View Full Version : Out on a $20,500 Bond



stick47
03-16-2010, 05:18 AM
The lowlife that rear-ended the car killing the 5 yr old is out on $20K bond so he can kill again. Something is very, very wrong with our legal system for this to be possible. This scumbag would never again see the light of day in most countries but I guess in the Good Old USA the lawyers have to have their meal ticket unchecked. It's plain to see that our penal system merely amounts to a network of revolving door hotels set up in such a fashion as to support the lawyers at the expense of public safety.

rcjunkie
03-16-2010, 06:20 AM
The lowlife that rear-ended the car killing the 5 yr old is out on $20K bond so he can kill again. Something is very, very wrong with our legal system for this to be possible. This scumbag would never again see the light of day in most countries but I guess in the Good Old USA the lawyers have to have their meal ticket unchecked. It's plain to see that our penal system merely amounts to a network of revolving door hotels set up in such a fashion as to support the lawyers at the expense of public safety.

I understand your anger and agree to a point, however, to place blame on the attorney's is wrong, it's the laws that need changed, not the ones using the system that's in place.

PennyQuilts
03-16-2010, 06:25 AM
I saw that and was outraged that he is walking the street. With a problem like that, he is likely to get right back behind the wheel all snookered up. Horrible. Don't blame the lawyers - they can't get anything set or not set without the court's approval. This is a court matter. And "court" is just as likely to mean police, juries, parole officers, DSS as "lawyers." At the end of the day, lawyers can ask for something but they have no power to grant it. Unless, of course, a prosecutor just looked the other way. But when people routinely complain about lawyers, that is not usually who they mean.

Here is the story from the Oklahoman:

Driver’s release from jail shocks Oklahoma crash victims’ family
BY AARON CRESPO | Oklahoman
Published: March 16, 2010

Darby Minor says she wasn’t angry about the accident that killed her grandson and seriously injured her granddaughter until Monday when she learned the man police said caused the fatal accident had been released on bail.

On Monday, she found out "this man was out sitting in his house enjoying the same freedoms we have and two weeks ago he took my grandson from me,” Minor said. "I would like the community to speak up and be heard because we never think, our family never thought we would be in the situation where we would be a family on the news and it does happen.

"And it could happen to anyone and this man is out on the streets again.”

Adam Stutts, 5, was in the back seat of the family car with his sister Avery, 3, when a pickup police said was driven by James Opp, 60, crashed into the back of the car. Adam was killed in the accident and Avery is recovering at The Children’s Center in Bethany.

Opp is charged with first-degree manslaughter. He paid $20,500 bail and was released from jail Saturday. He originally was arrested on a second-degree murder complaint.

Minor said she understands the reasons for the manslaughter charge, but the family didn’t expect Opp to be given bail.

"We had confidence that he had enough of a record behind him and he had broken bond before and I didn’t even consider that they’d let him out,” Minor said. "It’s shocking to us, it’s hurtful and I think it will be to the community too ... it’s just wrong that he’s out on the street and we want him behind bars.”

Opp admitted at the crash scene to drinking moonshine and to taking the anti-anxiety drug Xanax, according to a police report. A police officer reported Opp had an open beer can in the truck, smelled of alcohol, had bloodshot eyes and had very slurred speech.

At the time of the crash, Opp had been facing arrest for more than a year for alleged violations of his probation for cocaine possession. A judge authorized the arrest after being told Opp had failed to report in, failed to pay court costs and failed to attend counseling for relapse prevention.


Minor said Avery is being seen by several specialists at the center in Bethany and she’s improving.

"I asked how much of this was relearning and how much was just healing and the things she already knew coming back and they said as the damage heals in her brain that she’ll keep progressing,” Minor said. "There’s no way to know. Our faith is totally in God for healing and we believe that she’s going to be back like she was before.”

Minor said specialists told her the recovery could take four to six weeks.

She said as Avery improves, she still hasn’t truly dealt with Adam’s death.

"We haven’t been at the house, their house, very much. But that’s probably all going to hit us when Avery is not here any longer,” Minor said.

She said the community has been overwhelming and they’re happy with each bit of progress Avery makes.

"We’re thrilled with everything we see,” Minor said.

