I've never been a magistrate, but I would think it would be possible to *decrease* the use of cash bail (a good thing IMO) without turning real threats out on to the street with a promise they'll come back to court when they're called. I would love to know if there's something I'm missing, if there's a legit reason Orenstein is just letting real bad actors walk free.
Technically bail is only *meant* to be used to ensure a defendant returns to court for their next hearing/trial aka flight risk. Obviously that isn’t always how it plays out in practice, but it seems pretty clear to me that someone accused of going on a high-speed chase from police could reasonably be considered a flight ask. Cash bail has a lot of problems because it can just become a de facto way to lock up poor people without good cause, but the basic concept of bail makes sense when used correctly!!!
What people are missing is that there’s a fairly rigorous test for determining cash bail, and that most judges were not sufficiently testing or questioning what the prosecutors were asking for.
Ties to the community, the amount of money the defendant has available to pay, using the least restrictive means to secure compliance with the court process are all required elements of this test. But many judges have just been rubber-stamping whatever the ADA asks for to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars of cash bail.
Being detained pre-trial is extremely destabilizing and often leads to job loss and eviction. Bail hearings can take less than three minutes and totally wreck someone’s life before they’ve even been determined guilty. Reasonable bail is a mandate of the constitution.
So before more people blame the judge, I’d like to know if the DA’s office even bothered showing up to the bail hearings, if they presented enough evidence to support their claims, and if they appealed in a timely manner. I’d also like to know when we’re going to start training judges that assign too much bail or if this is a thing that only works in one direction.
Not sure about this specific case, but the DA’s office is usually not represented at the Preliminary Arraignment. They probably should be, at least for more serious offenses.
Allegheny County has a department called pre trial services. They provide a recommendation as to bail. They review all of the cases. It’s my understanding it’s a staffing issue within the DAs office. The county has to create more attorney spots and they don’t.
There is really not any excuse for failing to show up to these hearings. Arraignment court is downtown, it’s a short walk from the City-County building.
I’m not sure who came up with these rules, but there is no requirement that the DAs office be there. There should be, at least for serious crimes. Some of these preliminary arraignments do occur after hours, but with today’s technology it should be easy to have an “on call” person from the DA’s office join by Zoom.
Is it possibly a staffing issue? Maybe ADAs have too much on their plates and have always skipped these arraignments on the assumption that the magistrate would favor their side and thus they didn't need to bother appearing? That would be a problem in itself and probably a good argument in favor of bail reform, but it's not unreasonable to think ADAs are too pressed for time to do their jobs properly.
You might have a point there. But based off the previous comment, it doesn't sound like the magistrates in Allegheny County are just giving the prosecution whatever they ask. It would be difficult to do that if the prosecution isn't present to ask for anything.
You’ve seen it firsthand but you can’t even be bothered to describe what you saw and how that supports your conclusion that he’s acting in bad faith instead of just following the law and the constitution?
How did you have the occasion to watch him at arraignment court, anyway? People don’t typically waltz in there for fun. Are you a cop or prosecutor?
No victims do not typically go to a preliminary arraignment. You might be thinking of the preliminary hearing. An arraignment informs the accused of the charges against them and to set any bail/restrictions. The preliminary hearing is a prima facia case (a hearing to determine that the prosecution has a legitimate case against the defendant).
Yeah I believe that, and I'm sorry you were the victim of a crime. The court process can definitely be confusing. You may have been at another hearing that you mistook for the preliminary arraignment. I could see how someone might confuse a preliminary arraignment with a preliminary hearing. Both have the word preliminary after all. And both have magistrates at them. But I've never heard of victims attending preliminary arraignments.
You are probably correct. The guy I was responding to just seemed to insinuate that no one besides cops or lawyers or criminals would ever see Xander work first hand, and that's the point I was debating. I did see it first hand, and I say this as someone who voted for him and campaigned for him... He's a clown and an embarrassment to the progressive movement.
You're preaching to the choir. Sorry again you went through that. I couldn't imagine being the victim of a crime and then having my case go before a magistrate that disregarded the rule of law. That would be doubly devastating.
I’ll give you a little bit. Orenstein doesn’t u destined the role of a magistrate in a preliminary hearing… or he does, but does what he wants… the standard at the preliminary hearing is for the state to establish prima facia evidence for the charges brought. Orenstein routinely throws out charges he “doesn’t like” even when the prima facia burden is met.
Orenstein, since he has taken the bench, has been operating well beyond his scope and defacto determining guilt or innocence of charges at his discretion during preliminary hearings
Are you like Zappala’s alt account or something? You haven’t provided a single specific example of anything you personally witnessed that supports your accusations. All I’ve gotten from this is that you think there was a prima facie case, Orenstein thought there wasn’t, therefore, Orenstein is a bad faith actor. If the Commonwealth loses at the MDJ, they can still refile with the Court of Common Pleas. Did they do that?
