News
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.
view the rest of the comments
I’m not siding with this guy, but he had bail set and if the money can’t be used to pay bail then he is being denied bail. Just don’t let him post bail at all.
This is like, oh you’ll never get a million bucks, oh wait I mean a million of the right kind of money.
But bail is supposed to be set relative to the amount of money the defendant has and the crime committed. Kinda defeats the purpose if the dude just got piles of magic Internet money to post bail.
Bail is a system to oppress poor people. Bail should not exist. He should either be released until trial or held until trial (I side with holding him).
Gov says, “here is an amount we know you don’t have!”
Then they somehow raise that money from the community.
Now Gov says you can’t use that money because we never were gonna let you out.
That’s the part that is wrong.
You might want to look a little deeper than the headline.
I have. If a person can crowdfund money, it’s money. I don’t care. Even scumbags like this.
Should they have been allowed to crowdfund in the first place? That’s a good question.
I donated to Luigi. And, he wasn’t allowed bail at all.
When a government gets to decide that you can’t use the money you can raise to fund your legal fees (which includes bail), they are deciding how people should be prosecuted on a case by case basis, which is not equal for all.
Apparently there's a legitimate legal reason: https://lemmy.world/comment/23893766
There is no legitimate reason to tell a poor person that the money they have in their hand cannot be used to pay their bail.
That said, he needs to be denied bail because he’s a danger to society based on the accused crime.
They reduced it from 1.25m to 1m
He's only raised 0.25m
The issue is this "fundraiser" existed prior to the shooting and is not for legal defenses. It's blatantly and explicitly so he can go around and do the shit that lead to him shooting someone else and himself.
Like, you're "not siding with the guy" but are just wholesale making shit up to defend him...
Quick edit:
Because some people may need the math spelled out:
$1,250,000 reduced to 1,000,000 means the 250,000 he can't use for bail, he just gets to keep it.
He can't use it for bail but bail was already adjusted like it was.
And he can still (presumably) use it for legal fees.
Just what are you so upset about that you had to leap to an out an blantant racists defense?
Fuck the dude and fuck you. If you got put in jail and you said “here is money” and they said “no not that money” you’d be pissed.
As I said, you fuck, they should have just denied bail.
That’s an option.
You, a moron, cannot see how that’s just the slippery slope to courts doing anything they want.
Screw off, asshole.
It's either money or it's being denied bail.
It can't be both and justifying the breach of law when it applies to people you don't agree with; it's funny how quick liberals are to abandon their principles when its liberalism dysfunctioning on someone they don't like.
What US law says you cannot use crowdfunded money to post bail?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Same exact vibes as Libertarians arguing age of consent laws.
If you were polite, I could have explained this to you.
Bro, I was a dick to you because YOU were an ass to me FIRST. You began our interaction in “bad faith” by accusing me of supporting them, when I very clearly outlined the problem was the bail system and judicial abuse.
ALSO, you can’t explain anything because you just make assumptions and criticize people for things they never did.
The BAIL SYSTEM is a system to keep poor people in jail. You’d know this if you’d GIVE SOME FUCKS. Hilarious. You’re a joke.
If you're planning on keeping your four day old account, you're gonna want to stop burning bridges so fast. There's not many people here who take time to explain shit.
Best of luck tho
I don’t plan to keep it. You’re not a bridge. It doesn’t need explanation: you’re wrong, and you’re gaslighting.
It is quite hilarious that you are so smug and judgemental about someone you claim is "just wholesale making shit up"
When you claim:
The op's article clearly states that only funds received AFTER the shooting are not to be used according to the judge. Funds for bail do not need to be acquired specifically for legal defense, in fact him receiving funds from his fans after the shooting most likely for his legal defense is expressly WHY the judge is saying they can't be used.
I guess I shouldn't have given you all this valuable information unless you "asked nicely" first. Silly me.
This is how slippery slopes start. "Oh let's just not apply the law/constitution to this particular group of criminals like say racists and pedos. Then once that becomes the norm, they start making arguments for why the law/constitution shouldn't apply to more groups. Eventually it gets used as a tool of oppression. Even the worsts monsters need people making sure the rule of law is applied to them properly.
EDIT: Downvote me all you want. It's assholes like you that cheer for monsters like Magione and Robinson. A fucking cancer on our society!
....
First off, thank you for immediately telling everyone you don't know anything about the topic.
Secondly, a judge saying certain monies can't be used for bail is by no stretch a new thing.
It's literally the reason why pimps wear gold chains, and if you ask nice I might explain the connection for you.
What do you think that word means?
See Democrats like you would rather play word games about whether I am using the classic definition of liberalism or the modern US one instead of fixing your broken-ass party. As an independent centrist, it is so sad to see how badly your party has destroyed itself over the last 50 years. As long as Democrats act smug, they will lose more elections than they win. But keep being a pedant, I'm sure it makes you so popular with other human beings!
Buddy...
You just typed a whole bunch of words instead of what you think "liberal" means.
It's a term that gets thrown around a lot here and everyone means something different. So the only way this works is if people clarify what they're talking about instead of vague labels.
Just in general in 2026, if youre not being pedantic and just blindly following labels...
Statistically some billionaire somewhere is manipulating you. People need to understand shit these days, don't be upset when people take a couple seconds to help you understand.
You don't have to agree with me, you won't for a while. But eventually if you understand enough (honestly not much) you realize the only thing on the to-do list is a billionaire free society. We do that and whatever it doesn't solve, we can talk about next
I'm a CPA that does taxes for PE firms and hedge funds. I knew the rich were in control decades ago. Specifically Zionist Jewish supremecists run the world. It's unfortunate that all the idiot Democrats and Republicans want to do is fight each other instead of teaming up against the rich and the Zionists. Oh well, all Independent Centrists like myself can do is know that we are on the right side of history.
How does someone like this even find lemmy? Lol do you know where you are dipshit? Your kind are not welcome here
Looking for an alternative to Reddit that isn't a bunch of Antifa boot-lickers. Go ahead and kick me out while preaching tolerance, you hypocrite!
You’re a pathetic idiot and your family is embarrassed by you
Actually my family is quite proud of their son who came here with nothing from Cuba and is now a millionaire. I worked hard, got my CPA, and now help the largest hedge funds and PE firms on Wall Street avoid as much tax as possible. Based on how you are projecting, I bet you were born here to liberal, lazy parents who did not teach you strong Christian values, and the importance of hard work and playing the get rich game that is life in the USA. So now you are bitter that an immigrant is far more rich and successful than you. Boo-hoo!
lol cry more loser
Are Antifa in the room with you right now?
It's well known that Antifa pretends to not be organized. They literally have chapters in every Western country and every major US city. Rose City Antifa being one example that is well-documented. The Austin, TX chapter knows me very well. After having been attacked by them once, I always conceal carry and have installed cameras in my car and home. They now know this VERY well and largely leave me alone. Bunch of scardey-cats roleplaying as tough guys lmao.
🤣
Apparently they are everywhere, are highly organized, there are many of them, and some of them have targeted you? Are you a fascist or something? Why would they attack you?
Are they outside your house right now?
Say what you will, but all of us that exposed the Chapo Traphouse were targeted.
I have no idea what you are talking about, but okay.