Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

BostonUniStudent t1_ixtu3vu wrote

>Rahelin Reynoso, 33 and Quenty Ogando, 44, had bail set at $100,000 each at their arraignments Wednesday in Dorchester Municipal Court on charges of trafficking ...

>The seized fentanyl has a street value of about $2.25 million, the DA's office says.

That a decent amount of money.

197

[deleted] t1_ixtxbo5 wrote

[deleted]

108

Intrepid-Hunter-5813 t1_ixtzpkt wrote

My first arrest earned me a $100,000 bail for a robbery in which I made off with $116… all of the principles upon which our cash bail system are supposed to have been built were pretty much abandoned completely on like day 2.

70

dante662 t1_ixugehj wrote

​

Robbery is a violent crime against a person. So taking "only $116" doesn't matter, it's the fact you robbed a human being and put them in fear of their life. It's a felony (probably more than one since most robberies use a weapon or have assault/battery charges to go along with it).

​

If anything, $100k is too little. Violent crimes like that should have no bail whatsoever.

114

riski_click t1_ixuowye wrote

>If anything, $100k is too little. Violent crimes like that should have no bail whatsoever.

Nor should these guys who were keeping fentanyl in a child's bedroom.

73

Effective_Golf_3311 t1_ixuvtm5 wrote

Half of Reddit would like a word with you

3

fillymandee t1_ixwk4pp wrote

Which half?

2

shaqrock t1_ixwtam5 wrote

The half (or more than half) that think the war on drugs is fucking dumb

−2

fillymandee t1_ixwtusd wrote

The war on drugs is dumb. So is allowing street dealers to possess an amount of fentanyl that can kill an entire population.

17

streetbum t1_ixx4q5p wrote

The war on drugs is the only reason this situation even exists.

4

9Z7EErh9Et0y0Yjt98A4 t1_iy3a53i wrote

Indeed. Very few drug users are specifically seeking out fentanyl. It's used as a cheap and potent adulterant that is passed off as more desirable drugs, like prescription opiates, heroin, or even non-opiate type drugs like cocaine. Users are asking for all kinds of drugs and getting fentanyl of variable quantities, either adulterated into or straight up substituted for their intended product, which makes overdosing a real hazard.

Fentanyl adulteration is entirely a black market phenomena.

2

pup5581 t1_ixx8ea9 wrote

...it's why this shit is happening.

The war on drugs will never be won all while we waste billions a year. Fucking stupid country thinking the war on drugs is worth it and doesn't make it 10x worse

2

HebrewHammer14 t1_ixxa2nz wrote

What would you suggest as an alternative to fix the current situation?

2

pup5581 t1_ixxewdd wrote

What Portugal did in 2001 and the Netherlands and other countries are doing. Legalize all drugs for personnel use Portugal had a massive HIV and overall addict rate. After legalized it dropped significantly compared to the rest of the EU.

All the money that was spent to combat drugs and drug arrests when to rehab progams and they are now the leaders when it comes to getting people healty again.

Imagine billions going to treatment facilities vs tactical gear for police or Jail overhead? It's proven to work and helps lower drug use in general thus it hurts drug dealers.

Building a wall or hiring more police officers will make the issue worse and worse as we see. As no money goes to rehab...

2

cedarapple t1_ixxrmgp wrote

Portugal decriminalized drug use but dealers and distributors are sent to prison there, contrary to popular opinion. They also don’t tolerate open air drug markets.

2

HebrewHammer14 t1_ixy6nax wrote

I personally don’t hate the idea of legalization. However it’s hard to ignore a state like Oregon and a city like Portland where homelessness and drug use is out of control. Not to mention there are needles everywhere. They have jobs for ppl that are dedicated to just picking up discarded needles that are just left in the street. How do you think seeing that everyday would effect a child or what if they stepped on them ?

