Video of Dylan Roof Bond Hearing

Meh, I find myself uncomfortable with this. Mostly because we’re not particularly fond of the judicial system using optics and theatrics for public consumption. Such activity shows the growing influence of the Community Relations Service (CRS, Grande Lum) within the judiciary.

It was not a good thing when it was evidenced in Sanford/Orlando 2012/2013, it is not a good thing in Charleston 2015.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in 4th Amendment, 6th Amendment, AME Church Shooting, Big Stupid Government, Dept Of Justice. Bookmark the permalink.

59 Responses to Video of Dylan Roof Bond Hearing

  1. 1hear2learn says:

    I saw a few minutes of it on fnc earlier and was wondering what in the world is this? Never heard of such a thing before – thought that happened only after a trial. Just seemed way too soon, whole heartfelt etc., was uncomfortable watching it.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Jersey Beach says:

      I had to go look up what CRS was too, had no idea but it does seem way too soon for this. I only saw a few seconds, the part where FOX News played where a family member was forgiving him.

      Like

    • Amity says:

      Will there be a trial? I’ve heard the murderer essentially confessed, maybe he also agreed to plead “guilty.”

      Like

      • Ziiggii says:

        Hearing is set for October. That would be the only time a plea would be excepted. This was just the bond hearing.

        Like

        • Amity says:

          October! Huh. Well, I suspect this delay is less about collecting evidence, and more about hoping to prevent the uninvolved from raising a ruckus.

          Like

    • ButterCookie says:

      I agree!!!

      I thought this absolutely weird. The family is giving grief statements to him…I was like, “WTH?” This was the state’s automatic presumption of his guilt.

      This was not due process.

      Like

      • lovely says:

        Apparently the judge thought that this should be a cathartic moment for the community and family members rather than a legal proceeding. My mouth was open from the moment he defended Dylann’s family until I had to run out the door while he was setting bond.

        Liked by 2 people

        • smiley says:

          not appropriate.
          even though moving, heartfelt and inspiring regarding faith and forgiveness, it inserts an intensely emotional distraction from due process, and, imo, also starts to create just a hint of “show trial” to this.
          there has to be a well-maintained judicial decorum relative to the proceedings at hand.

          Like

      • Sassy says:

        Exactly. Almost makes one wonder if it’s not the plan. He seems to have an automatic constitutional case.

        Like

    • Sassy says:

      Whatever happened to the presumption of innocence–one of THE hallmarks of our judicial system? The victims get to attack the ALLEGED perpetrator before one iota of evidence is presented? This seems unprecedented and wrong.

      Like

  2. seabrznsun says:

    That judge needs a personal blog site, not a courtroom.

    Liked by 2 people

    • seeingeye2 says:

      I thought it was kind of refreshing though that the judge spoke with concern and sympathy for the family of the defendant as well as the families of the victims, saying both families were in pain and grieving. Can you imagine any Zimmerman judge saying such a thing?? And definitely not the POTUS!!!

      Liked by 3 people

      • jello333 says:

        I agree… even though it was unusual, I liked his opening comments. But then… allowing the statements by victims’ relatives?! At THIS stage of the case? Weird (and IMO wrong) in the extreme.

        Liked by 1 person

        • seeingeye2 says:

          Yes, it was wrong in the extreme. I don’t think the victim statements should be allowed in any kind of court until, and unless, the accused is actually convicted of the crime(s). Up until then he is an alleged murderer, innocent in our justice system until adjudged otherwise. In this case, they were allowed to speak as though the defendant had already been convicted.

          Like

  3. manickernel says:

    Was it proper from a judicial procedure standpoint to have family address the defendant at this point? Very doubtful. Was it proper for the judge to editorialize on issues other than the hearing? A little.

    Did it carry a very powerful message? Yes.

    Liked by 2 people

  4. moogey says:

    Victims being re-victimized.

    Is this tape made by the court and distributed to the media or is this a tape made by the media, for the media?

    IMO Human anguish in a court setting, should remain in the court setting.

    Like

    • Sandra says:

      I’m not speaking to your point, but I will say I enjoyed hearing the messages of the family members. Even in anguish they were all so virtuous. They made me think.

      Liked by 3 people

      • moogey says:

        Sandra, I’m not condemning the individuals. I not condemning their message in any way.

        It’s just that to me this seems like another video for human consumption and to me it somehow dilutes the sanctity of the court.

        I apologize if anyone thought that it was the message or the victim that I have an issue with. It is not.

        Like

        • smiley says:

          I agree with you.

          Like

        • duke says:

          Does not every accused have a right to a PUBLIC trial?
          How much more public can you get than publishing a video of the proceedings. Certainly more public than a handful of others who are in court because they are forced to be there, waiting for their turn in the dock.
          In the video as pointed out by many, the judge failed in his duty to presume the accused as innocent until proven guilty. The accused is not really formerly charged until arraignment.

          Like

    • Amity says:

      I’ve seen multiple versions of it, so I would guess the media was there, and presumably at levels most people would notice. Although admittedly grieving people are not the most observant.

      I would hope that the people who spoke were informed ahead of time that the media would be there and offered the possibility of speaking without it, but I’m probably being optimistic. Some of them have given statements to the press before, though, so at least those speakers were probably fine with it.

      Like

  5. Amity says:

    At least whoever filmed this didn’t keep the camera zoomed in on the feed showing the perpetrator, like the one I watched earlier today. Quit treating him like a star, media!

