Put your ad on MySaline! 501.303.4010






Latest Activity

Carlton Clay posted a blog post
9 hours ago
Shelli Russell posted a photo
16 hours ago
Shelli Russell commented on Wendy Friend's blog post Benton Panther Playoff game 11/21 Where is the link on ESPNWPS.com??
yesterday
Shelli Russell posted blog posts
yesterday
Tricia Power posted photos
yesterday
Wendy Friend commented on Wendy Friend's blog post Benton Panther Playoff game 11/21 Where is the link on ESPNWPS.com??
yesterday
Shelli Russell posted a status
"Hornets at Bentonville tonight. Live streaming at http://t.co/gUxwurallq via http://t.co/BbpWdG8oGi."
yesterday
Wendy Friend posted a blog post
yesterday
Tricia Power posted a blog post
yesterday
Shelli Russell posted events
yesterday
Shelli Russell added a discussion to the group Saline County Politics
yesterday
Seth Hardwick posted blog posts
yesterday
jim catton commented on Shelli Russell's blog post Bryant City Council Meeting Canceled Due to a Record 5 Aldermen Absent
yesterday
Jayme Pultro is now a member of MySaline.com
Friday
Amanda Bradley commented on Amanda Bradley's blog post free pallets?
Friday
Shelli Russell commented on Shelli Russell's blog post Bryant City Council Meeting Canceled Due to a Record 5 Aldermen Absent
Friday
brent hobson commented on Amanda Bradley's blog post free pallets?
Friday
Shelli Russell commented on Shelli Russell's blog post Bryant City Council Meeting Canceled Due to a Record 5 Aldermen Absent
Friday
Amanda Bradley commented on Amanda Bradley's blog post free pallets?
Friday
Shelli Russell commented on Shelli Russell's blog post County Attorney Speaks to Kiwanis About Decisions Facing Our Newly Wet County
Friday

It's been policy MySaline's since October 2013... Use your real first and last name as your username. Use the Settings link to change it. Don't be afraid to update your profile pic while you're there!  You're beautiful!


Opinions expressed on MySaline.com are not necessarily those of MySaline. Members are responsible for their own content. Read the terms of service on your profile page. Read it. Read.


Contact MySaline with questions about the website, advertising, donating to support MySaline, or any other reason:

PO Box 307, Bryant AR 72089, 501.303.4010, info@mysaline.com

MySaline.com is news & community since 2007 in Saline County, Arkansas. Join today and get involved!

Does anybody know what's going on in Saline County? There has been road blocks, warrant sweeps, two of my friends went to jail and one of them had to stay the whole weekend and see the judge on Monday.One was for driving on suspended and speeding ,the other had a warrant for some traffic offenses. They called me and I called the bondsman and was told that I would have to post a sheriff bond and the other one had to see the judge on Monday.I had to take the sheriff's office $120.00 and on Monday the Dist Judge set my other friend a sheriff bond too. I've never seen or heard of anything like this before.

Views: 161

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I think you already discovered what they were doing, arresting people that were breaking the law, such as speeding and driving when they do not have a license! Not sure what a Sheriff Bond is exactly, but it is not a reward for being top of their graduating class.
If I'm not mistaken it is the Bail bondsman job to see that All his/her bondees show up for all of their court dates. When one doesn't show up the courts can send them a show cause summons and they have a certin number of days to either bring that defendant in or pay the courts the amount of the bond.
It only seems logical to me that instead of our tax dollars going for a warrant officer to run around and look for someone with a warrant, make the bondsmen find and bring them in or pay the money!! Otherwise the warrants are going to stack up and we will have less officers protecting the citizens because they are too busy looking for ones that don't go to court.
A sheriff can not be a surety on a bond, that is illegal and I don't believe a sheriff's bond is where a sheriff can charge 10% either, I understand the sheriff's office is charging 10% on felonies and giving them a receit and a court date notice and calling it a sheriff bond?? Why are they only doing this on felonies and not everybody??
It's all about the money, and just where is this money going anyways?

