no true bill

Previous | Next
 rated by 0 users
Latest post 09-17-2008 4:14 PM by Ford. 11 replies.
  • 09-14-2008 12:14 AM

    no true bill

    ok today I found out that he has no true bill on my boyfriends case and the indictment has been taken off. This is a new york case, What does this mean for his case.
  • 09-14-2008 1:12 AM In reply to

    Feedback [*=*] re: no true bill

    A "no true bill" is a finding by a grand jury that there is no probable cause to decide that a crime has been committed.

    >>>>What does this mean for his case.

    Usually it means that the case is dismissed and he should be released.

    Of course, the prosecutor can probably file the case again. But, as the saying goes, "a prosecutor can usually indict a 'ham sandwich'".

    So, if you can't get an indictement the first time, unless there is new evidence, it usually does not make much sense to try it a second time. Without any gurantees, I'd view this as a very good sign.


  • 09-14-2008 1:31 AM In reply to

    re: no true bill

    ok he has benn to court twice for bail and has been denied, could this mean on his court sept 23 could he be released
  • 09-14-2008 1:52 AM In reply to

    Feedback [*=*] re: no true bill

    >>>>could this mean on his court sept 23 could he be released

    I'm surprised that he has not already been released.
  • 09-14-2008 2:01 AM In reply to

    re: no true bill

    ok well he was charged with gang assualt in the first degree but he didn't do it, he was just at the wrong place at the wrong time. Also he was on 5 years probation and his bail was remended twice because of the violation of his probation for being arrested again. The judge refuse to release him he said he wants to find out what part the case is going to what does this mean for him? Also what is the real reason he is still locked up .
  • 09-14-2008 11:22 AM In reply to

    Feedback [*=*] re: no true bill

    >>>> The judge refuse to release him he said he wants to find out what part the case is going to what does this mean for him? Also what is the real reason he is still locked up .

    Now, I understand. The judge is probably saying that, while the evidence was insufficinet to establish probable cause to sustain an Indictment, the same conduct, or related conduct, might still be used to find him in violation of his probation. For example, even if he was not in the fight, if he was otherwise violating conditions of his probation, the judge might violate him.

    What the outcome of a probation violation would be is far too complicated to speculate. The terms of a person's probation and the outcome in the event of a revocation can be defined differently for each defendant.

  • 09-15-2008 11:00 AM In reply to

    re: no true bill

    ok but he doesn't a PO he reports to a machine every month. He was going home and the cop stopped him, Also the cop put him together with 13 other people who were involved, One of the guys had blood on his shirt. Also the cop put on the police report that he was the arresting officer for all 13? Before this he was preparing to attend his second year of college and contiue working?
  • 09-15-2008 1:00 PM In reply to

    Feedback [*=*] None of that is relevant . . .

    The burden to prove a criminal charge is proof beyond a reasonable doubt - call that 95% proof or so. The burden to prove a probation violation is usually just a preponderance of the evidence - call that 50.1% proof.

    There's a whole world of events provable between 50.1% and 94.9% that can't secure a criminal conviction, but CAN be used to violate probation.
  • 09-16-2008 9:33 PM In reply to

    re: None of that is relevant . . .

    ok he has an court on the 23 of sept what is the likelihood that he will be release, This will be the third time he has seen the judge about his bail.
  • 09-17-2008 11:53 AM In reply to

    Feedback [*=*] Nobody here can tell you that . . .

    Sounds like he was involved in a serious event with gang ties. Hanging around with the wrong people can be the basis of a probation violation.
  • 09-17-2008 3:04 PM In reply to

    re: Nobody here can tell you that . . .

    With all dur respect you are wrong he is not a gang member and nor has he ever been. However the fight that occured was a gang fight He was not involved like I stated before he wasn't even watching the fight There were people standing around as someone threw and bottle into the crowd seeing this ma boyfriend and his friends cross the street and proceeded to the train station when they were stopped by a police officer.
  • 09-17-2008 4:14 PM In reply to

    Sad [:(] Look, lady . . .

    It isn't about reality.

    "With all dur respect you are wrong he is not a gang member"

    I never said he was. The event is tied to gangs.

    "the fight that occured was a gang fight He was not involved like I stated before he wasn't even watching the fight There were people standing around as someone threw and bottle into the crowd seeing this ma boyfriend and his friends cross the street and proceeded to the train station when they were stopped by a police officer."

    That may be the reality, but if he got charged with a crime, even if it was dismissed, then the state has some other evidence to connect him to the event.

    You can ignore what I'm telling you, but I AM trying to help. There's no guarantee that this probation violation goes away at the next court date.
Page 1 of 1 (12 items) | RSS

My Community

Community Membership New Users: Search Community