot.
20 years ago, TV put his sound bites on the air to create controversy and attract viewers.
Now, he has a keyboard, too much time, and is seen as a sage by the equally uninformed.”
-Rush Limbaugh
Produce one citation in support of the legal standard you claim applies, "he [the JP] just has to think he might be right."
Produce one citation in support of the contention that the criminal offense of Official Oppression requires personal gain. There have been prosecutions under this statute, you will be able to find precedents, at least most, and probably all of which contradict your assertion.
I also don't take offense at your posts, or even at your veiled insults. I simply find them misleading, of negative value, and find you entrenched. Those factors (and they are not the only ones) militate toward not wasting both of our time and effort in dialog.
I do agree that federal civil rights cases lie, and I concur with your prediction that they will be taken, so we aren't in 100% disagreement.
Civil rights action is a loser when the government acts lawfully.
In other words, to take the position that a civil rights claim lies, one must take the position that some government action was unlawful.
I am not claiming that an unlawful government act is necessarily a crime.
“Every person who comes to court does so with the absolute belief they are right”
And you practice law? That is a flat out B.S. statement there. Which leads me to believe a whole lot of your statements on this thread are pretty much B.S.
Which leads me to ONE of my problems with our Justice System. When the facts aren’t on your side then just baffle ‘em with Bull Shit.
I want to know this. I the entire history of the United States have 177..or more...people ever been arrested on exactly the same warrant and all been subjected to $1,000,000 bail? I think that would be what would be called a precedent. Which, as far as I know, makes this particular cased unprecedented.