Скачать или смотреть Judge Rules on Bond Forfeiture Dispute Bail Bondsmen vs Court Over Drug Patch Order

#CourtroomChronicles #BondForfeiture #JusticeInSession #JudgeDecision #BailBondCompany

In this courtroom session, the discussion centers around two bond forfeiture cases involving the same bail bond company and similar circumstances. Both cases revolve around defendants who failed to comply with court-ordered bond conditions—specifically the requirement to wear a drug patch within 24 to 48 hours. The judge clarifies that the failure to follow those conditions should have led to a bond revocation rather than the bonding company being held financially responsible.
The bonding company, represented by Mr. Romano, argues that they were not informed about certain bond conditions imposed directly by the court after the bonds were posted. They claim this lack of communication between the court, jail, and bondsmen results in unfair penalties for them, as they are held accountable for conditions they were unaware of. Mr. Romano further explains that his company cannot rearrest or act against clients without proper notice or legal authority, and that such cases expose them to financial losses and legal conflicts.
The judge acknowledges the communication gap but emphasizes that court attendance and compliance with bond conditions are the defendant’s responsibilities. Even if there were misunderstandings about the drug patch or ankle monitor violations, the defendants still missed their scheduled court dates, which legally constitutes a bond forfeiture.
To address recurring problems, the judge suggests that this issue be formally discussed in a bail bond board meeting to establish a standardized way of notifying bonding companies about new or modified bond conditions. In conclusion, the judge grants the bond forfeitures in both cases, takes judicial notice of the related dockets, and enters final judgments accordingly, while expressing intent to improve future communication between courts and bondsmen.

Subscribe My Channel-[‪@GavelStrikeUSA‬ ]

⚖️ Disclaimer:
This video is for informational and educational purposes only. It summarizes real courtroom proceedings and is not legal advice. All names and statements are part of the public record. The content is presented for awareness and understanding of court processes only.