    Liked by 2 people

  6. manickernel says:

    Too bad the judge in this case did not set reasonable bond, especially since the suspect lived a 5 minute walk from his victims.

    http://news.yahoo.com/prosecutor-slain-mom-girl-were-witnesses-against-suspect-125519462.html

    Now it is impossible to find a story that mentions the race of his victims, or even pictures, but here they are.

    http://www.dewalds.com/sitemaker/sites/Dewald1/obit.cgi?page=documents&user_id=1608182

    Like

  7. lovely says:

    I thought the judge was out of line and it was a misuse the the judiciary process. I also thought the judge was out of line when he chastised people and told them basically that Dylann came from a good family.

    Bizarre bond hearing.

    Liked by 1 person

    • manickernel says:

      I agree, his comments about Dylann’s family were waaay over the line. Seems I read Dylann has an uncle or grandfather that is a judge. Some connections.

      Liked by 1 person

  8. auscitizenmom says:

    Blaming Charleston Shooting On… The Tea Party?
    Politicizing Tragedy Reaches Absurd New Height
    http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/blaming-charleston-shooting-tea-party

    Like

  9. labrat says:

    I thought having victims make statements was bizarre.
    I thought the statements they made were amazing and quite unexpected so soon.

    This is a great article on the case.

    http://theothermccain.com/2015/06/19/dylann-roof-south-carolina-shooting-suspect/

    Like

  10. Ziiggii says:

    I listened to most all of it, although very difficult to do, but I was under the impression the judge did so in terms of setting an appropriate bond. Those statements from the families just sorta turned into grief statements like those normally given at the end of a trial during the sentencing portion.

    Like

    • Just Tea says:

      I figured the family would have protested him receiving a bond. Happens that the bond was for the gun charge only, not the murder charges. I guess that will come later.

      Like

      • Ziiggii says:

        I was told capital murder charges in SC automatically have a “no bond” setting…. I’m still trying to research that though. Never heard of it if true.

        Like

  11. lovely says:

    Hmmm…

    Judge Gosnell by luck of the draw or design?

    According to the Daily Beast, Gosnell used explicit racial language during a Nov. 6, 2003, bond hearing for a black defendant. 
     
    There are four kinds of people in this world — black people, white people, red necks, and n—rs,” Gosnell reportedly said

    http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/245626-judge-who-set-dylann-roofs-bond-has-history-of-racially-charged

    Like

    • jello333 says:

      Well… even though I THINK I understand the point he was TRYING to make, I can see quite a lot wrong with that comment (and no, not just the use of “n****rs”).

      Like

  12. John Galt says:

    “Meh, I find myself uncomfortable with this. Mostly because we’re not particularly fond of the judicial system using optics and theatrics for public consumption.”

    This. Judges are the last line of defense of a civilized society. You know you’re in trouble when they take roles in Kabuki theater.

    Like

    • Nanny G says:

      Kabuki theater.
      That’s it.
      But to what end?
      In recent cases of police ”gunning down unarmed black men,” there has been plenty of Kabuki theater.
      It was designed to incite the rabble, to rouse the ignorant, to enable those paid organizers to push their filthy ”race war” agenda.
      This time the Kabuki theater tamped down the potential for violence.
      These Christians who were family of the victims (and therefore victims, too) showed more love, more principal, more understanding than Obama, Sharpton or any of the professional black grievance leaders.
      As a group they defanged this situation so that it will not contribute to Obama’s ”look here, race war,” Potemkin Village.
      I head Obama say 11,000 people were killed by guns in one recent year of his reign.
      How many of those were black-on-black deaths?
      I’m betting we would be shocked if we knew.

      Liked by 1 person

  13. Swamp Witch says:

    Justice Department fast tracking $29 million dollars to help the victim’s families in South Carolina ! Just read it on Yahoo news . What is this about ? Hush money ? Blood Money ?

    Like

  14. Tonawanda says:

    If SC’s law permits this, it might be unconstitutional, or should be.
    Truly disgusting behavior by the judge.
    There are a thousand ways for the community to “heal” (an absurd and fatuous notion itself) without a personal confrontation with the accused, regardless of what is said.
    The rule of law is dying very quickly in America, in part because people are so easily manipulated by emotional appeals.
    If we are not idiocracy, we are getting close.

    http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=idiocracy+courtroom+scene&qpvt=idiocracy+court+room+scene&FORM=VDRE#view=detail&mid=85E00730124CC882D08085E00730124CC882D080

    Liked by 1 person

  15. starviego says:

    It’s been almost a week. Has Roof even been formally charged yet? How did he plead? What is the name of his defense lawyer?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arraignment
    Arraignment is a formal reading of a criminal charging document in the presence of the defendant to inform the defendant of the charges against them. In response to arraignment, the accused is expected to enter a plea.

    http://www.aol.com/article/2015/06/19/the-latest-on-church-shooting-survivor-played-dead/21198333/?icid=maing-grid7|main5|dl2|sec3_lnk4%26pLid%3D-473309966
    Shelby Police Chief Jeff H. Ledford said 21-year-old Dylann Roof would be charged either when the plane transporting him landed in South Carolina or when it entered South Carolina airspace.
    Roof has waived his right to counsel, meaning he will either represent himself or hire his own lawyer.
    An assistant clerk in North Carolina says the extradition hearing for suspect in the fatal shooting of nine people at a historic black church lasted just 10 minutes….

    Roof has had an Extradition Hearing in Shelby and a Bond Hearing in Charleston. But still nothing about his Arraignment Hearing, where he is formally charged with his crimes. It is inconceivable to me that they would allow Roof NOT to have a lawyer, to avoid any future controversy about lack of legal counsel.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s