2

Intrepid-Hunter-5813 t1_ixv3adw wrote

You have zero understanding of how the bail system is supposed to work. Bail is not to be used as a punishment, the purpose is to help ensure the defendant shows up in court. Yes, the severity of the crime is to be considered, but so are other key factors as well: Previous record (which I did not have), a history of defaulting (which I did not have), and a determination whether an individual is a flight risk (which I wasn’t). I was not in any way trying to justify my actions or downplay the severity of my crime, but rather just shed light on the fact that our cash bail system is wildly inconsistent and caters to those with large amounts of cash at their disposal (i.e. alleged high-level drug traffickers with millions of dollars worth of fentanyl). When all was said and done a judge agreed that my bail had been set far too high and knocked it down to $10k. Still a sum that a homeless drug addict can’t just pull out of their back pocket, but much more fair given the situation. Anyway, I plead out, did my time, made amends, started a business within the recovery field, and have the privilege of being of service and support to individuals who are going through the same difficulties that I once was.

47

NeptuneFrost t1_ixv56hw wrote

The internet is not the most compassionate, nor subtle place. Glad to hear you are in long term recovery. Addiction is horrible.

20

tomatuvm t1_ixukw8a wrote

So just put people in jail indefinitely on the word of the police?

That seems problematic.

42

iamheero t1_ixuyikx wrote

No, not indefinitely. In a felony trial, you have to have a preliminary hearing early on in the process. The purpose of the preliminary hearing is to determine (by putting on a mini-trial) if there's probable cause to believe the person accused actually did the crime so that you're not holding someone indefinitely. This is determined by a judge, and the defendant has an attorney to challenge the witnesses and evidence presented. Prosecutors need to prove (admittedly to a lower standard than at trial, again, probable cause) every element of the crimes. Typically these are set to occur within like 10 days of being charged, so that people aren't wrongfully held. This is in most states, if not all of them (Louisiana may be an exception, for example).

Now, practically speaking many defendants waive their own rights so that their attorney has more time to prepare, there are sometimes benefits to resolving a case before that hearing, but that's their choice. If they really were held in custody with no evidence, they'd do the hearing ASAP and they'd have their cases dismissed. The thing is, that almost never happens.

18

tomatuvm t1_ixv4kg4 wrote

Thank you for the info! Correct me if I'm wrong (genuinely asking here):

In Massachusetts bail is based on the ability and means to pay and the risk of flight, not on the severity of the crime. If the crime is severe enough, they have dangerousness/evidence hearings to determine if bail should be an option or not, correct? If there's risk/threat, they just don't have bail, right? Because bail isn't set up to be a mechanism to hold people and not everyone charged with a violent crime is denied bail, correct?

Basing it off my understanding of reading articles on the SJC ruling a few years ago, and not on any actual legal experience (hence why these are all questions more than statements)

https://www.molarilaw.com/blog/massachusetts-supreme-judicial-court-bail-must-be-affordable-defendants

5

iamheero t1_ixv619x wrote

So to preface: I am barred (inactive) in Mass, but I don't practice criminal law there so treat this like I'm a layperson. I do practice criminal defense and was a prosecutor in California, and they have a similar rule, so I'll just answer based on the laws there.

That's pretty much correct, at least in CA. The way it works in CA is if bail is set, it must be at a level that's affordable to the individual (ie not set on a schedule sheet) but still be an incentive to return to court. There can be additional requirements for bail like an ankle monitor, but that's not always needed. However, as you mentioned, depending on the severity of the crime, there's a strong possibility that bail will just not be set. Like robbery, for example, which is a violent crime (and counts as a 'strike' for CA sentencing purposes). It's very serious and so the judge may decide that the danger to the community and the risk of flight outweighs the accused's right to bail. They weigh a number of factors, but they're also basing the seriousness on how the DA charged the case, not on a hearing with evidence presented. For example, I have a client right now accused of a very serious crime and was given no bail, but the violent crime he's charged with was done in self-defense, which isn't in the police report or the complaint, so the judge can't really consider it.

