|
tive intention, which in fact it is, would
be the writ of habeas corpus?
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding) : Dele-
gate Child.
DELEGATE CHILD: Well, if he did
not choose, or if he could not furnish bail,
or if he decided that he did not want to
furnish bail, if he wanted to make the
State show cause, under the law the judge
must hear a writ of habeas corpus very,
very promptly.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding) : Dele-
gate Grant.
DELEGATE GRANT: Judge Child, as-
suming that section B was kept in the con-
stitution, would it be acceptable to you if
the words were added to it, "unless public
safety would otherwise require"?
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): Dele-
gate Child.
DELEGATE CHILD: Well, I think it
would be very unwise to keep it in there
at all under the present language.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): Dele-
gate Cicone.
DELEGATE CICONE: Judge Child, in
view of some of the questions asked about
whether you thought it was proper that a
rich man who could afford bail —
DELEGATE CHILD: Pardon me, I did
not hear the first part of the question.
DELEGATE CICONE: I am a little
mixed up on some of these questions.
I thought I had it clear. I would like to
ask this question about section 8. There
has been much said here that if a man had
money and could pay his bail to be re-
leased, for the same crime that a poor man
could not pay bail, the poor man would not
be released.
Under section 8 where it says excessive
bail shall not be required, this does not
mean excessive bail, but under section 8 if
it was at the discretion of the court, a man
could still be released on his own recog-
nizance without any bail, could he not?
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): Dele-
gate Child.
DELEGATE CHILD: Under either sec-
tion.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding) : Dele-
gate Cicone.
DELEGATE CICONE: Under section 8,
it would not necessarily mean that you
|
would have this stated specifically, that he
shall be released. You could also have the
same result under section A of section 8,
not excessive bail but no bail. He could
still be released, could he not?
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding) : Dele-
gate Child.
DELEGATE CHILD: Of course, his
own recognizance is really bail, but it is a
bond signed by himself with no security.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding) : Dele-
gate Cicone.
DELEGATE CICONE: No monetary
security, that is correct. But you could
accomplish what you want to accomplish
in section B under section 8 for the so-
called rich man versus poor man, is that
not correct?
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding) : Dele-
gate Child.
DELEGATE CHILD: Absolutely, you
could accomplish anything under section 8
that you could accomplish under this.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding) : Dele-
gate Cicone.
DELEGATE CICONE: Then it is my
understanding that in section B of section
5, you make it almost mandatory that a
man must be released. Is that right?
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding) : Dele-
gate Child.
DELEGATE CHILD: That is correct.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding) : Dele-
gate Clagett.
DELEGATE CLAGETT: Delegate Child,
I want to refer to one of your answers to
Delegate Key a few minutes ago.
Referring to the latter part of section B,
if the judge concludes that no terms or
any amount of bail would secure the appear-
ance of an individual defendant accused
before the court, would he have any dis-
cretion whatsoever to incarcerate or would
he be required to release under the terms of
section B ?
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): Dele-
gate Child.
DELEGATE CHILD: I think that he
would, Delegate Clagett, and that is my
main objection to the language under this
section.
DELEGATE CLAGETT: In other words,
he would be required to release that man
after determining a standard which would
|
