this post was submitted on 23 May 2026
116 points (98.3% liked)

News

37727 readers
1210 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] kibblebits@quokk.au 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

What US law says you cannot use crowdfunded money to post bail?

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

None that I'm aware of. Reread my comment and don't assume you are under attack. The judge is wrong here and givesomefucks is being inconsistent with their idealogical position.

[–] kibblebits@quokk.au 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

SOREY!!! It’s Lemmy, everyone’s gonna shank you.

Reread, and yes. You’re right. This criminal is a bad bad man, but if bail is set, it’s set.

I just don’t understand why the judge didn’t deny him bail. He’s a violent offender, and it really would not take much to justify that decision. I’m sure there is plenty of precedence of denying bail for far lesser crimes.

[–] deceiver@infosec.pub 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Here are the facts: Tennessee explicitly authorizes courts to conduct bond source hearings to prevent defendants from using the proceeds of illegal activity to secure their release. These hearings are required by state law for any bond set at $75,000 or higher — Eatherly’s $1 million bond clears that threshold by a significant margin, making this procedure entirely standard and not specific to his case. The burden lies completely on the party seeking to post the bond. Whoever is paying must prove that the money is derived from legitimate sources rather than illegal activities. Defense attorneys generally have to present bank statements, pay stubs, tax returns, or other financial records to satisfy the judge. If the judge is not satisfied with the legitimacy of the funds, the defendant will not be allowed to post bond and will remain in custody, regardless of whether they have the physical cash on hand.

[–] kibblebits@quokk.au 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

But it’s not illegal. If it was the money would be seized.

Still, this is giving a judge the right to say “this money is good whereas this money is bad” arbitrarily, and without a chance to appeal the motion in a higher court.

This guy needs to be in jail without bail.

BAIL is a system that was created to prevent poor people from leaving the jail. BAIL needs to be abolished. You either release them until trial or you don’t.

[–] deceiver@infosec.pub 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

The standard isn’t ‘proven illegal’, it’s ‘proven legitimate’ — those aren’t the same bar. The court doesn’t need to prove the money is dirty to block it, the defense needs to prove it’s legitimate. Unverified anonymous internet donations fail that test not because they’re criminal but because they’re unverifiable. Seizure is a separate legal action with a completely different evidentiary standard.

The procedure is codified in state law with defined standards, not made up on the spot. Bond rulings in Tennessee can be challenged through higher courts, so the ‘no appeal’ claim doesn’t hold up either.

And if you think bail is an unjust wealth-based system, the crowdfunding situation illustrates that perfectly: his supporters are collectively buying his freedom, which is exactly what bail abolitionists object to. That’s an argument for the judge’s skepticism, not against it.