So simply put, the judge first determines SHOULD they get bail, and then determines how much based on their income/resources.

6

tomatuvm t1_ixva77m wrote

Thank you for the info! The last paragraph sums up my layperson's understanding.

Hopefully it won't ever gain first hand experience on this one 😂

3

dante662 t1_ixungxz wrote

By the court.

Violent crimes, no bail, remanded until trial.

Non violent, released on own recognizance.

−12

tomatuvm t1_ixuotln wrote

You're proposing that someone lose their freedom over an accusation of a crime. Surely you can see the issue with that?

The purpose of bail, per the Constitution, is to ensure people show up to trial. Not punish them pre-trial. My understanding is there is a dangerousness hearing process to determine if the circumstances warrant not providing bail at all, based on the seriousness of the crime and evidence. But if you get bail, it has to be affordable but also expensive enough to make sure they show up to court*

  • I am definitely not a lawyer so all corrections are welcome
28

Sometimes_cleaver t1_ixuqvvk wrote

You're commenting to people who's only understanding of the criminal justice system is from Law and Order.

18

DRZ36 t1_ixv2z07 wrote

Bail generally isn’t to keep people off the streets. It’s to ensure they show up in court, because the criminal process is really slow. When bail has been set, the state hasn’t proved anything, other than that they had probable cause to make an arrest, which is a really low bar. Your position is basically “if the police accuse someone of a violent crime, they should sit in jail indefinitely.”

33

Robobvious t1_ixx40sf wrote

And your position is if the police accuse someone of a violent crime, they should sit in jail indefinitely unless they pay the government a bribe?

−1

DRZ36 t1_ixx4m84 wrote

First of all, it’s not a payment to the government. It’s returned if you show up to court. Second, bail is an imperfect system and there are better alternatives that work in some circumstances, but it’s certainly better than locking up everyone until trial

2

smedlap t1_ixuyi72 wrote

Pressing fake pills that contain fentanyl is also a violent crime against a person.

13

killd1 t1_ixwtn5j wrote

Bail is not punitive. All people are innocent until proven guilty in court so they shouldn't be held in jail. Bail is a means to allow them out but with incentive to go to their trial and not flee. They get their bail money back. So bail is mostly set based on flight risk and how much money they have.

5

My-Left-Plate t1_ixuzmis wrote

You violently out someone in fear for their lives. You should have had zero bail.

4

[deleted] t1_ixv3s2l wrote

Im surprised they admitted to this on reddit.

0

ShoreNorth9 t1_ixv5cok wrote

$100,000 is nothing, you should have been given no bail. Scum.

−9

Buffyoh t1_ixuk8ug wrote

Why in hell are they getting bail at all? If they possess one hundred pounds of Fentanyl, one hundred thousand dollars is nothing to them.

108

sckuzzle t1_ixuqyn9 wrote

It's because they don't actually have 100 lbs of fentanyl. The police like to inflate the numbers so that they seem more impressive. They actually have 100 lbs of powder that has trace amounts of fentanyl in it, but it's common practice to just label the entire thing as the drug, ignoring purity.

114

LinguiniAficionado t1_ixuw1zg wrote

According to mass state law, the entirety of any mixture containing a drug is counted as that drug, because they intend to sell the mixture. So yeah, you’re totally right to point out that it’s misleading, but it’s not the police trying to “sound impressive”, it’s just the legal definition of what the suspects were in possession of.

And really, less pure = more profit, because they have 100 lbs of something to sell regardless of what it contains, and a higher proportion of that being a cutting agent rather than pure fentanyl means they have higher profit margins, so it makes the $100k even less significant to them.