NewsOK (http://newsok.com/drivers-release-from-jail-shocks-oklahoma-crash-victims-family/article/3446771?custom_click=headlines_widget)

PennyQuilts
03-16-2010, 06:30 AM
The guy has a long rap sheet of petty crime including drug offenses, domestic violence and second degree burglary. It looks like no lawyers were present when bond was set.

Midtowner
03-16-2010, 06:32 AM
The lowlife that rear-ended the car killing the 5 yr old is out on $20K bond so he can kill again. Something is very, very wrong with our legal system for this to be possible. This scumbag would never again see the light of day in most countries but I guess in the Good Old USA the lawyers have to have their meal ticket unchecked. It's plain to see that our penal system merely amounts to a network of revolving door hotels set up in such a fashion as to support the lawyers at the expense of public safety.

Everyone deserves counsel in situations like this. Innocent until proven guilty. No exceptions. It looks like the only attorney present at this thing was the Assistant D.A., FWIW.

PennyQuilts
03-16-2010, 07:34 AM
Everyone deserves counsel in situations like this. Innocent until proven guilty. No exceptions. It looks like the only attorney present at this thing was the Assistant D.A., FWIW.

Having his own attorney there could only have resulted in a highter bond, seems to me. :ohno: He came out smelling like a rose. This is one case where not having an attorney might have been to his benefit.

As to innocent until proven guilty, that is a under the law. The court of public opinion never has and never will be held to that, especially when the guy admitted to being drunk on moonshine at the time. The public may be wrong but they aren't the ones to impose a sentence so it is not particularly significant, legally (short of not being able to get an impartial jury) and I don't think there is much concern about that.

Midtowner
03-16-2010, 08:09 AM
Penny, mostly agreed. I should have been more articulate. I was objecting to the notion that lawyers who represent the scum of the Earth should be vilified for doing so, Lynn Cheney and her McCarthyistic attacks on the lawyers who have volunteered to represent terrorist suspects, for example.

stick47
03-16-2010, 08:51 AM
it's the laws that need changed, not the ones using the system that's in place.
Oh come on... Maybe that's the view from your side but most everyone of my lay friends would point out that it's the lawyers that are making these laws and it's not completely by coincidence that they directly benefit their profession. I mean how can we ever clean up the mess in congress when we allow such conflict of interest to remain unchecked in our own local courts?
If it looks like a duck...

Midtowner
03-16-2010, 09:10 AM
So, stick, you'd suggest a regime where I wasn't allowed to benefit from my professional credentials? And I suppose fair is fair, we should let anyone with a hack saw and an exacto-knife play surgeon as well, right?

We're talking about fairly simple laws in this case, i.e., don't kill people.

I'm pretty sure the don't kill people concept predates lawyers and Congress.

And if the lawyers, who are really the only people in society with the training to know how one new law will affect whatever's already on the books [and whether the law they're writing is constitutional to begin with], aren't writing laws, who should be doing it? Ministers? Taco Bell employees?

stick47
03-16-2010, 09:25 AM
MT, Your post doesn't discount the truth of my post no matter how much you've obfuscated what I said. This is just the amount of disavowel I expected from one vested in the continuation of the screwed up status quo of the legal system. That's my final post on the topic as my point has been made.

Midtowner
03-16-2010, 09:49 AM
MT, Your post doesn't discount the truth of my post no matter how much you've obfuscated what I said. This is just the amount of disavowel I expected from one vested in the continuation of the screwed up status quo of the legal system. That's my final post on the topic as my point has been made.

You've only said one thing that's true -- that lawyers benefit from their profession. I don't think a single one of us would apologize for that. I worked hard, studied hard and took out six-figures in student loans to get where I am. Only after I've paid back my Aunt Sallie [Mae] will I really be able to really enjoy the fruits of my labors.

And it's not like I did some magic sleight of hand thing -- I pointed out that you were complaining about a situation where no private attorney was even present, where the defendant represented himself and got a good result for himself. The Judge and A.D.A. get paid their same salary regardless of what happens in that courtroom, so they didn't benefit that day. He's out on bail and sooner or later will be tried and likely convicted of a pretty darn heinous crime... you know, one of those complicated legalese, tough to understand criminal situations which 'ol King James referred to as "Thou shalt not kill."