Greg White said:
Seems a lot of folks in Saline County think that you can just miss showing up for court on traffic violations. These bonds assure that you will appear in court and the cost attributed to those bonds are forwarded to the court to cover costs of those folks that have wasted the courts resources previously. Thus, it is very likely that if you are required to post a Sheriff's bond or stay in jail until you see a judge, it is probable that you have skipped out on a court appearance on an outstanding warrant. Suspended license is probably a good sign that we have a repeat offender.
It's great that they are arresting people that are breaking the law but everybody but capital murders have a right to a bond and I don't think they are making misdemeanor traffic violators post a bond with the sheriff, only felonies, that's just a way for the sheriff's office to collect more money!! Saline County has never done this before and I don't know of any county in this state that does it this way, they allow the bondsman to write the bonds and when the person misses the bondsman is liable for the amount of the bond, and that's how it should be, seems like there's some underlying stuff going on that maybe they don't won't people to know about, but I understand a bonding company filed a Federal lawsuit on them and we'll see what happens next?

Jade said:
I think you already discovered what they were doing, arresting people that were breaking the law, such as speeding and driving when they do not have a license! Not sure what a Sheriff Bond is exactly, but it is not a reward for being top of their graduating class.
Your so Right and if he had alresdy paid the fine, why did he have a FTA?? Did they forget to take it out of the system or what??? That must have been the wekend that they weren't allowing any bondsman to write bonds.

Sandy Johnson said:
I forgot to add that yes, her boyfriend was going over the speed limit and certainly a ticket should have be issued ---HOWEVER, she has epilepsy and he was trying to get to her BEFORE she went into a seizure. There are some valid reasons the law is broken and I am sure everyone has driven over the posted speed limit at least once in their lifetime.

Sandy Johnson said:
My daughers boyfriend was arrested and had to post bond because he was driving 12 miles over the speed limit. The end result was that he had a failure to appear that was on his record -- He HAD already paid for the fines and does NOT have any other failures --- but it stays on your record for 3-5 years so since he did it once he might do it again. I can understand arresting someone for driving on a suspended license and why woul danyone drive without a license ... but come on, having a failure to appear that has ALREADY been paid for and still you have to go to jail and be bonded out because you have that on your record --- sounds like double jeopardy to me. And that is how we will be approaching the matter.
Gene Hall said:
It's great that they are arresting people that are breaking the law but everybody but capital murders have a right to a bond and I don't think they are making misdemeanor traffic violators post a bond with the sheriff, only felonies, that's just a way for the sheriff's office to collect more money!! Saline County has never done this before and I don't know of any county in this state that does it this way, they allow the bondsman to write the bonds and when the person misses the bondsman is liable for the amount of the bond, and that's how it should be, seems like there's some underlying stuff going on that maybe they don't won't people to know about, but I understand a bonding company filed a Federal lawsuit on them and we'll see what happens next?

Jade said:
I think you already discovered what they were doing, arresting people that were breaking the law, such as speeding and driving when they do not have a license! Not sure what a Sheriff Bond is exactly, but it is not a reward for being top of their graduating class.

Well I am sorry your child has epilepsy, but I still stand by my comment. If you don't break the law to begin with, you would not have this problem. And before you start, Yes, I have had a few speeding tickets, paid them all and have never had an issue. I would rather law enforcement set up road blocks and take offenders off the street than worry that a speeder will lose control and injure me or my family trying to save their family. I really don't think our police have issues they are trying to hide by taking drunks, People that fail to appear and other offenses off our public streets.
If they weren't doing it, there would be a discussion about how lazy our police are... you just can't win.....


Sandy Johnson said:

I forgot to add that yes, her boyfriend was going over the speed limit and certainly a ticket should have be issued ---HOWEVER, she has epilepsy and he was trying to get to her BEFORE she went into a seizure. There are some valid reasons the law is broken and I am sure everyone has driven over the posted speed limit at least once in their lifetime.

Sandy Johnson said:
My daughers boyfriend was arrested and had to post bond because he was driving 12 miles over the speed limit. The end result was that he had a failure to appear that was on his record -- He HAD already paid for the fines and does NOT have any other failures --- but it stays on your record for 3-5 years so since he did it once he might do it again. I can understand arresting someone for driving on a suspended license and why woul danyone drive without a license ... but come on, having a failure to appear that has ALREADY been paid for and still you have to go to jail and be bonded out because you have that on your record --- sounds like double jeopardy to me. And that is how we will be approaching the matter.
 
