"I don't care if it's a misdemeanor or a non-violent felony - it doesn't matter," said Flynn on Tuesday morning. "If you're charged with a crime, you should be arraigned right away - this guy should have been arraigned (Monday)."
Justin Ginter, partner at Lipsitz Green Scime Cambria, discussed the bail reform law further, explaining why Cremen was simply given an appearance ticket to be arraigned at a later point.
"Under the bail reform law that came into effect in January, many non-violent offenses were called 'non-qualifying offenses,' and because of that, it left no discretion as to whether bail could be set or not in those types of offenses," said Ginter. "If bail could not be set, that simply means that they fall under the category of non-qualifying offenses that were enumerated by the legislature."
While Flynn supports much of the bail reform legislation passed in January, he struggles to understand why arrested individuals wouldn't be arraigned right away.
"And now, we have an individual here who had a knife, using the n-word, allegedly, hateful speech, harassing and menacing peaceful protesters, and he's given a ticket to go home and come back in October, and I think it's wrong," Flynn said.
Regardless, Ginter doesn't believe that there will be a change to due process.
"From my perspective and what I've experienced so far, it really hasn't changed too much for us," he began. "I know this is sort of an anomaly with the hate crime and the menacing, but any violent offenses or very serious offenses - many domestic violence offenses and things like that - still require the person to be brought in and the judge to have the authority to set bail, issue an order of protection or whatever needs to be done in those situations."