Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Caitlin’s Law Approved by OK Senate Panel

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
The Straight Story Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-02-06 07:38 AM
Original message
Caitlin’s Law Approved by OK Senate Panel
Edited on Thu Mar-02-06 07:39 AM by The Straight Story
Caitlin’s Law Approved by OK Senate Panel
Posted: Feb 28, 2006, 03:29 PM

OKLAHOMA CITY - The family of Caitlin Wooten asked a Senate panel today for support of The Caitlin Wooten Act. Shortly after hearing testimony from Donna Wooten, Caitlin’s mother, Senate Bill 1037 was approved by a unanimous vote in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Paddack, an Ada Democrat and author of the measure, said the law seeks to protect Oklahoma families and communities from senseless acts of violence.

....

Paddack said SB 1037 contains three major reforms that are tough on crime and smart for Oklahoma families. The bill is aimed at strengthening bail laws by requiring persons charged with a violent crime to prove they are not a public danger before they may post bail. It also beefs up victim protection order (VPO) laws in Oklahoma to mirror federal VPO laws.

Finally, the bill will allow for an electronic notification system, called Victim Identification and Notification Everyday (VINE) to be put into place statewide in order to notify victims when offenders move throughout the criminal justice system.

http://www.kten.com/Global/story.asp?S=4501829

How does one prove they are not a public danger? Not saying the law is good or bad, just wondering how you prove such a thing...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
no_hypocrisy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-02-06 11:02 AM
Response to Original message
1. I agree. You can't logically prove a negative. Let the prosecutor
prove that the accused IS a public danger before denying bail. This sounds rather unconstitutional.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 09:48 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC