> so presumably a number of them are attached to people who did no crimes.
replyYou and I have very divergent views of the type of person likely to be charged or prosecuted for a crime or indeed to participate in a diversion program that involves GPS trackers, my friend.
Your heuristic is flawed. The pool of defendants with pending charges who were granted pre-trial home detention are going to be disproportionately non-violent, first-time offenders compared to those denied bail or with prohibitively large amounts.
replyMeaning an error like this harms innocent people wrongly accused more than the stereotypically hardened repeat offenders you imagine to be undeserving of your sympathy and presumed guilty.
> non-violent, first-time offenders
replyNon-violent, first-time offenders don't get ankle monitors. But thank you for highlighting my point.
They absolutely can, depending on the jurisdiction. I saw plenty of cases out of Atlanta with drug possession cases with no prior history getting an ankle monitor, back when they were live streaming bond hearings from Rice street.
replyYou do not get an ankle monitor for misdemeanour possession as a first time offender, in Atlanta or anywhere else.
replyLike, actual lol mate.
Right, because only guilty people become involved with the justice system.
replydeleted
replyNot at all. They're remarkably similar. What differs is our cost:benefit analysis of closing off this errata.
replyYours (inferred) is "Too Much : Zero".
Given that those are terminal values it would challenging for literally-any-other-view not to diverge from yours, on this.
deleted
replydeleted
replyDon't live in the US.
reply