|
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): Dele-
gate Bamberger.
DELEGATE BAMBERGER: At least in
that respect you would not object to 5-B if
we remove from it its exclusion of cases
punishable by death or life imprisonment?
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): Dele-
gate Child.
DELEGATE CHILD: I would object to it.
We do not need it. The old language is
sufficient.
DELEGATE JAMES: (presiding): Dele-
gate Bamberger.
DELEGATE BAMBERGER: You say the
old language implicitly gives the right to
bail in cases which are punishable by death
or life imprisonment?
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): Dele-
gate Child.
DELEGATE CHILD: It has been so in-
terpreted by the rules and statute.
DELEGATE BAMBERGER: In what
other respect does section 5-B state rights
which are not implicit in section S?
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): Dele-
gate Child.
DELEGATE 'CHILD: Well, as I tried to
explain, section 5-B says that he must be
permitted, or must be entitled to release no
matter what crime he has committed, just
so it is not capital. It gives the judge no
discretion as to whether or not he should
release him, whether or not he is wanted in
several other states.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): Dele-
gate Bamberger.
DELEGATE BAMBERGER: How do you
reconcile the proposition that a judge may
deny bail on the grounds that the defend-
ant has committed a crime and may repeat
that crime with the proposition, the founda-
tion of our law, that every man is presumed
innocent until proved guilty?
Are you suggesting that a judge may
before trial, hold a person on the grounds
that he has committed a particularly dis-
tasteful crime?
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): Dele-
gate Child.
DELEGATE CHILD: No, but his record
has a whole lot to do with it.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): Dele-
gate Bamberger.
|
DELEGATE BAMBERGER: Then I ask
you how you reconcile that proposition with
the presumption of innocence?
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): Dele-
gate Child.
DELEGATE CHILD: Well, a matter of
fixing bail has nothing to do with the pre-
sumption of innocence. He is entitled to bail
under certain conditions. I mean, the amount
of his bail is the only thing that the judicial
officer has to pass upon.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): Dele-
gate Sherbow.
DELEGATE SHERBOW: Delegate Child,
in line with Delegate Key's questions, is it
not a fact that under this provision an ac-
cused is mandated to release, no matter
what the crime may be, no matter how
dangerous he may be to society or to him-
self, .provided only that the court can set
the bail and the terms to bring him back?
How can you incarcerate a man and set
terms to bring him back?
DELEGATE CHILD: Well, I think that
is true, yes, sir.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): Judge
Sherbow, are you in agreement with Judge
Child's interpretation of the language?
DELEGATE SHERBOW: Absolutely. I
do not want to debate it now. I do not want
to fall in the error of some of my brothers
who are debating with Delegate Child.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): Dele-
gate Chabot.
DELEGATE GHABOT,: Judge Child, I
was a bit confused by some of your answers
to Delegate Gill.
Let us assume for the moment that 5-B
would be stricken from this bill of rights.
Now, would you say that the judge would
decide not to release an insane person by
setting a high bail for him, or would the
situation be that an insane person would
not be released because he would be com-
mitted to the examination of some psychia-
trist?
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): Dele-
gate Child.
DELEGATE CHILD: If a person were
brought before a judge and the judge had
any doubt of his sanity or could see pretty
well that he was dealing with an insane
person, rather than release him on bail, he
would commit him somewhere where he
would not be of danger to himself or to
|