51

sckuzzle t1_ixuxt36 wrote

> the entirety of any mixture containing a drug is counted as that drug

for sentencing purposes. Laws can't change the physical reality of the world. And the physical reality is that there weren't 100 lbs of fentanyl there, no matter what some law says about how long someone should be thrown in jail for. And the police are absolutely still lying (not misleading) about how much fent there is. It's both not the "legal definition" and not the truth.

>And really, less pure = more profit

lol.

−6

Explorer_of_Dreams t1_ixwmpgr wrote

Fuck off trying to defend drug dealers. They're willingly selling 100 lbs of product they know will possibly kill their buyers and they don't care

3

sckuzzle t1_ixwz111 wrote

Nowhere did I defend drug dealers.

0

Explorer_of_Dreams t1_ixwzvz5 wrote

The police gave an estimation of the value the drug dealers had - one pretty lower that the full weight given. Just because you can't do basic math doesn't mean you have to call the people trying to take these murderers off our streets liars

−1

sckuzzle t1_ixx278y wrote

Ahh. So you're just mad I'm criticizing the police. Got it.

1

[deleted] t1_ixv4ag3 wrote

[deleted]

19

Fanfics t1_ixvl9cg wrote

I was gonna say, lol. "Holy shit are they planning to kill the entire US population?"

EDIT: Technically I guess it would be a chemical weapon though?

9

Aromatic_Oven_3971 t1_ixuws75 wrote

They also had a pill press. So very possible they had pure fentanyl and cutting agents prepped and ready to press into pills

9

sckuzzle t1_ixuyv5q wrote

If they had 100 lbs of pure fentanyl, the police would have reported that they seized drugs with a $1.3b street value. Yes, that's b, as in billion, as in $1,300,000,000.

They didn't seize 100 lbs of pure fentanyl.

32

Intrepid-Hunter-5813 t1_ixv3sif wrote

I don’t know how many times I’ve had to explain this to people… glad somebody gets it.

7

Maddcapp t1_ixuw0j2 wrote

Yup and the street value shit is a joke. Maybe if you broke up the amount into $5 bags and sold 200,000 of them. Which wouldn’t happen.

8

Aromatic_Oven_3971 t1_ixuwnc6 wrote

How do you know? You can literally buy pure (relatively…95%+) fentanyl from the dark web

1

jojenns t1_ixvd4l7 wrote

Can you provide the lab results or actual weight then please?

0

Effective_Golf_3311 t1_ixuwe5x wrote

Are you suggesting they track down each granule?

Or is it safe to say that the weight given by police speaks better to the idea that they were trafficking rather than possessing, since the dealers will divide it up later as necessary to wholesale?

Nobody does pure fentanyl. It’s all cut. So it’s one thing to try to push a simple possession charge but when we’re talking this size the whole number tells the whole story.

These guys were gonna make a fuck load of money off of the death and misery off of people and the fact that you’re trying to minimize it is pretty disgusting.

−1

sckuzzle t1_ixuyc32 wrote

> Are you suggesting they track down each granule? Nobody does pure fentanyl. It’s all cut.

Of course they shouldn't track down the grains. I'm saying that at minimum they should have said that they found 100 lbs of powder that contained fentanyl. Saying it's 100 lbs of fentanyl simply is not factually accurate and also intentionally misrepresenting what was seized.

>and the fact that you’re trying to minimize it is pretty disgusting.

Mmmm, yes, that's what I'm doing. Calling out lies means that I must be pro-murder, right? Cool. Got it.

11

Equivalent_Metal_534 t1_ixts12q wrote

Screw those bastards to the wall. They’re conspiring to kill, whether or not they care.

71

Explorer_of_Dreams t1_ixwmuvn wrote

Too many people on this subreddit will side with the drug dealers because of "acab"

3

SinibusUSG t1_ixyc9fh wrote

If they do, it's because they've lost sight of the forest for the trees and the reason people oppose police in the first place. The dealers cause real harm to communities, and while they might in many ways be symptoms of other failures in society, they are still dangerous ones that need to be dealt with. The "enemy of my enemy is my friend" thing doesn't really play out in most real-world scenarios-

1

9Z7EErh9Et0y0Yjt98A4 t1_iy3ypld wrote

Don't limit your horizons. I have enough hate in my heart for drug dealers and our worthless pigs

1

IDCFFSGTFO t1_ixunlum wrote

Apparently 100 lbs of fentanyl is enough to kill every person in Massachusetts 3 times.

