House arrest would be heaven I would think given the alternative being a small cell.
rsbm I believe a publication ban is "prior restraint" on publishing, and it's almost never allowed, as I understand it. The government can seek to punish someone for publishing something, but unless there are exceedingly powerful reasons involving national security or Col. Sanders' secret recipe or something, they can't keep someone from publishing. (I'm not a lawyer; this is just as I understand it.)
because RA has been charged with murder times two.
It makes me wonder if there's something he wants to get rid of that LE may not have taken the day they were at his house. It's a big resounding no from me. He made his bed. Now he has to lie in it. <modsnip>
But this presumes he is guilty of the crime and that hasn’t been proven yet at all.
Yes. But he could attend just as easily his a live video feed, no? Why have him come in person if she isn’t hearing arguments and is just making a ruling on written submissions?
Even with a presumption of "innocence", the potential danger to the community, and flight risk assessment, seems to indicate that RA should sleep in the bed he has made for himself.
‘He seemingly went on living his life without change.’ That reminds me, I’ve been meaning to ask, was the 30-day alcohol rehab ever confirmed? If so, how soon after the murders, if anyone knows? If it’s true, what do you guys make of it? I wonder what his wife thought at the time?
I agree. I wonder if he would be more inclined to suicide now that he’s had a (mild and secluded) few weeks in jail and perhaps realized how lousy his outlook is long term?
The hearing would be closed I'd think if that was the case. It's listed right now as "Public Access"Is she able to impose a total publication ban if she is so inclined? Eg: if she keeps the documents sealed in whole or in part, can she say no specifics can be released by anyone in attendance? I remember being irritated that in Canada, the media could not report on the Paul Bernardo / Homolka case because she got a very nice deal after lying about her role in the murders of a couple teens and her own sister. But that’s what happened. But American media wasn’t covered by the ban and so… they were able to print details just over the border. I remember reading about the case while in Florida. But I couldn’t read about it while visiting the place where the crimes happened. Imagine that?
Courts Gag Media at Sensational Canada Trial : Justice: The facts in the murder, kidnaping and assault case will eventually come out. Citizens rely on U.S. TV, smuggled papers.
Even on a continent numbed by the likes of Jeffrey Dahmer and Night Stalker Richard Ramirez, the story unfolding at the trial here of Paul Bernardo, a boyish, 29-year-old bookkeeper, is striking in its depravity.www.latimes.com
Yeah I really don't think he'll get bail. But you never know.
He doesn’t have Iris Eytan defending him.
And I covet the recipersbm I believe a publication ban is "prior restraint" on publishing, and it's almost never allowed, as I understand it. The government can seek to punish someone for publishing something, but unless there are exceedingly powerful reasons involving national security or Col. Sanders' secret recipe or something, they can't keep someone from publishing. (I'm not a lawyer; this is just as I understand it.)
You're Canadian, I think you said, but you lived in Florida so you probably recognize the reference, but for others outside the umbrella of American advertising, Colonel Sanders had a chain of fried-chicken places, and his "secret recipe" was supposedly held as a sacred secret when I was a lad.
In other cases, they have figured out how to determine how fast someone was moving by figuring distance from the towers over time. I think there could be an application here.
