Sheriff Rod Hoops, proposal states that the county would need to charge bail bond companies a fee to be able to have their services listed throughout their county facilities.

At this time, bail bonds companies approved by the California Department of Insurance are listed for the defendants at no cost.

The proposal further states the amount of which to charge bail bond companies. To have their company listed at four of the San Bernardino County jail facilities, they must also include a $50 dollar fee that will be required every month. However, if you want it listed at the five detention facilities, it would cost $10 a month.

It is said, this program will annually generate $97,000 for the departments.

Also, the plan proposes, that instead of listing the bail bond companies alphabetically, they would be entered into a “lottery” type listing contest, and in the order they are drawn out of the hat is the way they will be displayed to inmates on paper.

To oppose or accept this proposal, the meeting will take place Tuesday morning at 10a.m. at 385 Arrowhead Ave in San Bernardino.

Both, Shirley Tidwell and her husband, Danial “Boone” Tidwell,  after pleading guilty to the misdemeanor charges, were sentenced to three years probation and a fine. Shirley Tidwell pleaded guilty to three counts, while Danial Tidwell pleaded guilty to five, for him, resulting in 180 days of house arrest.

Deputy District Attorney, William Lee, explained that prosecutors objected to the Tidwell’s pleas, which had been made directly to the court on Friday, further explaining that the misdemeanors were unsuitable for the two. Wednesday, Lee said, “Because I think they were in charge of the entire operation. They owned the business.” He further described their behavior as continuous and flagrant.

Both Randy Ideshi and Jerry Christian plead guilty to one misdemeanor count by way of plea bargains.  They were both sentenced to two years probation.

The fines for both Danial and Shirley Tidwell, exceeded $20,000 together. However, Ideshi was only fined $1,000 and Christian was ordered to pay $3,125.

After the 180 day grace period, if all fines are paid, Danial can ask to be released from his probation. It is also said that prosecutors are not opposed to terminating Ideshi and Christian’s probation, after one year.

There are four other defendants still remaining that will appear in court for a hearing on August 27. Those include Michael Steel, Samantha Widener, Keith Widener,  and Kirk Widener.

Bail bonds regulatory agency California Department of Insurance  investigators and the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s detectives served a warrant to search the premises of the Bail Hotline Bail Bonds Company.

The bail agency is being accused of conducting solicitation through inmates to get other inmates to use their company, according to sheriff’s spokeswoman Arden Wiltshire, who further stated, “Let’s say a person is arrested and brought in and booked into jail. They cannot promote or encourage the use of certain bail bonds companies.”

Not only was the company accused of soliciting to inmates by their bondsmen, they are also under suspicion of using inmates to solicit to other inmates.

Wiltshire said, “So they could drum up business.” What kind of bail company does that? Not only is it illegal, it’s old-fashion ambulance chasing.

Under the Penal Code 160, and under Section 1800 of the Insurance Code, soliciting bail business is a huge violation.

The county’s DA’s office for violations will review this investigation.

Wiltshire gave a comparison of this process to a doctor going in front of the medical board. “They have to answer to how they conduct business,” further stating that “it is no different with the bail company. They have to explain.“

Authorites made their arrests on Wedsneday, as a follow-up to a year-long investigation which involved local, federal and state officials. Police seized 32 pounds of methamphetamine, $20,000 in cash and 10 guns.

Among those arrested include Darren Johnson, a barber from San Bernardino. Mr. Johnson was originally arrested last October when he was riding his motorcycle through town. He was later released without charges. However, as of late, his videotaped arrest has gone viral on the Internet and garnered wide attention to the case.

He’s now claiming police used excessive force and has filed a $5 million claim against the city. Authorities are now charging him for possession of cocaine for sale and resisting arrest. After a year, police have announced that Johnson was a member of a gang they have been building evidence against.

The takedown raid was dubbed, Operation Barber of Seville.

As bondsmen, we’ve already been fighting a singular economic battle for some time, because we can’t compete based on price — we’re regulated by the Department of Insurance and are rates are set with them. In addition, our customers may not be very particular:  They often just want to deal with whoever can help them the fastest.

It used to be that good, honest service was the benchmark of a successful bail bond business.  Call me old fashioned, but I still believe this to be true and I really get steamed when I find myself up against bondsmen who break the law to earn a buck – and who then use bad economic times as their excuse.  So I’d like to dispel the belief that their practices have anything to do with a lousy economy.  I want to do this because I am extremely concerned about a growing trend that threatens to tear apart our industry…

Let’s take the example of a defendant who has been arrested. While his information is being entered into various jail computer databases during booking, unscrupulous bail bondsmen actually “hack” into these databases to get his name.  Sometimes, this happens within minutes of a booking.  Once these hackers have illegally got the defendant’s name, jail location and DOB, they start to gather information about friends and family – anyone whose emotions this bail bond blood sucker can potentially manipulate to his advantage.  Then they cold call these people for the purposes of negotiating bail. It’s bad enough that the defendant committed a crime; it’s even worse when he is being exploited by another who will get away, Scott free, with breaking the law.

Never before have we faced a period in our society, where our right to privacy has been invaded and compromised with such alarming frequency.  Now even those loosely connected to the defendant like current or former bosses, ex-spouses or estranged family members can get wind about an arrest in this callous manner.  Besides the obvious embarrassment, work and personal relationships could be irrevocably damaged.  I continue to ask myself:  In what way, shape, or form could a bad economy possibly have influenced this?