Gene Hall said:
It's great that they are arresting people that are breaking the law but everybody but capital murders have a right to a bond and I don't think they are making misdemeanor traffic violators post a bond with the sheriff, only felonies, that's just a way for the sheriff's office to collect more money!! Saline County has never done this before and I don't know of any county in this state that does it this way, they allow the bondsman to write the bonds and when the person misses the bondsman is liable for the amount of the bond, and that's how it should be, seems like there's some underlying stuff going on that maybe they don't won't people to know about, but I understand a bonding company filed a Federal lawsuit on them and we'll see what happens next?

Jade said:
I think you already discovered what they were doing, arresting people that were breaking the law, such as speeding and driving when they do not have a license! Not sure what a Sheriff Bond is exactly, but it is not a reward for being top of their graduating class.
it is not just folks breaking the law. my son in law was arrested in a sweep a couple of weekends ago and held for no other reason than he is Latino. he was refused the right to call his consulate (a violation of the Vienna convention) and refused the right to call his attorney ( a civil rights violation.) a deputy from inside told our attorney to pull the video from that weekend, said it did get bad in there. Jailers consistently called one Pakistani man Osama, and called the Latino men racially degrading names. there was also some physical contact. They were refused showers for 4 days, no blankets with which to sleep at night, and slept on hard cold floors. Saline Co called immigration to pick up ALL of them, even the ones with green cards. Immigration was very angry. created paperwork (your tax dollars at work) and they wound up letting them go. They refused to let my daughter pay his fine. The sheriff has told so many people so many different lies, he is now tripping himself up, can't remember to whom he told which lie. One lie for reporters, one for ACLU, one to our attorney, one to us. Make up your mind as to which lie you want to use mr sheriff. We have contacted the media (local and national) Blanch Lincoln Lambert's office, Vic Snyder's office, ACLU, our civil rights lawyer, Reggie Koch, and the Mexican consulate. Several have come forward with stories of abuse (verbal and physical) and the consulate, ACLU, and the detainees are all filing a lawsuit against Saline County Sheriffs office. These men were guilty of nothing more than being immigrants.

If you know of anyone who has been arrested in this sweep, who may have had their rights violated, please contact Attorney Reggie Koch in Little Rock. He would like to hear your story and you may possibly have a case. I for one will not stop until the Sheriff is removed from office,policy and procedure has been changed, and these men are compensated for lost wages, abuse suffered, and monetary damages.

I put this sheriff in the same category as a common law breaker. If you are not going to follow the law, you need not hold office. not having the knowledge of these laws is no excuse.
You are right about if you are out of state and I think you should be allowed that opportunity, instead of having to go back to court out of state. I don't think these ones in questions are from out of state and as far as the bond amount going towards the fines NO thats not the case at all, the Sheriff is only allowing the bondsmen to write the little misdemeanor traffic tickets, so no none of that $50.00 goes toward the fines. And if that person he or she bonded misses court the bondsman will have to go find that person and put them back in jail or pay the full amount of the bond to the court! I fully agree that thats the way it should be and there should never be warrants stacked up or no warrants officer or any officer out looking for people that didn't show up, it's the bondsman job that's what they guarantee the courts when they write the bond, that their defendant will show up for all od his/her court dates. The problem here is that the Sheriff is only allowing the bondsman to write the misdemeanor bonds and the sheriff is collecting 10 % and giving them a receipt and a court date and calling it a sheriff's bond! Now here's the question, who is going to go and hunt these that miss court??
The sheriff is exempt from having to pay the state fees that bondsman do and from being liable for the ones that don't show up, It'll be us with our tax dollars paying warrant officers to serve the warrants that are going to pile up, but what's a few more?? Wonder what the Public Defenders office and the Arkansas Insurance Dept. thinks about the money the sheriff is taking away from them?
I understand there was a Federal Lawsuit filed on them last week from a bonding company, funny the public hasn't been notified about any of this!
our attorney has used the FOIA to obtain the video that was taping the weekend in question concerning our case. there are officers there that are tired of having problems with the sheriff and his cronies that will talk. We are going to national media. Mark my words, I WILL NOT DROP THIS ISSUE. I want to see some people fired, along with the law breaking sheriff. It happened to my family this time, it may be yours next time. We have a right to demand that the people in charge follow laws and not try to skirt around them. I have been a rights activist for many years, and have the money to hire some very good attorneys. You are correct in your previous statement that they have bitten off more than they can chew.