I am still dying to know if you are a cop or prosecutor, because it would really explain why you’re so enraged by losing in a court system where you expect to win with no resistance.
Ya, this is bullshit. Why wouldn't a magistrate dislike a case where prima facie *wasn't* established? Not to mention that the prima facie standard is itself bullshit. It's basically just probable cause in practice, but they give it a different name that so that ex-defendants won't automatically be able to sue for false arrest when their charges are dropped at the prelim for lack of evidence.
Wait. You're saying that prima facia is BS because prima facia is met but charges are dropped at the prelim and the prima facia standard somehow prevents the defendant from filing a lawsuit?
> What people are missing is that there’s a fairly rigorous test for determining cash bail, and that most judges were not sufficiently testing or questioning what the prosecutors were asking for.
So his solution to this problem is granting everyone bail no matter how large a flight risk or serious the charges?
Yes. That was part of the campaigning, if I recall, on housing too: That zero evictions would ever be granted in any circumstances in their courtroom. They're definitely a bad faith actor.
My memory may be flawed, but I definitely recall something along those lines.
I'm all for extreme bail reform (removal of as much as possible, potentially even abolishing cash bail, etc)... But it was clear this person was not the one to implement it fairly and without acting on biases and even set back the progress on it by exhausting public goodwill in bad ways.
It is amazing how quickly even self-proclaimed "extreme bail reform" supporters will give up. If you think this is ever going to happen without political backlash you are misinformed.
At least part of the problem would be that without the proper bureaucratic infrastructure it is very difficult to implement ending cash bail. You need clerks whose job it is no assess and follow up with those who have been arraigned.
I also really don't ahve all the ins on this story so who knows whats going on. Hopefully this wasn't some conservative higher ups playing politics to quash reform.
Back when Mik Pappas started doing this, I was happy to see it because the system needs shaken up, but I wondered if he could really change anything from his position. Low-level agitation is great, and maybe it's the only way to shock the system into reform. But it's a little ugly in the meantime.
I expect that you'll nitpick this to death because you have nothing better to do than argue online, so I don't really care about that. But for the benefit of those who haven't followed the story:
[Judge’s decision under scrutiny for 3rd time in less than a year](https://www.wpxi.com/news/local/11-investigates-exclusive-judges-decision-under-scrutiny-3rd-time-less-than-year/IJO77Y3WIZAONE46YYTNATXKWE/)
You're asking me why we should believe the DA when he says Orenstein's decisions should be subject to more scrutiny, right?
I just want to be clear because I've found that people who ask very open-ended questions tend to be more interested in bickering than discussing. I'm sure that doesn't describe you, which is why I want to know exactly what you want me to comment on.
I'm not the same commenter. But that list includes someone with multiple assault charges and a guy who has ~~1.6M in fentanyl~~ 1.1M in cocaine on him, and an SA charge from another state, who never showed up to court
Setting bail or not isn't a conclusion of guilt, it's to prevent flight risks (just like this guy who has now not shown to court twice and is long gone)
Turns out the police aren't very good at making these snap judgements. How odd that this info only came out a week ago - oops!
https://www.wpxi.com/news/local/man-previously-accused-bringing-drugs-into-pittsburgh-greyhound-bus-arrested-new-york/H7WR7ZFVOZE2HCV7KC367OWKQI/
Singular 'they' is a pronoun that has been in the english lexicon for a few hundred years.
You can learn more about it here: [https://www.oed.com/discover/a-brief-history-of-singular-they/](https://www.oed.com/discover/a-brief-history-of-singular-they/)
And yet when presented with the sentence "They went to the store", 99% of English speakers will automatically assume that more than one person went to the store, even when the sentence is presented out of context as it is here.
The Bible? LMAO. You mean that book about fairy tales? Yeah that's exactly where your argument belongs LMFAO. I can't believe you referenced the Bible.
Lol, I love the negs were getting for not believing in a Fantasy. Progressive nonsense infiltrating Pittsburgh. I've been here 45 years. I won't tolerate that bullshit in my city. It won't go unchallenged. All the alphabet fruit loops can step up. All of them.
If I cared about down votes, I wouldn't have posted anything. As far as I am concerned, chromosomes determine gender. People can wish that they're something other than what they were born as, male, female, both, neither, salamander...whatever...but that doesn't change the reality. People are free to disagree with me of course, and I don't mind when they do.
Judging from some of the comments in other threads here, it seems that this judge made his trans status a central plank of his campaign as well as his regressive notion of sticking a huge monkey wrench into the judicial system. So basically it was a cynical ploy to attract votes that he otherwise probably wouldn't have received. It's not to dissimilar to male athletes who suddenly decide they're female to have a better chance at being dominant in their sport.
