Comments on: Judge Won’t Lower Rendell’s Bond

By: 429SCJ

429SCJ — Fri, 30 Sep 2011 10:59:42 +0000

The bond is irrelevant here, this young woman is a killer. I pity her circumstance and path, but danger is danger, and this young woman is a threat to others and herself. Let us say a prayer for her and press on.

By: molino jim

molino jim — Fri, 30 Sep 2011 01:27:59 +0000

Billy–”there’s some one in there”. Check the purpose of bond. Then check how many other adults and or 17 year olds have a bond of this amount set for the same crime. I feel sure she could not post even a bond of 25,000, so what is the purpose of 300,000? I hope you could agree that her mom is not going to come up with that amount of money. If I recall correctly there is a 10% fee for the bondsman that is not returned so she is not going any where. Is the county jail truly the best place for her?

By: Oversight

Oversight — Thu, 29 Sep 2011 11:15:30 +0000

In Response to OldMarine

I believe that she had Judge Boles at her arraignment and the bond was lowered then either.

By: billy

billy — Thu, 29 Sep 2011 04:04:19 +0000

Uh……..shes charged with murder………Hello?………anyone in there?

By: Thinking

Thinking — Thu, 29 Sep 2011 03:11:49 +0000

HAhaha yes judge Boles would have been good..I know those girls love him in drug court chance after chance…

By: molino jim

molino jim — Thu, 29 Sep 2011 00:26:39 +0000

I’m unsure why the judge kept the bond so high. Is she a danger to others or a flight risk? Looking at some of the other cases in the last few months, most did not have this high bond and were not kept in jail. I’m not saying she should or should not be released on a lower bond—just don’t understand.

By: OldMarine

OldMarine — Wed, 28 Sep 2011 22:35:49 +0000

Her bad luck she didnt get Judge Joel Boles