I lived here during the reign of King Dan Harmon who had the run of Saline county and did as he wished. I left and said I would never come back, and here I am. It is well known through out the state that the majority of people in charge here are as crooked now as they were then! I have absolutely no respect for the Sheriffs office here in Saline county. They were abusive, and denied people their basic civil rights. they degraded them, abusing mentally, emotionally, and physically. Sheriff may say I wasn't there, I do not know of what I am speaking, but my son in law was there and so were others, and the tapes do not lie. He told the reporter he was not there all weekend, and yet his deputies tell us otherwise as do the tapes. Not only was he there, he was well aware of what was going on in his jail. I would be embarrassed to tell the press that I am the sheriff, yet I have no idea of what is going on in my jail, and I do not know the laws I am suppose to follow, and am not aware of basic civil rights that every detainee is to be given. What does that say about him as a leader?


btw, we are up to over our 15 people we needed to file a lawsuit and make it stick. They may need to think about crossing every t and dotting every i at this point. we have witnesses, tapes, recordings of the sheriff telling me and my daughter one thing, the media something different, and ACLU yet another lie. At least stick with one lie so you do not trip your self up. I can't trust anything else he says now that I have caught him in a tangle of lies. wonder where he attends church?


Gene Hall said:
From what I understand the story is out and of course the sheriff's office isn't cooperating with giving up any information, imagine that?? We know they have backed theirselves in the corner and don't have any legal ammo to fight back with!!
Gene Hall said:
It sounds to me like this administration is just as bad as tha last one!!! They may have bit off more than they can chew this time. Maybe that's why the Sheriff his self started bonding the felonies out his self so he can make enough to pay off the lawsuit.... Better be glad you have a good attorney, or saline county would wiggle their way out of this too.

Ana Hernandez said:
it is not just folks breaking the law. my son in law was arrested in a sweep a couple of weekends ago and held for no other reason than he is Latino. he was refused the right to call his consulate (a violation of the Vienna convention) and refused the right to call his attorney ( a civil rights violation.) a deputy from inside told our attorney to pull the video from that weekend, said it did get bad in there. Jailers consistently called one Pakistani man Osama, and called the Latino men racially degrading names. there was also some physical contact. They were refused showers for 4 days, no blankets with which to sleep at night, and slept on hard cold floors. Saline Co called immigration to pick up ALL of them, even the ones with green cards. Immigration was very angry. created paperwork (your tax dollars at work) and they wound up letting them go. They refused to let my daughter pay his fine. The sheriff has told so many people so many different lies, he is now tripping himself up, can't remember to whom he told which lie. One lie for reporters, one for ACLU, one to our attorney, one to us. Make up your mind as to which lie you want to use mr sheriff. We have contacted the media (local and national) Blanch Lincoln Lambert's office, Vic Snyder's office, ACLU, our civil rights lawyer, Reggie Koch, and the Mexican consulate. Several have come forward with stories of abuse (verbal and physical) and the consulate, ACLU, and the detainees are all filing a lawsuit against Saline County Sheriffs office. These men were guilty of nothing more than being immigrants.

If you know of anyone who has been arrested in this sweep, who may have had their rights violated, please contact Attorney Reggie Koch in Little Rock. He would like to hear your story and you may possibly have a case. I for one will not stop until the Sheriff is removed from office,policy and procedure has been changed, and these men are compensated for lost wages, abuse suffered, and monetary damages.

I put this sheriff in the same category as a common law breaker. If you are not going to follow the law, you need not hold office. not having the knowledge of these laws is no excuse.
There are really two separate issues of recent discussion concerning pre-trial release in Saline County. One is that the local judges signed an order prohibiting what is known as credit bonding, which is a practice utilized by some licensed bail bondsman where instead of collecting 10 percent of the bond from the client the bondsman collects something less and extends credit to the person to pay out the balance over time.

