Sunset Whitney Ranch, CA Criminal Defense Law Firms & Lawyers

You can bail someone out before the arraignment, but I dont advise it. The bail amount often changes at arraignment, for better or for worse. If bail goes down, you dont get a refund from the bond company. If bail goes up, the person goes back into jail until the new amount of bail is posted (assuming that you can afford the new amount). Depending on the case, the person might also be able to get released without any bail.

Possibly. A confidential informant or source is a person who assists the police by providing information used to charge or convict another person of a crime. The informant might be acting only out of a sense of duty to help apprehend violators without regard for personal gain--this kind of informant is called a "citizen-informant." Other informants provide their information in exchange for money. And still other informants provide their information in exchange for leniency in matters involving their own wrongdoing. Any or all of these informants may be "confidential" - meaning the police and prosecutor may agree to shield their identity from the defense or public - but in certain circumstances, a judge may order the identity of the informant disclosed. Disclosure of the informant's identity is required if the identity of the informant would be relevant or helpful to the defense, or essential to a fair determination of the case. Common examples of this are where the informant was an eyewitness to, or a participant in any of the offenses charged in the indictment. An informant can be made to testify at either at a pretrial hearing or at trial. For example, if the informant's identity is ordered disclosed because he or she was the source of information for a search warrant, and he or she was present and witnessed the illegal acts that resulted in the issuance of the warrant, the informant might have to testify as a witness at a hearing before trial in which the defense argues the warrant was improperly issued. If the police or prosecutor do not want to reveal the identity of the informant, either for the informant's safety or so as not to "blow their cover" so the informant can be used in future cases, they will go to great lengths to avoid having the informant testify. But in the end, it's up to the Judge, who will balance the request for continued non-disclosure against the constitutional rights of the accused to present a defense and to have a fair trial. As many courts have held, witnesses are the property of neither party and both parties ought to have equal access.