Amherst police arrested David Rempp, age 23, who lists his address as "streets of Amherst", for domestic Assault & Battery with a dangerous weapon and destruction of property with that dangerous weapon.
Unfortunately because he was transported by AFD for psychological issues, APD did not get a chance to book him, thus no mug shot.
Mr Rempp was arrested Friday but later bailed under the condition he report to a hospital for treatment, and then Eastern Hampshire District Court on Monday morning for arraignment.
But he failed to appear in District Court and a warrant was issued for his arrest.
Editors note: For any of you old enough to remember the Sharon Galligan murder at the Hampshire Mall in Hadley you will understand why I did not redact the sensitive medical information about Mr. Rempp.
Click to enlarge/read
12 comments:
So if I understand this right, the court lets a psycho go, with the condition he gets help and returns to court on the following Monday.
What the hells wrong with this picture?
Anon 11:39 AM
Sorry I can't publish that because I'm not sure that is him.
First thing I did as well when APD told me they did not have a mug shot, but since there are 3 David Rempp's on Facebook I need better corroboration.
Anon 11:48
If you knew how often this sort of thing happens you would not sleep very well at night.
Crazy people walk the streets.
Not sure why you referenced Sharon. Is it because this Remp was "suicidal"? Otherwise I don't see the connection. Sharon was in the wrong place at the wrong time. She didn't know her murderer. Unfortunately, you are correct this type of scary behavior is all too common when people are not receiving or accepting appropriate psychological care. Clearly this dude has serious issues.
Yes, it was the "suicidal" connection.
Anon 1148: even crazy people have a right to bail and medical treatment. If I can read between the lines on this one it is my bet that this "treatment" was a commitment in a psych ward. If that is true that an arrest warrant also issued. I am also willing to bet that there were other factors involved that can't be reported.
There are always other factors that can't be reported.
Since this falls under the new domestic abuse law requiring police to purge from their weekly logs, I was lucky to get this much.
Hey, Ed's still out there so anything is possible.
Larry. I think David Rempp posted a comment on your 3/22/12 blog entry...??
Yes, I noticed that (or I should say, Google did). Kind of wished he posted a photo.
Under the law, i.e. the Massachusetts bail statute, public safety considerations are NOT part of the analysis for a judge considering bail. I know that this is hard for citizens like Anon 11:48 am to accept. But judges, too, have to follow the law.
Under an adjunct to the bail statute enacted in the past twenty years, prosecutors in Massachusetts get to raise public safety concerns in what's popularly called a "dangerousness hearing", which they must request from the judge at the arraignment. That hearing, however, requires the formal presentation of evidence, which can then be cross-examined by the defendant's attorney, as well as any additional evidence the defendant may choose to present.
Restraints on an individual's liberty require evidence, not just verbal argument, that they are necessary, or, alternatively, that the defendant has a prior track record of nonappearance for court dates. This is what living in a free society, under a government restrained by law, means: due process before you can lock someone up.
Rich Morse
Mr. Morse,
Under the laws of Mass. people are often held for 30 days or more while they are being evaluated to see if they are a danger to their self or the public. As should have been the case here.
Post a Comment