The other issue is that of the sheriff's bond which is but one means of releasing those after arrest but prior to trial.

The only way these two things become related is that while the order mentions credit bonding as what is being prohibited, in reality, at least with respect to felony cases, it would appear that the recent practice is to authorize release for those arrested for felonies only upon posting of sheriff's bonds although this will have to be monitored over the coming days and weeks to know for sure.

There are other means of pre-trial release as well: release by citation (utilized a lot in traffic or more minor cases--people refer to this as "getting a ticket"), release on one's own recognizance (known as o.r. release), what we call a signature bond which involves an unsecured bond where the arrestee or other person on their behalf signs the bond pledging to forfeit the bond if the arrestee does not appear, cash bonds where the person posts the full amount of bond in cash, a secured bond such as where a a licensed bondsman or surety guarantees the person's subsequent court appearances and this is normally accomplished by the person paying the bondsman a nonrefundable 10 percent of the total amount of the bond with the bondsman standing good for the rest, a sheriff's bond where the person comes up with 10 percent of the bond usually in cash which is posted with the sheriff and then after the case is concluded receives 90 percent of the 10 percent back, and then in some cases you see property bonds utilized, perhaps alone or in conjuction with other pre-trial release measures, where property (real estate or personalty and normally unencumbered) is pledged to ensure one's appearance at trial. With respect to any of these measures a judge may impose other reasonable conditions to ensure appearance at trial such as weekly reporting to a probation officer, electronic monitoring, etc.

Under the Arkansas Rules of Criminal Procedure all of these types of bonds warrant consideration and the rules contemplate that a judge is to set a form of cash bond only after determining that releasing an arrestee on his own recognizance will not ensure his appearance at trial.

It must be remembered that the reason for pre-trial release measures is to ensure one's appearance at future court proceedings, not to punish the accused before a determination of guilt or innocence has been made. This assessment is necessarily case-by-case specific because each individual's proclivity to appear or not appear for future court proceedings varies depending upon a myriad of factors which the judge is required to consider prior to making such a decision. For example, a high school student with no criminal history and significant ties to the community who has been arrested for a relatively minor felony warrants different consideration regarding pre-trial release than an individual arrested for a serious felony with no ties to the community and a history of numerous failures to appear.

In my view, a judicial officer should have all pre-trial release measures available as options and should carefully consider and tailor the pre-trial release measure to the specific case. For example, a number of jurisdictions use bond schedules which are useful as a starting point in making decisions but the pre-trial release decision must still necessarily be made on a case-by-case basis--a one size fits all approach, whether it is releasing everyone on their own recognizance or making everyone post a cash bond before release would not be in keeping with the rules which contemplate an individualized assessment of the person's likelihood to appear at all future court proceedings.
First of all let me say Thank You Brent for taking time out of your day to address these issues. I have had my home office in Benton for 3 years now and I have been a Licensed Professional Bail Bond Agent for 10 plus years now and I have never seen anything like this before where professional bail bonds are concerned.
Myself and/or one of my agents have sat in District Court on Bond hearings every Mon., Wed., and Fri. for the past 3 years and we have definately seen a difference in not only the prosecutor asking for a sheriff bond on all felony cases, but the amount of bond that they ask for is ridiculous compared to the amount that was asked for and/or sat in the prior bond hearings before the sheriff bonds started. Yes every case and individual should be considered as their case is looked at, but it's amazing the difference in the amounts the bonds are being sat at. Now that the lawsuit has been brought against the parties as of yesterday at bond hearings even the misdemeanors were given signature and or bonds in court. Were talking about dwi's domestic battery, failure to appears x4,etc. I understand that their are shady characters in every profession but each one that in found quilty of wrong doings should be dealt with individually, not the whole industry! The no credit bonding order from our judges came down last year in August and if this is their defense on the reason they are not allowing us to post professional bonds than why has it been nearly a year now? Their is NO law that I'm aware of that says we can't allow credit on bonds, however my company never allowed credit unless it was a large bond and we require collateral in the full amount of the bond also in lieu of the remaining balance of the premium as well as the bond, along with a reputable co-signer, and our clients have to call and/or come in once a week.
If our client violates any of the bond stimpulations (not reporting in, moving without notifying us,pulling new charges, missing a court date,etc.) they can be locked back up and their bond will be revoked. With this in mind we do more than charge and collect a 10% non refundable premium on each bond. while we do set defendants free until their trial that is their right when they get a bond to be bonded out, and we are 100% liable for all their court appearances or we don't just have to pay the 10% we collected, we have to pay the full amount of the bond. My question is who are responsible for these that are being released on dwi's, domestic battery, and sheriff bonds, what happens when they get put on the streets and continue to commit crimes and/or not show up for court?? How many warrants are setting there now that haven't been served,how much is it costing the tax payers to house the inmates that can't post the sheriff bonds, they have to feed them, pay for medical expenses, etc. Are these Sheriff Bonds not a credit bond if they are charging 10% to the defendant and refunding 90% of it back to them (by law they have to) than this means the defendant is being charged 10% as a bribe to go to court with a refund of 90% when they show up, that means they are actually only keeping 1% and if thats not credit bonding what do you call it?? I'd also like to know where this money goes and what it is used for, we were told by a jailer that 90% goes to the jail and 10% goes to the administrator.
Brent Standridge said:
There are really two separate issues of recent discussion concerning pre-trial release in Saline County. One is that the local judges signed an order prohibiting what is known as credit bonding, which is a practice utilized by some licensed bail bondsman where instead of collecting 10 percent of the bond from the client the bondsman collects something less and extends credit to the person to pay out the balance over time.

