Bail – Jason Gouldon

Presumption of innocence is a foundation of our legal system. Until a person is convicted by a court of law, the crimes charged on them are alleged crimes. A reader, “Miriam,” commented on a recent post stating:

“Can we please remember that this man may be innocent. I don’t know the details but I do know that a person should be proven guilty before sentenced, judged and ruined.”
“Miriam”

“Miriam” is absolutely correct. But there still needs to be controls in place to protect the public from an alleged criminal charged with certain categories of offenses. Consider a mass shooter who opens fire on a crowd of innocent people. Until a jury convicts them, they are presumed innocent. If they were then somehow released on bail, should they be allowed to buy guns while they await trial? It’s the same point here – a man is accused of raping children, and is somehow out on bail. Should he be around children while awaiting trial? If you were a parent, and Jason Gouldon invited you and your children to come over and swim, would it be helpful to know that he’s currently out on bail and awaiting trial for child molestation?

People can make their own decisions, it’s a free country. If you were someone who knows about these charges, and still feels comfortable letting an alleged child predator spend time with them, you can make that call. But what if you didn’t know? And what if something happened to your children? Thankfully, in this case, it was recently ordered that Mr. Gouldon not be around any children while he awaits trial.

Another thing to consider is the charges, and the potential validity of the charges. In the example with the mass shooter above, there would very likely be witnesses, or CCTV footage, or some other damning evidence condemning the alleged shooter. Because of this, the chance of the murderer being released on bail is close to zero. You wouldn’t have to worry about them moving next door to you. But in cases of child molestation, these crimes are inherently private, and happen behind closed doors. So maybe you think that accusations like this are common, and have a high chance of being false or fabricated. But that is simply not the case.

Consider this article on Child Sexual Abuse: The Myths and Truths (Safe Shores. April, 2021). According to research referenced within the article,

“False allegations of sexual abuse by children and adolescents are statistically uncommon, occurring at the rate of 2 to 10 percent of all cases.”
Mikkelsen, E. J., Gutheil, T. G., & Emens, M. (1992). False sexual-abuse allegations by children and adolescents: Contextual factors and clinical subtypes. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 46(4), 556-570.

Let that statistic sink in. According to this accredited research, there’s a 90-98% chance that an accused child abuser actually is. Armed with this data, would you allow a presumed innocent and alleged child molester to be alone with your young children? And wouldn’t you want to know about the alleged charges prior to making that decision?

This question has been asked many times by multiple readers and commenters. We’ve seen many trial dates come and go, all while an alleged child rapist is allowed to walk the streets freely and with no provisions to public safety. Given the nature of the alleged crimes, how could this be possible?

Bail Bonds

Let’s begin with bail bonds. In the United States, a defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. They have a right to a speedy trial. And most states and counties have a schedule of bail amounts based on charges against the defendant. So, if an alleged rapist or murderer has the means to pay the bail amount, they are allowed to be free while awaiting trial. If a defendant does not have the means to post bail, they wait in jail during the pretrial period. Sound fair to you? You’re not alone.

Endless Delays

Once a defendant posts bail, what happens to the “speedy trial?” While a defendant has a right to a speedy trial, they also have the ability to waive that right and essentially delay the trial. A district attorney’s office has limited means to speed it up from the People’s side, so the system allows this process to be dragged out much longer than it should be. Add to that a busy caseload in a courthouse, and in this case, the emergence of a global pandemic that shuttered the courts and court processes, and you’ll understand why this case is coming up on the five year mark. Yes, you read that correctly… FIVE YEARS. Five years where someone accused of raping children and child porn is allowed to be free and do what they want. Walk on the beach, go out to dinner, attend a concert or movie.. or rape more children?

Fairness to Victims

Not only is this unfair to the public interest in safety, but imagine how it feels to the victims in a case like this. What message does it send to a child, who does the right thing, the thing they’re taught in school to do: tell someone what is happening. It’s an extremely difficult thing, and unfortunately many children don’t have the courage or ability to report something like this. But when they do, against the odds, and then that person is allowed to walk free, what message does that send to those children? To all children. And why. Why should someone accused of a history of violent sexual crimes be allowed to be free? Someone facing multiple life sentences once they’re inevitably convicted. Because they have money.

Benefits of Pretrial Detainment

In a case like this, where an offender is a public safety risk, and has the luxury of funds to post bail, there’s another side effect – their ability to delay trial and extend their paid freedom. As discussed above, while the accused has a right to a speedy trial, the people (and victims) do not have a right to a speedy conviction. When a defendant is in jail awaiting trial, in all likelihood they’ll want a speedy trial. But where’s the motivation if they’re not? It’s human nature – do everything possible to extend the temporary freedom.

Ok, so it’s not fair. Is there any hope?

There is hope. There’s recently been some monumental changes in how California courts handle this inequity. It stemmed from a March 2021 California Supreme Court decision in In re Humphrey (S247278). The case presented two key questions concerning bail: whether cash bail is unconstitutional, and how to resolve two apparently conflicting California constitutional provisions concerning bail. The case addresses the exact inequality discussed above, and addresses the key question of: “how does paying bail protect the public in the case of a violent offender that poses a severe safety risk to the public?” Many aptly named “Humphries Motions” have been filed in lower California courts since the decision was passed down, allowing courts to better keep the public safe and prevent “pretrial freedom” for those with the means to pay for it.

That’s great news, but what about this case?

According to public court documents, The People of the State of California filed a remand motion on 4/22/2022 – essentially asking the court to remand Gouldon to pretrial custody while awaiting trail. That motion was set for hearing on 4/26/2022, and while it appears Mr. Gouldon wasn’t remanded at that time, another hearing was set for Monday, 5/2/2022, so it’s likely a continuation on that motion and there’s a chance he could be locked up at that time. In the meantime, the court has imposed strict interim release conditions for Mr. Gouldon:

Have no children under age of 18 in home.
Do not go places where children congregate.
Abide by 6:00 p.m. curfew.
May drive to and from work.
May drive to verified counseling (provide name and address of therapist).
May go to the grocery store one time per week, not to exceed two hours.
May attend medical emergencies.
Reside at <address redacted by author> in Visalia.
Do not Knowingly Possess child pornography
Comply With Protective Order
Search and Seizure
Submit person, vehicle, residence, and articles under your dominion and control to search and seizure at any time of the day or night by a peace officer, with or without a warrant for: child pornography, electronic devices (phone, computer, other mobile electronics, etc.) pass codes and lock codes.

(source: https://www.santacruz.courts.ca.gov/online-services/case-lookup case number 22CR01676)

Now we’re getting somewhere. Although it’s scary to think that these conditions weren’t in place for the past nearly five years, it’s comforting to know that they are now. Is it as safe as him being locked up? The author does not think so, but it’s closer, and we can all pray that on Monday this alleged monster is taken from the comfort of his home to a more suitable environment.

Footnote

A new slew of charges were also filed against Jason Gouldon on 4/21/2022, a day prior to the remand motion, so it’s likely that this new case has something to do with the motion to remand. While the nature of the new charges brought against Mr. Gouldon are the same, researching the penal codes within show some that are much more serious and heinous. More on that new case later.