$500,000 Bond for a Registration Charge: Is It Fair?
$500,000 Bond for a Registration Charge. Is That Fair?
By FAC Media | Opinion & Research
Half a million dollars.
The announced secured bond for an alleged failure to report an online identifier.
That is the bond announced for Stephen Jack Stines in Catawba County, North Carolina. His listed charge involves an online identifier, which can include an email address or screen name. Read the published charge list.
The announcement notes prior convictions but does not explain how the bond was set. We have not reviewed the bond order or his full case record. Bond is a condition of release before trial, not a sentence.
Still, is this amount fair and necessary for the conduct alleged?
For someone unable to secure release, waiting in jail can mean losing a job, housing or time with their children. Families may face unpaid bills and legal costs before a verdict.
A bond may offer release on paper. But if someone cannot afford it, what does that promise mean? How humane is a path to freedom that remains out of reach? Is this justice?
What risk supported this amount? Could less restrictive conditions address it? These questions deserve answers.
Florida families know these worries, too. FAC has examined the burdens of registry enforcement and asked for clear answers about internet-identifier reporting. The two states have different laws, but the need for clear rules and fair treatment reaches across state lines.
The operation behind the headline
Operation Full Compliance ran for roughly three months. The October 16 announcement listed 15 people charged, 14 arrested and 28 felony counts. One person remained unapprehended at the time.
Our count of the published charges:
- 14 online-identifier reporting counts
- 7 address-reporting counts
- 1 general failure-to-register count
- 2 residency-restriction counts
- 4 online-conduct counts
22 of 28 counts concern registration or reporting duties. These are charges, not a count of people or new sexual assaults.
North Carolina generally requires new or changed online identifiers to be reported in person within ten days. The reporting-offense law requires a willful violation. That distinction matters.
The whole picture matters
The separate online-conduct charges need explanation. In one person’s case, earlier reporting described alleged Facebook and Instagram use against platform policies. That charge label alone does not establish contact with a child.
Other reports identify additional premises allegations and drug allegations involving some people in the operation. The announcement is not everyone’s complete case history.
Children deserve safety. Families deserve fair treatment. Protecting the public means asking what conduct occurred, what response was needed and what actually made anyone safer.
Sources and reporting notes
Charge totals were counted from the October 16 announcement published by WHKY. The totals describe the listed charges, not unique victims, convictions or every pending case.
The announced bond amount is not a verified current custody status. North Carolina’s pretrial-release law describes the factors and conditions used in release decisions. We have not obtained the bond order explaining this amount.
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
If that was me, they could just go ahead and put me out of my misery. I do not know too many people who can afford that high a bond, and even someone who commits murder usually doesn’t have that high of a bond and I watch the news a lot.
And even if I had that much money, I would agree to a “No bond” and stay in jail until the trial and make sure my family takes the half mill. My bond was $10,000 but I got screwed because after I bonded out, they held some charges back just so I would have to be re-arrested. That was another $5,000. Finally, my lawyer told the judge, “Enough was enough” and the judge 50/50 agreed. She made a point that if I was released “I better not see you get re-arrested or you are DONE!” Well my second arrest was because they held charges back, not that I “Re-offended”.
Very sneaky and nasty tricks they use to get us back in jail. If I knew that at the start I would waved bond in the first place because either way I was screwed, at least I would have had my $15,000 in the bank went I eventually got released. They love to kick us when we are down.
12 counts of illegal pictures. bond is 35K per count. They charged me for every picture I had already deleted. 420 K for my bond. first time offender.
If I had it all over to do again, I would wave bond. But if I could do it over, I wouldn’t be in the fix I am in now on the registry. But time machines are not real, except on the movie “Back to the future”.
LOL that was my bond, i was a first time alleged offender never broken any law before that i had ties to florida for 20+ years and the charges were 13 counts of possession. (allegedly)
in the end i plead to 5 counts got adjudication withheld and had to serve 2 1/2 years probation.
My lawyer was an idiot when the judge asked questions at the bail hearing she turned to me to answer them instead of answering them the way the judge would want to hear.
Most important thing when arrested is shut up and do some research on an attorney or have your family do some research if you don’t have the access inside
I’m wondering if I misunderstood something about this article.
I have several internet instant messaging type accounts which are logged into FDLE site with my username.
However if these sites forbid people like me to be on there can the sheriff pick up their case and charge me for being on this site.?
I asked about this personally, and whether they correlate just depends on the site. I’ve got friends who’ve had Facebook and other social media for years, while others get deactivated; it’s not really consistent, it just happens if they flag your info for being sold and the site catches it. You’re fine as long as the FDLE Registraition office has your internet identifiers down. Always check each time you go in to update!
Thanks for your response and a second thought after I posted that was you know how when the detectives go in front of the television cameras and say they got a cyber tip that led them to such and such.
Soon as how they already know we’re on there it would never surprise me if they pushed the issue with Facebook or any other site just to get another opportunity to lock us.
I recently had what I thought was a yearly residence verification where they demanded to see my driver’s license and then three or four weeks later a different department with a sheriff’s showed up called the street crime unit and this guy and I played tag for 3 weeks while he says he’s got 30 days to comply with seeing my driver’s license.
Because it was difficult to get our schedules I felt like I was always on hooked to take his call and this truly put me in a nervous wreck for a long time I’m just now getting over it slowly but I sent him a copy of my driver’s license thinking that would work and we can get past scheduling conflicts.
Now Halloween’s coming up and I wish I was out of town.
They don’t care as long as it doesn’t pertain to them. That’s the typical mindset we see these days. If those of us affected want to be heard, we have to be willing to wage a war. The only way.
Read President Roosevelt’s quote I used! https://floridaactioncommittee.org/saturday-news-lookout-registry-news-across-borders/