Long Beach, $200,000 Bail Reduced to $100,000, Sex Offense
The victim began by asking our client why he did what he did. She explained that she had lower back pain, so there really was no need for him to insert his finger into her vagina. Instead of denying that he stuck his fingers in the victim’s vagina, he explained that there was a medical purpose and benefit to what he did.The Point of This Summary: Seventy-five year old client in Long Beach held on two sex offense charges. Bail was set at $200,000. Greg substitutes in for the public defender at the Preliminary Hearing and has one count dismissed by the judge. Greg then makes motion to reduce bail and judge reduces bail to $100,000, which the family was able to post and have the client released.
Instead of telling her she was crazy and fabricating a claim, or reminding her that she consented, he admitted his conduct and went on to defend it as medically proper, although he had no education beyond the ninth grade in high school. He also did not remind her that she never complained about the “massage” while he was performing it and that she paid him for his service.
Our client was quickly arrested on two charges of violating Penal Code § 289(d). This was a serious sex offense matter, wherein he allegedly took advantage of his position as a “sobrador” over a vulnerable victim, not only because of her age, but because of her need for medical attention. Bail was set at $200,000 and his family was unable to post the amount necessary for a bond (usually eight to ten percent).
The family came to Greg Hill & Associates, most concerned that their father was in jail and deprived of his heart medication, as well as several other pills that he took every day. They were concerned he might die in jail before any charges were even resolved.
The client’s family was happy that our client was able to return home, where he could again take his medication. They were also pleased that one of the two charges was dismissed.
It merits mention in this discussion of bail that judges are supposed to consider just two criteria in evaluating what amount of bail is necessary. The amount is supposed to be a sum that guarantees the defendant’s future appearances at court and one that protects the public. This is a difficult analysis, as no amount of bail will really protect the public unless the bail is so high that client cannot post it at all. Moreover, it is exceedingly difficult for a judge to figure out how much money to set for bail to guarantee one’s future appearance in court. Judges do not perform any type of analysis of a person’s financial status, i.e. evaluation of one’s bank accounts, equity in one’s home, value of cars, etc.
For more information about the issues in this case summary, click on the following articles: