How about a brief refresher on federal bail, since everyone's got opinions on it this week? Yes?

Okay, here we go. In federal criminal cases, bail is governed by the Bail Reform

I’ve often said that nothing is normal about Julian Assange’s case. Here’s my list of the top 10 least normal aspects, strictly on the logistical side of monitoring the extradition proceedings (this is not to mention the many substantive issues that are also far from normal).

1. The judge’s stubbornly persistent refusal to acknowledge that NGO observers are professionals and have an important role to play (separate to that of the general public) in ensuring open justice, and refusal to grant us access to be able to do our jobs properly.

2. The constantly shifting goal posts in gaining access to the public gallery, and arbitrary restrictions on numbers in all 3 courts where proceedings have been held. On any given day, it’s impossible to predict how many will be let in and when, necessitating very early queuing.

3. Receiving conflicting information from the court about remote access, including being accredited to the Cloud Video Platform and then having that access revoked in September. The same thing seems to have happened to us again for 4th January.

4. After unbelievable difficulty getting in, what we actually observed was a small screen on the other side of a large room. It was often impossible to tell who was who, and I could only follow properly as I had the lawyers’ voices memorised from February (when I could see them).

#BombayHighCourt begins hearing the plea of Sunaina Holey accused of making objectionable statements against Maharastra Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray and Cabinet Minister Aaditya Thackeray.

@SunainaHoley
@OfficeofUT
@AUThackeray
@CMOMaharashtra
@MumbaiPolice

Adv. Abhinav Chandrachud answers the query of the court asking the parties to present the stand of other democratic countries on the statements made on WhatsApp or Twitter.

Chandrachud relied upon judgments of US Courts to submit that when similar statments against the government were made, a US court took a stand that the statement needs to be rectified and not arrested.

Chandrachud relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the matter of Amish Devgan wherein the court observed that if it is a prominent person like a news channel anchor or a public figure, they have to observe higher amount of responsibility before making statement.

Chandrachud: My client (@SunainaHoley ) is not a public figure and hence her statements if incorrect can be rectified by the concerned authority. She need not be arrested.

A hearing is underway now in the case of Richard Barnett, one of the Capitol insurrection defs (photographed at Pelosi's desk) — the govt is challenging an Arkansas magistrate judge's release order. Chief Judge Beryl Howell in DC halted his release until she rules on the matter

Prosecutor Mary Dohrmann begins by arguing Barnett flouted laws "in the most brazen and flagrant manner possible" when he breached the Capitol: "He knew exactly what he was doing."

Prosecutor says the note that Barnett left for Pelosi in her office — "Nancy, Bigo was here you bitch" — was "disturbing" and says the photographs of him sitting at Pelosi's desk show that he appears to "relish" the notoriety

Govt says Barnett doesn't have a criminal record, but notes police reports where a caller lodged a complaint that he'd pointed a rifle at a car with a "Black Lives Matter" sticker and, in a separate incident, was carrying around guns in public

I was raised as a Christian fundamentalist and used to write - in full belief - in support of basing society on the laws of the Torah (first five books) of the Bible.

I was taught that the Confederacy (the pro-slavery rebels of the southern US) were the “right” side. I remember my paternal grandfather (who was later convicted as a child molester) praising me for articles arguing as much. I remember my family flying a Confederate flag.

I once wrote supremacist, homophobic, Islamophobic, and even anti-Semitic blogs, arguing a religious nationalist ideology that was patriarchal, discriminatory, and outright offensive.

I was 17. 18. Early 20s. Back then, I wanted to join the US military. I thought every opinion I regurgitated was Gospel. I missed the part about “whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.”

I once confused hatred for love.