As I understand it, bounty hunters are free-lance kidnappers who work for lenders and bail bondsmen as agents to physically seize persons and property of debtors, and they can do this legally.
Is this true in all states? Can a person accosted by a bounty hunter resist, or sue him or his ‘employer’? If the hunter uses force–and how else can he subdue his victim–can the victim use counter force as ‘self-defence’?
I find the whole idea astonishing and repellent; if a retail store employee lays a hand on a suspected shoplifter, he and the store can be sued. What is going on?
A suspected/alleged shoplifter is innocent until found guilty. Bail jumpers, while not convicted, promised to be present at court and broke a contract with both the court system and their bail bondsman. So while I cannot say anything about the various laws regarding bounty hunters, their “victims” are already guilty of jumping bail.
Not a legal expert, don’t know laws of all states (any states, come to think of it), but yes, bounty hunters have to be registered as law enforcement agents. They even get badges. Resisting them is resisting arrest.
Now if they get overly aggressive, etc, you can sue them for violation of civil rights and whatnot. But you probably can’t sue them for wrongful imprisonment if you actually are a bail jumper.
So for a bail jumper to have a successful “self-defense” case against a bail-bond enforcement agent (legally licensed), he has to show that the bail-bond enforcement agent was using an undue level of force to subdue him or handle him, and that his life was in jeopardy. Tackling you because you try to run away, no. Whacking you in the head with a bat after you surrendered - maybe. If you can still defend yourself at that point.
I’ve always heard of “bounty hunters” in the context of arresting bail jumpers. Siezing property of debtors is the work of “repo men”, which is something else entirely. IANAL, but in the latter case there’s usually signed paper to the effect that the lender legally owns the property in question until the debtor finishes paying for it. If you fall behind in your car payments, the bank hires a repo man to return their car to them.
I worked for a temp agency and was assigned to work at a bond agency. The guys are very professional and certainly knowledeable of their clients.
Usually the TV stuff doesn’t happen because a lot of the agents actually write their own bonds. So they aren’t going to write a bond on someone they think they’re going to have difficulty with.
I did the clerical work but there were times when someone didn’t show, the bounty hunter doesn’t go all gung ho after the guy. I would call the guy and poliety request he reschedule and if that didn’t work we’d try other things. For instance if the guy had his mother put up her house as collateral on the bond, I would call and inform the mother her son “skipped,” and we were now in the process of legal procedings to take her house away, which we weren’t. You know how fast old mom rats her son out when she thinks her house is going to be taking away.
I also found things like MySpace or Facebook. The agency takes photos and fingerprints as a condition of writing the bond. I’d slap one of those photos on Facebook and pretend to be him. People would think I was the skip and tell me everything.
Or some of the higher risks wear monitoring devices and I would three times a day log into their accounts and record this. If anything might indicate the device was not working or was taken off, the bond was revoked. (The bond was written that way), and the guy went to jail.
At least in the office I was at, a lot of it was typical office work and though people told me stories of getting shot at and such, like you see on TV, but if someone is really dangerous the judge won’t allow bail or no bond agnecy will write the bond. These people aren’t idiots they know pretty much who will flee or not. Of course they make mistakes, but they know by and by
If you ever find yourself needing the assistance of a bail bondsman, realize that their fee might make their service cost prohibitive if they had no way to recover on a skipped client.
Yeah, this guy paid his money on the condition that he would get it back when you showed up for court. You didn’t show. He wants his money back. Ergo, he is going to come and get you, and you agreed to that when you took his money. You could have paid your own money, or you could have stayed in jail.
The law specifies that you deposit 10% of the bond amount with the court, which is essentially what a bail bondsman would do and eliminates the need for them.
I couldn’t clearly state what I wanted to in that post.
A person posting bail in Illinois only has to post 10% of the bail amount with the clerk of court, not the entire bail amount, so there’s no need for bail bondsmen.
Yeah, I know. What I don’t know is why you think this disproves my point. Because of this legislation, which was designed to have precisely this effect, the bail bond industry is not economically viable in this state and has been eliminated.
For instance, running a quick Yahoo search on two Midwestern cities, one in Illinois (and much, much larger than the comparison city) and one not in Illinois:
There have been periodic discussions on Capitol Hill re: imposing Federal standards on bounty hunters (usually after some cross-border “outrage,” define it as you will), but nothing has ever come of it. Here’s, I believe, the most recent bill, which didn’t even attract a second cosponsor and died in committee: http://www.americanbailcoalition.com/new_html/Bounty%20Hunter%20Laws.htm
All responces so far talk of the bounty hunter going after the bail jumper. What if I, a non-criminal, find myself in a situation with a confused bounty hunter? Am I required to comply with their commands as I am with a police officer? Am I allowed to defend myself, or others? IE if the bounty hunter has made a mistake and is trying to capture my non-criminal wife, can I treat him/her as a threat?
I saw something on TV once about how bounty hunters sometimes snatch the wrong person by mistake. One bounty hunter had snatched some soccer mom at gun point, stuffed her into the trunk of the car and driven her into another state before he figured out she was not the person he was after. The show (one of those 20/20 type shows, but I no longer remember which one) made it appear as though innocent people snatched by mistake basically had no recourse against the bounty hunters who pretty much have total immunity to do whatever they want to anybody they want, as long as they say they thought you were the person they were looking for. There are no consequencing for abducting the wrong person. At least that’s how they made it look. If that’s not true, what ARE the consequences?