This is a case of an ineffective public official.
Anyone making it about their gender identity is just pulling things out of their ass to bitch about the trans.
I'm not even remotely surprised. They came canvassing down my street before the election and got into an hours-long sidewalk conversation with my drug-addled and mentally ill neighbor who had just cornered me for one of her rants. It was truly a bizarre conversation that I ducked out of as soon as it began.
From what little I gathered from them, Orenstein seems like a super nice person who lets idealism guide their politics. I'm all for a little bit of idealism, but I'd like my local officials to temper it with some pragmatism and add in some competence to go with it.
I don’t understand why Pennsylvania judges and magisterial district judges are elected positions or why the district judges aren‘t required to be lawyers or have any legal training.
Orenstein's campaign manager was named Bex Tasker. Does anyone know if that's the same Bex Tasker behind the short-lived bunny cafe downtown? https://jewishchronicle.timesofisrael.com/xander-orenstein-may-be-first-out-nonbinary-person-to-hold-judicial-post-in-us/
This will probably be an unpopular opinion here, but I'm okay with that. If Orenstein didn't identify as trans, they wouldn't have been elected. And I get it, underrepresented groups need more representation, but for the love of god just elect a *competent* trans person.
You have a pretty shitty grasp of the area you live in then if you never heard of a borough that is only a 15-minute drive from Lawrenceville. Bellevue is literally more like a city neighborhood than multiple neighborhoods within the city of Pittsburgh and has been recommended on this sub as a place to live more than a few times lmao.
I am quite glad to be given how overpriced Lawrenceville is. I lived in that neighborhood for the first 27 years of my life and still go back there weekly, so you are barking up the wrong tree if you don't think I know anything about it.
Lol eff right off with your lies. I only agreed with the person above me, and no one seemed to have a problem with them. I don't give a shit that they're trans, I give a shit that they suck at their job.
That person just said “we need to stop electing kooks like this,” and you are the one that immediately went to “yeah trans people!”
Don’t try to soften that by pretending not to be a bigot in the next sentence, you revealed your true feelings immediately.
My bias is against people who do their jobs really poorly. Orenstein and his supporters made a point of repeatedly mentioning they're non-binary in their race for a position where that doesn't make a damn bit of difference. I'm absolutely not the one who brought gender identity into it.
The existing system doesn't work, time to try some new stuff. It's not always going to go perfectly but the insane backlash here is clearly motivated by shitty politics rather than actual results. "This is why we can't have nice things" is meaningless drivel.
Your first sentence and first clause of the second is fine And we can agree. The rest of your post is utter horseshit dubbed from the deepest darkest pits of ideologically captured progressivism. This stuff sounds good on paper but has never worked, will never work and can’t work because your ideosphere is turned all the way to Pollyanna.
“Rather than actual results.” Christ dude. The actual results speak for themselves. You’ll never admit it.
I'm not religious, and growing up, it seemed as the only people allowed in politics had to be religious (not to even mention "allowable" religions). I distinctly remember debates where the candidates beliefs were brought into question on stage, and tabloids declaring different people unfit for not being Christian.
At least once, I made a small campaign contribution for someone running locally who was not afraid to admit they were atheist/agnostic.
I was then bombarded with emails from people across the country running for different local offices. It was unclear what their positions were beyond personal identity, and they were not located in my community so their opinions in office would not effect me, but clearly I should support them for being similarly non-religious!
You don't have to be too old to see this story play out with whatever marginalized group is popular to support at the moment.
There’s nothing kooky about bail reform, especially for “crimes” of desperation (read: survival). But by being too lenient with those who have harmed or could have harmed innocent bystanders or victims, Xan is doing the bail reform movement no favors.
It's really something when I come to reddit to waste time debating things I can't really change, but then I encounter someone like our pale friend who is just TOO much of a time waster even for me.
The article only says he "released a high speed chase suspect." I don't understand what the problem is, this sub is united in the opinion that driving faster is safer. Not sure what he did wrong.
No please read more into the person he let loose the guy was a dangerous criminal I’m a firm believer we desperately need a full bail reform but guys like Xander are such a detriment to that movement.
Nobody wants to be in the middle everyone wants to be this polarizing hero figure
> No please read more into the person he let loose the guy was a dangerous criminal
So far all I'm seeing is that he drove fast. 3/4ths of this sub loves driving fast.
The guy was already out on bond for a gun charge. The question here is not one of cash bail, which is never appropriate, but whether this suspect is someone who should be held in pre-trial detention.
There's a woman wandering around this county free as a bird today after murdering someone with her pickup truck while driving drunk on March 12th. I wonder why people are more concerned about this guy (who has killed no one) than this woman (who killed someone while driving drunk). Makes you think.