In some cases, corrupt bail bondsmen even had the stones to illegally visit a defendant in jail (usually within 1-2 hours of the arrest). They are masters of knowing just what buttons they can push when negotiating bail with a stressed, frightened or angry defendant.  They will mine him for all his important contact phone numbers and make it seem like it was his idea to give them out.  They also sweeten the deal by offering illegal, low bail premium rates. This practice not only undercuts the normal market forces, it puts both the defendant, who is already in trouble, and his innocent connections, in danger of breaking the law.

In California, where more bail bond business is conducted than any other state in the nation, the scenes I’ve described to you are happening on a massive scale.  I often end up scratching my head in bewilderment:  Who is actually letting these thieves inside the jails? Are certain officers being bribed?  Are there inmates who get a cut from the scammer bail agent’s take if they intimidate other arrestees into signing with a particular bail bond service?  And just how are they gaining computer access to booking information, mere minutes after the defendant has been booked, anyway?

I have been told by many clients that they were called by a bondsman who wasn’t contacted by anyone in their family, nor by friends or the defendant. When the client asked the caller where he got their contact information, they were almost always told: online.

Here is the only economic-related news for you:  These unscrupulous bondsmen must be engaged in an operation that involves, at minimum, hundreds of thousands of dollars in insurance premiums per day.  In my opinion, it won’t be long until legitimate retail bail companies, undercut and hurt by these illegal tactics, go the way of the dinosaur. Taking their place will be a large network of criminal computer hackers and illegal solicitors that can ultimately crack every database in California.  Our reputation will be utterly ruined, and the negative Bail Agent stereotype of a shady parasite that is perceived to be one step below the criminal he claims to help, will be reinforced.

One of my readers reminded me of another scam going on that also deserves some attention:  lawyer referrals and kickbacks – a practice that violates both state and federal law. This practice is also known as capping.  It’s when bail bond agents who have been illegally referred to defendants by their attorneys make “cold calls” on inmates. The agents deposit money in the lawyer’s accounts in return for these referrals – or they give money to the inmates’ families or act as a conduit for free long-distance telephone calls.

A popular myth says when the economy goes down, crime goes up.  And when crime rises, bail bond bondsmen grow rich.  But this is not true.  Remember, we too, are sellers of what some might deem to be a luxury item. Families experience a lot of stress when a loved one is in jail. It’s a trying, emotional time; and this leaves them vulnerable to a number of bail bond scams. If a bail agent doesn’t follow the law, whether economic times are good or bad, how can you trust them to treat clients fairly in the end?

In the world of bail bonds, unemployment as well as lost credit and housing devaluation has made it increasingly difficult for people to bail out their family members, loved ones and friends. It used to be a lot easier to put up the 10% or $2,000 for a $20,000 bail bond on a credit card when you had a larger limit to draw from.

The San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department stated ”There definitely have been more cite releases in the last couple of years… We are under a court order to stay just below maximum capacity to help alleviate the overcrowding situation.” For those who are “cited out” or “cite released,” the court has entrusted the defendant with the duty of showing up on their own for court dates, in lieu of being held in jail or being bailed out. 

Unfortunately, this doesn’t nesessarily mean there are less of those out there on the streets committing crimes. There’s no guarantee the offenders will show up for court as promised. Then we’re back to where we started all over again: overcrowded jails,  more cite outs and more people being re-arrested.

By simply having a bail bondsman involved in the process, it can help to put an end to this vicious cycle. Bail companies provide the public a much needed service. Definitely something for the penal system to think about, before approving more cite out releases.

When you bail someone out of jail, you take responsibility to make sure they show up for their court appearance. We tell people all the time, courts understand small mistakes like traffic, illness or trouble finding the courtroom. However, that doesn’t mean judges like it.

Such may have been the case in San Bernardino Superior Court this week where the judge issued arrest warrants and set bail at $200,000 for two defendants who weren’t present in his court when he call their case at 8:36 am. They were due in court at 8:30. The defendants were brothers accused of attempting to bribe the staff member of a San Bernardino Supervisor.

The men showed up in court 20 minutes late. Their attorney indicated the two were in the wrong courtroom. The judged agreed to lower the bail back to $100,000 if the bail bondsman would ”re-assume” the bond. While the men waited briefly in the court’s jail, the attorney contacted the bondsman who provided the proper Reassumption of Liability for the bail bond.

This is common in the bail bond business: a simple mistake puts the bond in jeopardy and judge rules that the defendants have failed to appear in court. In such cases, when the defendant contacts the bondsman, bondsmen will usually continue the bail bond.

Such may have been the question of Allegra Fromby a former elementary school vice president was out on bail in San Bernardino County for $75K. She had been charged with two counts of felony drug possession. At her court appearance on 9/14, her bail was increased to $200K. She’s being detained at the West Valley Dentention Center until she can raise the $20,000 (10%) needed for a bail bond.

The case originated back when she arrived at a shooting scene of her husband. Allegedyly, the vehicle that she drove to the scene had marijuana in it. She was arrested for possessing of marijuana for sale and transporting marijuana and child endangerment. Fromby’s lawyer believes the bail was increased due to the complaints filed against the San Bernardino Police for false arrest, false imprisonment, and illegal search and seizure.