The other issue is that of the sheriff's bond which is but one means of releasing those after arrest but prior to trial.

The only way these two things become related is that while the order mentions credit bonding as what is being prohibited, in reality, at least with respect to felony cases, it would appear that the recent practice is to authorize release for those arrested for felonies only upon posting of sheriff's bonds although this will have to be monitored over the coming days and weeks to know for sure.

There are other means of pre-trial release as well: release by citation (utilized a lot in traffic or more minor cases--people refer to this as "getting a ticket"), release on one's own recognizance (known as o.r. release), what we call a signature bond which involves an unsecured bond where the arrestee or other person on their behalf signs the bond pledging to forfeit the bond if the arrestee does not appear, cash bonds where the person posts the full amount of bond in cash, a secured bond such as where a a licensed bondsman or surety guarantees the person's subsequent court appearances and this is normally accomplished by the person paying the bondsman a nonrefundable 10 percent of the total amount of the bond with the bondsman standing good for the rest, a sheriff's bond where the person comes up with 10 percent of the bond usually in cash which is posted with the sheriff and then after the case is concluded receives 90 percent of the 10 percent back, and then in some cases you see property bonds utilized, perhaps alone or in conjuction with other pre-trial release measures, where property (real estate or personalty and normally unencumbered) is pledged to ensure one's appearance at trial. With respect to any of these measures a judge may impose other reasonable conditions to ensure appearance at trial such as weekly reporting to a probation officer, electronic monitoring, etc.

Under the Arkansas Rules of Criminal Procedure all of these types of bonds warrant consideration and the rules contemplate that a judge is to set a form of cash bond only after determining that releasing an arrestee on his own recognizance will not ensure his appearance at trial.

It must be remembered that the reason for pre-trial release measures is to ensure one's appearance at future court proceedings, not to punish the accused before a determination of guilt or innocence has been made. This assessment is necessarily case-by-case specific because each individual's proclivity to appear or not appear for future court proceedings varies depending upon a myriad of factors which the judge is required to consider prior to making such a decision. For example, a high school student with no criminal history and significant ties to the community who has been arrested for a relatively minor felony warrants different consideration regarding pre-trial release than an individual arrested for a serious felony with no ties to the community and a history of numerous failures to appear.

