Originally Posted by
skydiver69
Ken. Bail legislation changed in 2017 to make it much harder for the police to use. There are arguments for reduced bail but in essence the government threw the baby out with the bath water when making bail so hard to use now, but I digress. In any case bail for low value (in monetary terms) damage would be hard to justify. Lastly reading between the lines it looks like the police have more enquiries to make before charging the idiots. If they had been charged they would have been bailed to court but as it stands it looks like they were released pending further enquiries.
Wait a minute. They have these folks on tape stealing thousands of pounds of cash money? Repeatedly? And they have them in custody. And "more enquires" need to be made before charging them? Your system is quite different from ours.
Another difference appears to be the bail system. The police do not set bail. We have three separate branches of government. The Executive Branch (to which the police and prosecutors belong) enforce the laws. They investigate crimes, catch the criminals, hold them temporarily, charge them, and bring them to court. In court, the Judicial Branch (which is separate from the Executive Branch) reviews the evidence and the charges and orders them to be held or released pending trial. And if they are held, the court (judge) sets bail, if any. The police have no say in the matter and the prosecutor may argue/plea for a high bail, but it's up to the judge who is totally independent of the prosecutor.