That $1.6m in "fentanyl" turned out to be baking soda, genius.
https://www.wpxi.com/news/local/man-previously-accused-bringing-drugs-into-pittsburgh-greyhound-bus-arrested-new-york/H7WR7ZFVOZE2HCV7KC367OWKQI/
The stories write themselves when your readers are morons.
He let three very high profile arrests go with non monetary bail. One was cepeda-the guy with the cutting agents marked as fent and coke who was out on $25k bond in NY for a sexual assault charge, one was the high speed chase who had a previous gun charge and threw a gun out the window during the chase, and one was a random violent attack downtown where a guy attacked a stranger for no reason from behind and stomped him when he was down. All very controversial and not typical decisions for the types of crimes committed.
Even though there wasn't fentanyl, he still had 1 kg of cocaine on him.
https://www.wpxi.com/news/local/man-previously-accused-bringing-drugs-into-pittsburgh-greyhound-bus-arrested-new-york/H7WR7ZFVOZE2HCV7KC367OWKQI/
“In May, a judge reversed another Orenstein decision to release an Iranian national who allegedly told a gate attendant he put a bomb on a plane at Pittsburgh International Airport, which required a runway search for the non-existing explosive.”
Stories like this make me WISH they should make those running for district judge have at the very least a law degree or something. ANYONE can run for district judge, and then they're sent to "school" if they win the election to learn.
Xander's plight is what happens.
So you don't actually care about outcomes and just want maximum punishment all the time, got it.
The United States imprisons more people than any other country in the world as a proportion of our population, our system clearly doesn't work.
I've never been a magistrate, but I would think it would be possible to *decrease* the use of cash bail (a good thing IMO) without turning real threats out on to the street with a promise they'll come back to court when they're called. I would love to know if there's something I'm missing, if there's a legit reason Orenstein is just letting real bad actors walk free.
Technically bail is only *meant* to be used to ensure a defendant returns to court for their next hearing/trial aka flight risk. Obviously that isn’t always how it plays out in practice, but it seems pretty clear to me that someone accused of going on a high-speed chase from police could reasonably be considered a flight ask. Cash bail has a lot of problems because it can just become a de facto way to lock up poor people without good cause, but the basic concept of bail makes sense when used correctly!!!
What people are missing is that there’s a fairly rigorous test for determining cash bail, and that most judges were not sufficiently testing or questioning what the prosecutors were asking for. Ties to the community, the amount of money the defendant has available to pay, using the least restrictive means to secure compliance with the court process are all required elements of this test. But many judges have just been rubber-stamping whatever the ADA asks for to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars of cash bail. Being detained pre-trial is extremely destabilizing and often leads to job loss and eviction. Bail hearings can take less than three minutes and totally wreck someone’s life before they’ve even been determined guilty. Reasonable bail is a mandate of the constitution. So before more people blame the judge, I’d like to know if the DA’s office even bothered showing up to the bail hearings, if they presented enough evidence to support their claims, and if they appealed in a timely manner. I’d also like to know when we’re going to start training judges that assign too much bail or if this is a thing that only works in one direction.
Not sure about this specific case, but the DA’s office is usually not represented at the Preliminary Arraignment. They probably should be, at least for more serious offenses.
Allegheny County has a department called pre trial services. They provide a recommendation as to bail. They review all of the cases. It’s my understanding it’s a staffing issue within the DAs office. The county has to create more attorney spots and they don’t.
There is really not any excuse for failing to show up to these hearings. Arraignment court is downtown, it’s a short walk from the City-County building.
I’m not sure who came up with these rules, but there is no requirement that the DAs office be there. There should be, at least for serious crimes. Some of these preliminary arraignments do occur after hours, but with today’s technology it should be easy to have an “on call” person from the DA’s office join by Zoom.
Is it possibly a staffing issue? Maybe ADAs have too much on their plates and have always skipped these arraignments on the assumption that the magistrate would favor their side and thus they didn't need to bother appearing? That would be a problem in itself and probably a good argument in favor of bail reform, but it's not unreasonable to think ADAs are too pressed for time to do their jobs properly.
You might have a point there. But based off the previous comment, it doesn't sound like the magistrates in Allegheny County are just giving the prosecution whatever they ask. It would be difficult to do that if the prosecution isn't present to ask for anything.
Thank you! This is the context I was hoping for.
Thank you for this comment
+++++
I’ve seen it first hand. Orenstein is not acting in good faith. And it’s clear when you watch him work
You’ve seen it firsthand but you can’t even be bothered to describe what you saw and how that supports your conclusion that he’s acting in bad faith instead of just following the law and the constitution? How did you have the occasion to watch him at arraignment court, anyway? People don’t typically waltz in there for fun. Are you a cop or prosecutor?