So yeah, good job, bury these mass murderers under the jail.

50

sckuzzle t1_ixus8jo wrote

They didn't actually capture 100 lbs of fentanyl though.

51

smedlap t1_ixuz6jl wrote

They also didn't adhere to strict lab conditions to assure that each pilll contained the same dose. I am sure some of those pills they pressed had overdose amounts of fentanyl in them. That is a common way for young first time pill poppers to die. These are not addicts selling to manage their own habit. Put them away.

12

sckuzzle t1_ixv0dam wrote

> They also didn't adhere to strict lab conditions to assure that each pilll contained the same dose.

Oh, absolutely. Fentanyl is dangerous and we should harshly punish those who intentionally peddle in it. But we don't have to misrepresent how bad this is by saying there was enough fent there to kill everyone in the state three times over when there wasn't.

Justice comes with accurately representing the facts.

25

smedlap t1_ixv10zw wrote

I think the facts are accurately portrayed here. They put a value of 2.2 million on it. 100 lbs of pure fentanyl is worth more than that?

3

sckuzzle t1_ixv1lk0 wrote

When police report the value of drugs, they report the street value, because it is higher. 100 lbs of pure fentanyl is worth over a billion in street value.

10

smedlap t1_ixv2b8k wrote

so 2.2 mil accurately describes the purity and value.

2

sckuzzle t1_ixv2r4c wrote

It probably accurately describes the higher end of the street value, yea. But representing drugs by their street value is like representing a crate of apples as having a value of $1000, because they could be turned into apple pies and sold at Marie Calendars.

These guys had the apples and they had pie crust and they had ovens, so they were definitely planning on turning the apples into apple pies. But there's a lot of work that has to be done between having the raw materials and actually having that much in cash.

7

smedlap t1_ixv3oo3 wrote

My point is that the 2.2 number has that data in it. 100 lbs of pure is worth more. The 100 lbs of cut pill product is worth 2.2.

3

IDCFFSGTFO t1_ixxj50i wrote

Ask me if I give a fuck. My cousin was killed by some cocksuckers just like these, if it wasn't them. Everyone caught trafficking in fentanyl or carfentanyl should all be charged with felony murder. Someone should run for congress on that platform, they'd win in almost any district in the fucking country at this point. Everybody knows somebody.

2

Effective_Golf_3311 t1_ixuwqgb wrote

This is rich… guy is in here advocating for his dealer lmao

−3

BeatriceDaRaven t1_ixuyjvs wrote

you're being a clown. He's obviously not advocating for the dealer or minimizing what the dealer is doing or any other nonsensical phrases you keep spewing, he's just clarifying the facts since it's obviously misleading to say they have "100 lb's of fent". Nobody is defending, advocating for, or minimizing what the dealer is doing. just stop..

11

Peeeculiar t1_ixu5nmi wrote

On the same day:

>In Chelsea District Court, Elizaul Landestoy Sanchez, 34, of Revere, is charged with counts relating to dealing cocaine and fentanyl.
>
>He’s behind bars on $100,000 bail after “a joint task force consisting of Revere and Lynn police, DEA agents and Massachusetts State Police executed a search warrant at 58 School Street in Revere and seized more than 509 grams of cocaine and more than 26 grams of fentanyl.”
>
>Some of the drugs, Hayden’s office said, “were found in a children’s bedroom.”
>
>Sanchez, per the office, has a “significant criminal record” that includes state prison time for drug trafficking.

