Скачать или смотреть Michigan Judge Slams Abuser With $500K Bond & Home Confinement Order

#CourtroomDrama #MichiganCase #DomesticViolence #LegalUpdate #BondHearing

In the Michigan courtroom proceedings of People vs. Philip Carrick, prosecutors sought a modification of Carrick’s bond due to his repeated violations and escalating acts of domestic violence. Assistant District Attorney Sam Bernstein outlined a disturbing pattern of abuse spanning from March through July, during which Carrick allegedly assaulted the victim multiple times by kicking, punching, biting, choking, and even threatening to kill her if she sought help. Evidence included photographs of severe bruises, bite marks, and a head injury, alongside hospital records.

The prosecution emphasized that Carrick committed these assaults while already out on bond for another domestic violence case, underscoring his disregard for court orders. His criminal history revealed prior convictions, including a 2023 domestic violence case where he assaulted another victim, leaving her traumatized to the point of fleeing the state. Prosecutors argued Carrick posed a grave danger to women and the community, urging the court to set a strict $500,000 cash bond with no leniency.

Defense attorney Bernstein countered that the existing bond of $500,000 with a 10% privilege was already significant, requiring $12,500 upfront, and stressed Carrick’s reliance on this arrangement. He argued that the bond set was neither low nor unreasonable and should not be increased.

Judge ultimately sided with the prosecution, modifying Carrick’s bond by removing the 10% posting privilege, making it strictly a $500,000 cash or surety bond. Additionally, the court imposed home confinement with GPS tethering, with limited consideration for work-related travel. The judge highlighted concerns that Carrick’s violent behavior escalated after the removal of his prior tether, demonstrating his inability to comply with court orders.

This ruling reflects the court’s intent to prioritize victim safety and community protection over Carrick’s bond flexibility.

Subscribe My Channel-[‪@CaseVista‬ ]

Disclaimer

This summary is for informational and educational purposes only. It is based on publicly available courtroom discussions and should not be considered legal advice.