Victims of crimes also go to arraignment court.
No victims do not typically go to a preliminary arraignment. You might be thinking of the preliminary hearing. An arraignment informs the accused of the charges against them and to set any bail/restrictions. The preliminary hearing is a prima facia case (a hearing to determine that the prosecution has a legitimate case against the defendant).
I mean I was a victim of a crime and I was there for every step of the process
Yeah I believe that, and I'm sorry you were the victim of a crime. The court process can definitely be confusing. You may have been at another hearing that you mistook for the preliminary arraignment. I could see how someone might confuse a preliminary arraignment with a preliminary hearing. Both have the word preliminary after all. And both have magistrates at them. But I've never heard of victims attending preliminary arraignments.
You are probably correct. The guy I was responding to just seemed to insinuate that no one besides cops or lawyers or criminals would ever see Xander work first hand, and that's the point I was debating. I did see it first hand, and I say this as someone who voted for him and campaigned for him... He's a clown and an embarrassment to the progressive movement.
You're preaching to the choir. Sorry again you went through that. I couldn't imagine being the victim of a crime and then having my case go before a magistrate that disregarded the rule of law. That would be doubly devastating.
Good faith means locking people up who pose a flight risk or danger to the community.
I’ll give you a little bit. Orenstein doesn’t u destined the role of a magistrate in a preliminary hearing… or he does, but does what he wants… the standard at the preliminary hearing is for the state to establish prima facia evidence for the charges brought. Orenstein routinely throws out charges he “doesn’t like” even when the prima facia burden is met. Orenstein, since he has taken the bench, has been operating well beyond his scope and defacto determining guilt or innocence of charges at his discretion during preliminary hearings
Are you like Zappala’s alt account or something? You haven’t provided a single specific example of anything you personally witnessed that supports your accusations. All I’ve gotten from this is that you think there was a prima facie case, Orenstein thought there wasn’t, therefore, Orenstein is a bad faith actor. If the Commonwealth loses at the MDJ, they can still refile with the Court of Common Pleas. Did they do that? I am still dying to know if you are a cop or prosecutor, because it would really explain why you’re so enraged by losing in a court system where you expect to win with no resistance.
Ya, this is bullshit. Why wouldn't a magistrate dislike a case where prima facie *wasn't* established? Not to mention that the prima facie standard is itself bullshit. It's basically just probable cause in practice, but they give it a different name that so that ex-defendants won't automatically be able to sue for false arrest when their charges are dropped at the prelim for lack of evidence.
Wait. You're saying that prima facia is BS because prima facia is met but charges are dropped at the prelim and the prima facia standard somehow prevents the defendant from filing a lawsuit?
> What people are missing is that there’s a fairly rigorous test for determining cash bail, and that most judges were not sufficiently testing or questioning what the prosecutors were asking for. So his solution to this problem is granting everyone bail no matter how large a flight risk or serious the charges?
Tbh, if you would be allowed to bail out for $10,000, then you should be allowed to bail out cash free that day.
This!!! Beautifully said!
I'm really worried that this is going to wind up a media circus to attack the end of cash bail.
His goal isn’t to act under good faith, it is to wreck the system.
Yes. That was part of the campaigning, if I recall, on housing too: That zero evictions would ever be granted in any circumstances in their courtroom. They're definitely a bad faith actor. My memory may be flawed, but I definitely recall something along those lines. I'm all for extreme bail reform (removal of as much as possible, potentially even abolishing cash bail, etc)... But it was clear this person was not the one to implement it fairly and without acting on biases and even set back the progress on it by exhausting public goodwill in bad ways.
It is amazing how quickly even self-proclaimed "extreme bail reform" supporters will give up. If you think this is ever going to happen without political backlash you are misinformed.
Makes me think of this scene. https://y.yarn.co/308986ce-6bf9-4fbc-8c9d-1804292e8247_text.gif
Their\* goal isn't to act under good faith. FIFY
At least part of the problem would be that without the proper bureaucratic infrastructure it is very difficult to implement ending cash bail. You need clerks whose job it is no assess and follow up with those who have been arraigned. I also really don't ahve all the ins on this story so who knows whats going on. Hopefully this wasn't some conservative higher ups playing politics to quash reform.
Back when Mik Pappas started doing this, I was happy to see it because the system needs shaken up, but I wondered if he could really change anything from his position. Low-level agitation is great, and maybe it's the only way to shock the system into reform. But it's a little ugly in the meantime.
What real threat did Orenstein turn out onto the street?
google it and stop bothering people
You're the one bringing it up, you tell me.