26

SinibusUSG t1_ixycfto wrote

> Some of the drugs, Hayden’s office said, “were found in a children’s bedroom.”

Sometimes I wish it were possible to charge someone with attempted manslaughter.

2

Dukeofdorchester t1_ixusiny wrote

I used to live a block from there…interesting neighborhood

23

Badloss t1_ixuvl70 wrote

I don't understand the point of Fentanyl. Maybe it's my innocent lamb DARE propaganda conditioning but is there any upside to using it? It seems like the only point of Fentanyl is to trick people into thinking it's heroin or something and then it kills them. Is it even possible to use Fentanyl safely?

17

Aromatic_Oven_3971 t1_ixuwjdi wrote

Technically yes. It’s used in hospitals as a pain killer. As a street user? No it’s not possible to use it safely. The difference between ingesting an amount that will get you high and an amount that will kill you is single digit milligrams. Something tells me dealers and users aren’t using pharma grade scales

29

Maddcapp t1_ixux3d5 wrote

Yes it’s 100% possible to use safely. When administered by a doctor in a medical setting. On the street no not safe even when being careful because you don’t know the strength. It’s so widely used by dealers because it’s extremely cheap and easy to order from Chinese chemical distributors. You can buy $20,000 worth and make hundreds of thousands of dollars selling it.

Users don’t care because it gets them really high and keeps the withdrawals away.

It’s toxic and deadly if ingested. But it’s a myth that skin contact can kill you.

20

Intrepid-Hunter-5813 t1_ixv58z8 wrote

“But it’s a myth that skin contact can kill you..”

Don’t tell that to all of the cops who have “overdosed” from reaching into a suspects pocket and pulled out an open bag. There was a recent study published in the New England Journal of Medicine that basically obliterated the notion that all of these cops were overdosing and the police union clapped back by essentially saying that police would never lie, and therefore the study was just an attempt to downplay the heroic actions of these poor cops. Strange times.

14

9Z7EErh9Et0y0Yjt98A4 t1_iy3za7z wrote

That's not true. Fentanyl reacts with cop DNA to produce a reaction that presents exactly the same as a panic attack and can only be reversed was shooting 6 doses of narcan up the nose.

3

Maddcapp t1_ixvtnzq wrote

I generally support the police. They have tough jobs. But yeah that’s debunked 100%.

−2

dorgba t1_ixuxl95 wrote

It is cheaper and more potent. Using it safely might be a loaded question. You can use it and not die. Would not call that safe though.

9

abagofit t1_ixvsgfi wrote

My grandma is prescribed fentanyl patches for pain, so it does have medical use

3

PuritanSettler1620 t1_ixv009q wrote

That is terrible! How many people will die and how many lives will be ruined by that horrible drug?

7

Dpentoney t1_ixv3nxu wrote

That’s an excessive amount of fentanyl

4

theundeadpixel t1_ixwhmqt wrote

Amazing the cops didn’t instantly drop dead when they were within 5 miles of the fentanyl

4

defnotbjk t1_ixvaota wrote

And this is why you test presses (or better yet don't take them at all)

3

TheTr7nity t1_ixvo955 wrote

Excellent work by the Police. Cleanup the streets.

3

thirdsin t1_ixuokel wrote

The last line of the article
>Innocent, etc.

Lol, savage.

2

impact4 t1_ixvlpwo wrote

Give them a year in prison for each LB, they can erase a year for every g of fent they consume. Everyone who deals addictive drugs should experience addiction and an overdose, they are the lowest of the low.

2

Zaius1968 t1_ixwelaz wrote

100 pounds?? Isn’t that enough to kill the entire city?

1

ThrobbingWetHole t1_ixxjupy wrote

I feel like it’s worth way more than 2.25m if they pressed that into pills which is likely what was gonna happen. Pills go for 15-25 each

1

TheGanjaLasagna t1_ixw6lus wrote

These people should be publicly executed.

−1