As far as our legal system goes and it being screwed up, every single civilized country on Earth has lawyers. Every single civilized country on Earth has courts. In fact, a measure of the civility of a people is the strength of its courts. In the U.S., we have such a robust court system that one man can actually stand against (and win) Congress or the President of the United States if his rights are violated.

stick47
03-16-2010, 10:52 AM
Blah blah blah. Who came up with the system that lets this killer walk out of jail after admitting he was driving while drunk? That's indefensable on any level as far as I see it.

PennyQuilts
03-16-2010, 11:03 AM
And it's not like I did some magic sleight of hand thing -- I pointed out that you were complaining about a situation where no private attorney was even present, where the defendant represented himself and got a good result for himself. The Judge and A.D.A. get paid their same salary regardless of what happens in that courtroom, so they didn't benefit that day. He's out on bail and sooner or later will be tried and likely convicted of a pretty darn heinous crime... you know, one of those complicated legalese, tough to understand criminal situations which 'ol King James referred to as "Thou shalt not kill."

Again - note the circumstances, Stick. If you think lawyers suck, come back and complain when they've actually done something sucky. In this case, the blood sucking lawyers had nothing to do with it.

rcjunkie
03-16-2010, 12:24 PM
Oh come on... Maybe that's the view from your side but most everyone of my lay friends would point out that it's the lawyers that are making these laws and it's not completely by coincidence that they directly benefit their profession. I mean how can we ever clean up the mess in congress when we allow such conflict of interest to remain unchecked in our own local courts?
If it looks like a duck...

No, that's the view from the rational side, the side that doesn't try to make every legal issue into some type of conspiracy.

Jethrol
03-16-2010, 11:15 PM
Thanks for the article Penny....I didn't hear this story until now.

To me it's real simple, when you've jumped bail before, have a warrant for your arrest outstanding for over a year for drug charges, and you just killed someone where drugs and/or alcohol are suspected to be involved....you're done, no bail.

His guilt or innocence in the wreck are not really all that relevant IMO when setting bail. He's a flight risk....don't give him bail.

Jethrol
03-16-2010, 11:19 PM
Everyone deserves counsel in situations like this. Innocent until proven guilty. No exceptions. It looks like the only attorney present at this thing was the Assistant D.A., FWIW.
Yes, everyone is innocent until proven guilty. No question about it.

However, that is not even relevant at this point. He's accused of a crime, he's had a warrant for his arrest for over a year, he's a known flight risk based on his own past actions......this all means no bail for you.

But that has nothing to do with guilt or innocence.

Midtowner
03-16-2010, 11:26 PM
I doubt very much that the Asst. D.A. and the judge did this sort of thing without reviewing the relevant facts. He may be a flight risk for less serious crimes, but for manslaughter? He'd be insane to try and not show up for court on that sort of thing.

Jethrol
03-16-2010, 11:31 PM
I doubt very much that the Asst. D.A. and the judge did this sort of thing without reviewing the relevant facts. He may be a flight risk for less serious crimes, but for manslaughter? He'd be insane to try and not show up for court on that sort of thing.
What? Where does this idea come from?

He's obviously shown his contempt for the law and doesn't seem to care about doing the right thing. How does having a manslaughter charge lower HIS desire to escape punishment? It doesn't.....your point simply speaks to what the legal system will do to bring him back....but at that point he's already gone.

How would he be insane to not show up for a manslaughter charge?

Midtowner
03-16-2010, 11:32 PM
I wasn't there, nor were you. I'm just giving the judge and ADA the benefit of the doubt.

Jethrol
03-16-2010, 11:34 PM
I wasn't there, nor were you. I'm just giving the judge and ADA the benefit of the doubt.
Well now you're chickening out on your argument.

I'm not saying the DA and Judge ignored evidence. You said he'd be insane to not show up for a manslaughter charge. Why? I'm saying he's a flight risk.....period. The severity of his crime is irrelevant.

kevinpate
03-17-2010, 05:27 AM
... I'm saying he's a flight risk.....period. The severity of his crime is irrelevant.

As to the first portion, I'm not inclined to disagree.
The judge and the ADA apparently saw it differently.
As to why, don't know. I've not reviewed what they reviewed. Maybe they blew it, maybe not.

As to the 2nd portion, severity of crime is not irrelevant.
It's certainly not the biggest consideration, but it is typically one of several factors considered in determining what amount, if any, the court will set for bail.