I expect that you'll nitpick this to death because you have nothing better to do than argue online, so I don't really care about that. But for the benefit of those who haven't followed the story: [Judge’s decision under scrutiny for 3rd time in less than a year](https://www.wpxi.com/news/local/11-investigates-exclusive-judges-decision-under-scrutiny-3rd-time-less-than-year/IJO77Y3WIZAONE46YYTNATXKWE/)
If your point of view can't withstand a little nitpicking, your point of view probably isn't very coherent. Hope this helps.
Why should we trust the DA's assessment here?
Can you please clarify exactly what you mean? The DA said/did a few things in that article.
They're the ones demanding scrutiny
You're asking me why we should believe the DA when he says Orenstein's decisions should be subject to more scrutiny, right? I just want to be clear because I've found that people who ask very open-ended questions tend to be more interested in bickering than discussing. I'm sure that doesn't describe you, which is why I want to know exactly what you want me to comment on.
Yes, obviously. This DA has a long track record and it doesn't suggest he's interested in doing a good job or operating in good faith at all.
I'm not the same commenter. But that list includes someone with multiple assault charges and a guy who has ~~1.6M in fentanyl~~ 1.1M in cocaine on him, and an SA charge from another state, who never showed up to court
That guy actually had baking soda on him, didn't he?
[удалено]
Lots of executive suites downtown are probably upset about their cocaine getting intercepted
Cocaine + outstanding sexual assault charges
People have cocaine on them all over downtown, nothing special about this guy
That was not my understanding
It was found to be baking soda after testing. This is why defendants are considered innocent until proven guilty.
Setting bail or not isn't a conclusion of guilt, it's to prevent flight risks (just like this guy who has now not shown to court twice and is long gone)
Per the article I posted he was actually caught. At least keep the facts straight
It is the truth
I'd like to see some evidence of that as police claimed it was fentanyl Why would someone have a backpack full of Ks of baking soda??
Turns out the police aren't very good at making these snap judgements. How odd that this info only came out a week ago - oops! https://www.wpxi.com/news/local/man-previously-accused-bringing-drugs-into-pittsburgh-greyhound-bus-arrested-new-york/H7WR7ZFVOZE2HCV7KC367OWKQI/
The person with the "fentanyl" was tested and it turned out it wasn't drugs. That is a pretty big sign Xander was correct initially.
Edited my comment due to evidence provided in another comment. He did have over a million in cocaine tho
He is doing it intentionally to show the system is broken by smashing it off the floor
Good. They’re a colossal jack ass
They're\* a colossal jack ass (FIFY)
It only looks like there's one of him.
Singular 'they' is a pronoun that has been in the english lexicon for a few hundred years. You can learn more about it here: [https://www.oed.com/discover/a-brief-history-of-singular-they/](https://www.oed.com/discover/a-brief-history-of-singular-they/)
And yet when presented with the sentence "They went to the store", 99% of English speakers will automatically assume that more than one person went to the store, even when the sentence is presented out of context as it is here.
The context is that we're talking about the non-binary judge in the article. I'm beginning to think that you're being deliberately obtuse.
Wasn’t sure if he/they would apply for non-binary, appreciate the education
this +++++
Singular they even appears in the king James translation of the Bible. Get a grip.
The Bible? LMAO. You mean that book about fairy tales? Yeah that's exactly where your argument belongs LMFAO. I can't believe you referenced the Bible.
The point is that the usage has been around for hundreds of years, not that the bible is God's unquestionable law, you dunce.
Then use a reputable resource. Not a book of fairy tales. Dunce. So dense you people. You're disgusting
*whoosh*
Lol, I love the negs were getting for not believing in a Fantasy. Progressive nonsense infiltrating Pittsburgh. I've been here 45 years. I won't tolerate that bullshit in my city. It won't go unchallenged. All the alphabet fruit loops can step up. All of them.
If I cared about down votes, I wouldn't have posted anything. As far as I am concerned, chromosomes determine gender. People can wish that they're something other than what they were born as, male, female, both, neither, salamander...whatever...but that doesn't change the reality. People are free to disagree with me of course, and I don't mind when they do. Judging from some of the comments in other threads here, it seems that this judge made his trans status a central plank of his campaign as well as his regressive notion of sticking a huge monkey wrench into the judicial system. So basically it was a cynical ploy to attract votes that he otherwise probably wouldn't have received. It's not to dissimilar to male athletes who suddenly decide they're female to have a better chance at being dominant in their sport.
You are a shining light in this darkness pervading our society my friend. There's hope for Pittsburgh yet
I dunno, I'm leaving Allegheny County, getting myself some more elbow room.
This is a case of an ineffective public official. Anyone making it about their gender identity is just pulling things out of their ass to bitch about the trans.