In my view, a judicial officer should have all pre-trial release measures available as options and should carefully consider and tailor the pre-trial release measure to the specific case. For example, a number of jurisdictions use bond schedules which are useful as a starting point in making decisions but the pre-trial release decision must still necessarily be made on a case-by-case basis--a one size fits all approach, whether it is releasing everyone on their own recognizance or making everyone post a cash bond before release would not be in keeping with the rules which contemplate an individualized assessment of the person's likelihood to appear at all future court proceedings.
Saline County Jail needs to be investigated, I was arrested last week in Shannon Hills on a misdemeanor charge< where I was never read my rights< never got to see nor was asked to sign a ticket> It was 6 hours before I was booked in, Because Deputy "Shelly" was too busy playing solitaire and putting on press on nails< I suppose she was waiting on the next shift to do her job. Then when my bonds lady comes to post my bail, she was told I had a "Sheriffs Bond" also they had changed my charges totally< they said I was there on a felony and I had three failures to appear. I was charged with a misdemeanor, and have never had to appear in court for anything and no priors. When my bonds Lady told them she would contact the arresting officer< they changed their whole story QUICK. They had all of my information in my book in wrong< my social> everything they had me as 99 yrs. old but I was born in 2009. They are incompetent and crooked.

Kathy Chism said:
First of all let me say Thank You Brent for taking time out of your day to address these issues. I have had my home office in Benton for 3 years now and I have been a Licensed Professional Bail Bond Agent for 10 plus years now and I have never seen anything like this before where professional bail bonds are concerned.
Myself and/or one of my agents have sat in District Court on Bond hearings every Mon., Wed., and Fri. for the past 3 years and we have definately seen a difference in not only the prosecutor asking for a sheriff bond on all felony cases, but the amount of bond that they ask for is ridiculous compared to the amount that was asked for and/or sat in the prior bond hearings before the sheriff bonds started. Yes every case and individual should be considered as their case is looked at, but it's amazing the difference in the amounts the bonds are being sat at. Now that the lawsuit has been brought against the parties as of yesterday at bond hearings even the misdemeanors were given signature and or bonds in court. Were talking about dwi's domestic battery, failure to appears x4,etc. I understand that their are shady characters in every profession but each one that in found quilty of wrong doings should be dealt with individually, not the whole industry! The no credit bonding order from our judges came down last year in August and if this is their defense on the reason they are not allowing us to post professional bonds than why has it been nearly a year now? Their is NO law that I'm aware of that says we can't allow credit on bonds, however my company never allowed credit unless it was a large bond and we require collateral in the full amount of the bond also in lieu of the remaining balance of the premium as well as the bond, along with a reputable co-signer, and our clients have to call and/or come in once a week.
If our client violates any of the bond stimpulations (not reporting in, moving without notifying us,pulling new charges, missing a court date,etc.) they can be locked back up and their bond will be revoked. With this in mind we do more than charge and collect a 10% non refundable premium on each bond. while we do set defendants free until their trial that is their right when they get a bond to be bonded out, and we are 100% liable for all their court appearances or we don't just have to pay the 10% we collected, we have to pay the full amount of the bond. My question is who are responsible for these that are being released on dwi's, domestic battery, and sheriff bonds, what happens when they get put on the streets and continue to commit crimes and/or not show up for court?? How many warrants are setting there now that haven't been served,how much is it costing the tax payers to house the inmates that can't post the sheriff bonds, they have to feed them, pay for medical expenses, etc. Are these Sheriff Bonds not a credit bond if they are charging 10% to the defendant and refunding 90% of it back to them (by law they have to) than this means the defendant is being charged 10% as a bribe to go to court with a refund of 90% when they show up, that means they are actually only keeping 1% and if thats not credit bonding what do you call it?? I'd also like to know where this money goes and what it is used for, we were told by a jailer that 90% goes to the jail and 10% goes to the administrator.
Brent Standridge said:
There are really two separate issues of recent discussion concerning pre-trial release in Saline County. One is that the local judges signed an order prohibiting what is known as credit bonding, which is a practice utilized by some licensed bail bondsman where instead of collecting 10 percent of the bond from the client the bondsman collects something less and extends credit to the person to pay out the balance over time.

The other issue is that of the sheriff's bond which is but one means of releasing those after arrest but prior to trial.

The only way these two things become related is that while the order mentions credit bonding as what is being prohibited, in reality, at least with respect to felony cases, it would appear that the recent practice is to authorize release for those arrested for felonies only upon posting of sheriff's bonds although this will have to be monitored over the coming days and weeks to know for sure.

