UNREAL: “A Brooklyn judge believes he found a loophole for state’s controversial new bail reform law.” That “loophole” was literally *written into the new bail reform law.* Made it stronger. @NYPost will lie when reform doesn’t lead to jail & when it does.nypost.com/2020/02/16/bro…
As stated in the practice commentary & quoted by Judge Hecht in his opinion:
“CPL § 530.60 [old bail law] remains largely intact, although the new bail law provides for a **broader basis for revocation of a securing order** in cases of re-arrest while at liberty.”
“CPL § 530.60 [old bail law] remains largely intact, although the new bail law provides for a **broader basis for revocation of a securing order** in cases of re-arrest while at liberty.”
What does this all mean? The article is a lie meant to make it seem like bail reform is forcing judges to fight. In fact, judges dont have to bypass bail reform. Bail reform specifically addresses the problem of new violent felony arrests. Even made this part of the law harsher.
Yet another indication of how untrustworthy the media—particularly the @nypost—is when it come to “justice.” Lazy Rooting for failure. Cheering tragedy. A bullying “told you so” mentality. No interest in truth or nuance. Even when literally written for you in a judicial opinion.
I’m a defender. I’ll give Andrew Denney (@messagetime) & Jorge Fitz-Gibbon (@jfitzgibbon) benefit of the doubt. Whoever fed you this story was lying. Your reporting is false. The premise misleading. Did you read the opinion? The law? Happy to walk you thru it. Meantime: Retract.
Did you read anything I just wrote? Plain English. The new bail reform law *DOES* have built in limits.
UPDATE: One of the reporters reached out to me. We had a cordial conversation. Walked him through the falsehoods, perhaps inadvertent, in the story. What the truth actually was. He invited me to send him any specific falsehoods. I obliged. Hoping he'll follow through & correct.
Update to the Update: The reporter didn't retract or correct.