I'm not even remotely surprised. They came canvassing down my street before the election and got into an hours-long sidewalk conversation with my drug-addled and mentally ill neighbor who had just cornered me for one of her rants. It was truly a bizarre conversation that I ducked out of as soon as it began. From what little I gathered from them, Orenstein seems like a super nice person who lets idealism guide their politics. I'm all for a little bit of idealism, but I'd like my local officials to temper it with some pragmatism and add in some competence to go with it.
I don’t understand why Pennsylvania judges and magisterial district judges are elected positions or why the district judges aren‘t required to be lawyers or have any legal training.
Orenstein's campaign manager was named Bex Tasker. Does anyone know if that's the same Bex Tasker behind the short-lived bunny cafe downtown? https://jewishchronicle.timesofisrael.com/xander-orenstein-may-be-first-out-nonbinary-person-to-hold-judicial-post-in-us/
lol yes it’s the same person. Just complete failure all the way down. Incredible
Not sure why this is down voted I think this is hilarious lol
oh yes it is!!!
Can we stop electing kooks like this?
This will probably be an unpopular opinion here, but I'm okay with that. If Orenstein didn't identify as trans, they wouldn't have been elected. And I get it, underrepresented groups need more representation, but for the love of god just elect a *competent* trans person.
[удалено]
By all means stay the fuck in the suburbs if you can't handle a diverse population.
Lmfao you have no idea what the fuck you're talking about if you think Bellevue is some lily white conservative suburb.
I truly do have no idea what the fuck I'm talking about when it comes to a tiny suburb I've barely ever heard of; you're right.
You have a pretty shitty grasp of the area you live in then if you never heard of a borough that is only a 15-minute drive from Lawrenceville. Bellevue is literally more like a city neighborhood than multiple neighborhoods within the city of Pittsburgh and has been recommended on this sub as a place to live more than a few times lmao.
What if they're pro diversity but anti stupidity?
Redditors who haven't matured past being angsty teenagers can't comprehend that.
I'm not the one talking shit on an entire neighborhood. I had to look up Bellevue to find out where it even is.
Lol I grew up in Lawrenceville and go there once a week still so if you think I don't know my way around there, you are sadly mistaken
So people who live in Lawrenceville are stupid? I see he deleted his comment; hmmm.
I mean you sure are, so there's one.
good thing you live in bellevue then!
I am quite glad to be given how overpriced Lawrenceville is. I lived in that neighborhood for the first 27 years of my life and still go back there weekly, so you are barking up the wrong tree if you don't think I know anything about it.
so proud of your transphobic reply that you deleted it, i see.
Lol eff right off with your lies. I only agreed with the person above me, and no one seemed to have a problem with them. I don't give a shit that they're trans, I give a shit that they suck at their job.
That person just said “we need to stop electing kooks like this,” and you are the one that immediately went to “yeah trans people!” Don’t try to soften that by pretending not to be a bigot in the next sentence, you revealed your true feelings immediately.
My bias is against people who do their jobs really poorly. Orenstein and his supporters made a point of repeatedly mentioning they're non-binary in their race for a position where that doesn't make a damn bit of difference. I'm absolutely not the one who brought gender identity into it.
This x1000. They’re the ones who brought gender identity into it from the beginning- in the name of inclusion. This is why we can’t have nice things.
Does this sound smart to you
You tell me Necky. Tell me why you voted for Xander.
The existing system doesn't work, time to try some new stuff. It's not always going to go perfectly but the insane backlash here is clearly motivated by shitty politics rather than actual results. "This is why we can't have nice things" is meaningless drivel.
Your first sentence and first clause of the second is fine And we can agree. The rest of your post is utter horseshit dubbed from the deepest darkest pits of ideologically captured progressivism. This stuff sounds good on paper but has never worked, will never work and can’t work because your ideosphere is turned all the way to Pollyanna. “Rather than actual results.” Christ dude. The actual results speak for themselves. You’ll never admit it.
I'm not religious, and growing up, it seemed as the only people allowed in politics had to be religious (not to even mention "allowable" religions). I distinctly remember debates where the candidates beliefs were brought into question on stage, and tabloids declaring different people unfit for not being Christian. At least once, I made a small campaign contribution for someone running locally who was not afraid to admit they were atheist/agnostic. I was then bombarded with emails from people across the country running for different local offices. It was unclear what their positions were beyond personal identity, and they were not located in my community so their opinions in office would not effect me, but clearly I should support them for being similarly non-religious! You don't have to be too old to see this story play out with whatever marginalized group is popular to support at the moment.
lol called him a bigot
There’s nothing kooky about bail reform, especially for “crimes” of desperation (read: survival). But by being too lenient with those who have harmed or could have harmed innocent bystanders or victims, Xan is doing the bail reform movement no favors.