There are other means of pre-trial release as well: release by citation (utilized a lot in traffic or more minor cases--people refer to this as "getting a ticket"), release on one's own recognizance (known as o.r. release), what we call a signature bond which involves an unsecured bond where the arrestee or other person on their behalf signs the bond pledging to forfeit the bond if the arrestee does not appear, cash bonds where the person posts the full amount of bond in cash, a secured bond such as where a a licensed bondsman or surety guarantees the person's subsequent court appearances and this is normally accomplished by the person paying the bondsman a nonrefundable 10 percent of the total amount of the bond with the bondsman standing good for the rest, a sheriff's bond where the person comes up with 10 percent of the bond usually in cash which is posted with the sheriff and then after the case is concluded receives 90 percent of the 10 percent back, and then in some cases you see property bonds utilized, perhaps alone or in conjuction with other pre-trial release measures, where property (real estate or personalty and normally unencumbered) is pledged to ensure one's appearance at trial. With respect to any of these measures a judge may impose other reasonable conditions to ensure appearance at trial such as weekly reporting to a probation officer, electronic monitoring, etc.

Under the Arkansas Rules of Criminal Procedure all of these types of bonds warrant consideration and the rules contemplate that a judge is to set a form of cash bond only after determining that releasing an arrestee on his own recognizance will not ensure his appearance at trial.

It must be remembered that the reason for pre-trial release measures is to ensure one's appearance at future court proceedings, not to punish the accused before a determination of guilt or innocence has been made. This assessment is necessarily case-by-case specific because each individual's proclivity to appear or not appear for future court proceedings varies depending upon a myriad of factors which the judge is required to consider prior to making such a decision. For example, a high school student with no criminal history and significant ties to the community who has been arrested for a relatively minor felony warrants different consideration regarding pre-trial release than an individual arrested for a serious felony with no ties to the community and a history of numerous failures to appear.

In my view, a judicial officer should have all pre-trial release measures available as options and should carefully consider and tailor the pre-trial release measure to the specific case. For example, a number of jurisdictions use bond schedules which are useful as a starting point in making decisions but the pre-trial release decision must still necessarily be made on a case-by-case basis--a one size fits all approach, whether it is releasing everyone on their own recognizance or making everyone post a cash bond before release would not be in keeping with the rules which contemplate an individualized assessment of the person's likelihood to appear at all future court proceedings.
That's why when someone is issued a speeding ticket they are given a court date. A defendant has the right to tell his or her side of the story to the judge. If the judge feels there were mitigating circumstances the charge can be dismissed with no penalty, court cost, etc.



Sandy Johnson said:
I forgot to add that yes, her boyfriend was going over the speed limit and certainly a ticket should have be issued ---HOWEVER, she has epilepsy and he was trying to get to her BEFORE she went into a seizure. There are some valid reasons the law is broken and I am sure everyone has driven over the posted speed limit at least once in their lifetime.

Sandy Johnson said:
My daughers boyfriend was arrested and had to post bond because he was driving 12 miles over the speed limit. The end result was that he had a failure to appear that was on his record -- He HAD already paid for the fines and does NOT have any other failures --- but it stays on your record for 3-5 years so since he did it once he might do it again. I can understand arresting someone for driving on a suspended license and why woul danyone drive without a license ... but come on, having a failure to appear that has ALREADY been paid for and still you have to go to jail and be bonded out because you have that on your record --- sounds like double jeopardy to me. And that is how we will be approaching the matter.
Gene Hall said:
It's great that they are arresting people that are breaking the law but everybody but capital murders have a right to a bond and I don't think they are making misdemeanor traffic violators post a bond with the sheriff, only felonies, that's just a way for the sheriff's office to collect more money!! Saline County has never done this before and I don't know of any county in this state that does it this way, they allow the bondsman to write the bonds and when the person misses the bondsman is liable for the amount of the bond, and that's how it should be, seems like there's some underlying stuff going on that maybe they don't won't people to know about, but I understand a bonding company filed a Federal lawsuit on them and we'll see what happens next?

Jade said:
I think you already discovered what they were doing, arresting people that were breaking the law, such as speeding and driving when they do not have a license! Not sure what a Sheriff Bond is exactly, but it is not a reward for being top of their graduating class.

RSS

© 2014   Created by Shelli Russell.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service