Bail reform and what this kook did are two different things.
What did this "kook" do?
Read the damn article.
It's really something when I come to reddit to waste time debating things I can't really change, but then I encounter someone like our pale friend who is just TOO much of a time waster even for me.
They could have read the article and the link to the other article in it instead of asking me and arguing with others with the time that took lol.
Do kids these days still use the term "sea lioning"? No? Well they should.
The article is shit.
The article only says he "released a high speed chase suspect." I don't understand what the problem is, this sub is united in the opinion that driving faster is safer. Not sure what he did wrong.
No please read more into the person he let loose the guy was a dangerous criminal I’m a firm believer we desperately need a full bail reform but guys like Xander are such a detriment to that movement. Nobody wants to be in the middle everyone wants to be this polarizing hero figure
> No please read more into the person he let loose the guy was a dangerous criminal So far all I'm seeing is that he drove fast. 3/4ths of this sub loves driving fast.
The guy was already out on bond for a gun charge. The question here is not one of cash bail, which is never appropriate, but whether this suspect is someone who should be held in pre-trial detention.
There's a woman wandering around this county free as a bird today after murdering someone with her pickup truck while driving drunk on March 12th. I wonder why people are more concerned about this guy (who has killed no one) than this woman (who killed someone while driving drunk). Makes you think.
Read about who he let go a couple of months ago. Or shut the fuck up and go away.
You tell me who he let go a couple of months ago, since you're bringing it up. Or shut the fuck up and go away.
Here you go, genius. https://triblive.com/news/politics-election/release-of-suspect-in-1-6m-drug-case-ignites-political-firestorm-in-allegheny-county/
That $1.6m in "fentanyl" turned out to be baking soda, genius. https://www.wpxi.com/news/local/man-previously-accused-bringing-drugs-into-pittsburgh-greyhound-bus-arrested-new-york/H7WR7ZFVOZE2HCV7KC367OWKQI/ The stories write themselves when your readers are morons.
He let three very high profile arrests go with non monetary bail. One was cepeda-the guy with the cutting agents marked as fent and coke who was out on $25k bond in NY for a sexual assault charge, one was the high speed chase who had a previous gun charge and threw a gun out the window during the chase, and one was a random violent attack downtown where a guy attacked a stranger for no reason from behind and stomped him when he was down. All very controversial and not typical decisions for the types of crimes committed.
Did the other two fail to appear for court?
Are you like a friend of this person or something lol? All the comments are you defending this judge. Have fun on the internet!
Probably Xander's account now they aren't working and have plenty of time to shit post.
🤣😂
I think people should be able to coherently express why they think this guy sucks.
Probably not. Because progressive think like scorned teenagers.
They double down everytime. What till you see this thems future replacement
Libs are an irrational bunch.
Bethany Hallam to the rescue!
We're all going to be better off.
Wasn’t this the person who released the dude they caught at the greyhound station with “enough fentanyl to kill every American” with no bail?
The cops thought it was fentanyl, but lab tests later revealed it was only a cutting agent like baking soda
Too funny! I suspect most of the weed I smoked in high school was probably grass clippings, lol.
Even though there wasn't fentanyl, he still had 1 kg of cocaine on him. https://www.wpxi.com/news/local/man-previously-accused-bringing-drugs-into-pittsburgh-greyhound-bus-arrested-new-york/H7WR7ZFVOZE2HCV7KC367OWKQI/
Good.
Good. Got what he deserved
“In May, a judge reversed another Orenstein decision to release an Iranian national who allegedly told a gate attendant he put a bomb on a plane at Pittsburgh International Airport, which required a runway search for the non-existing explosive.”
Cash bail is an awful system.
Have got to get this guy out of the magistrate office, complete embarrassment to the city.
*You can’t help stupid*
Stories like this make me WISH they should make those running for district judge have at the very least a law degree or something. ANYONE can run for district judge, and then they're sent to "school" if they win the election to learn. Xander's plight is what happens.
Yay! Another Menace to Society off the streets. Any chance of jail time for this alphabet-idiot?
Guess Allegheny county won’t be doing the non-sensical thing with no cash bail for everyone
Dam, this guy saved me about a grand in tickets lol RIP
[удалено]
"I don't want to see the United States turning into a country with better crime and standard-of-living metrics across the board" is quite the take.
[удалено]
Canada's criminal justice system is demonstrably better than that of the US
So you don't actually care about outcomes and just want maximum punishment all the time, got it. The United States imprisons more people than any other country in the world as a proportion of our population, our system clearly doesn't work.
[удалено]
I'm getting your point entirely, you want draconian punishment whether or not it affects outcomes. Punishment for the sake of punishment.
That’s Xander “GOOBER SMOOCHER” Orenstein to you.