A homeless man accused of setting fires at a Jewish university dormitory was arrested again just hours after his arraignment.
New York City police say they picked up 33-year-old Peter Weyand around 11:30 p.m. Saturday for trespassing after he busted a fence and broke into a Staten Island backyard.
Weyand, who was out on “supervised release” in the arson case, was released under the same conditions after his subsequent arrest, according to court records.
It was Weyand’s third time in handcuffs this month.
Early Friday, authorities say he kicked out part of a glass door to a dormitory lobby at Manhattan’s Yeshiva University and used matches intended for lighting a Hanukkah menorah to torch rolls of toilet paper, a box of hand sanitizer refills, a desk and computer
No one was injured and the fire department said there was no indication it was a hate crime.
On Dec. 5, Weyland was charged with misdemeanor menacing and harassment after quarreling with a roommate in Brooklyn.
A message was left with a lawyer who represented Weyand at his arson arraignment.
(AP)
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
12 Responses
The “judge” who released him deserves to be arrested.
Our justice system suffers from deficiencies, and this is nothing new. One would think that perpetrators of white collar crime would fare better, and for the benefit of society, if they were not incarcerated, and worked (under appropriate supervision) to help compensate the victims of their crimes. But, no, we imprison them for many decades, accomplishing nothing. No one denies that they deserve negative consequences, but these huge prison sentences are senseless.
The perpetrators of violent crimes are at least as apt to repeat their offenses, and society needs them to be in custody. But it precisely these that are seen as victims and allowed to be released. And they re-offend quite frequently. The only winners here are the lawyers who defend them, and the purveyors who push the PC agenda that advocates going soft on crime.
Something stinks here badly. Vote Republican.
keep releasing him till chas v’shalom loss of life. welcome to world of liberal logic!
Why on earth would an ARSONIST have been RELEASED????
* Alleged arsonist
This guy is a walking time bomb. Why can’t they lock him up and get a psychiatrist to evaluate, at least?
This guy looks like Marjoe.
Just send him to a Mets game. He’ll be fine.
@TheLittleIKnow
I agree with you almost fully, i would just ad a caveat that a white collar crime has to be assessed as to motive and method. There does have to be large sentences or there would be no deterrent. Unless you have a better deterrent, and for that, i’m all ears.
I have no problem with the release of suspects of non-violent crimes before trial. But how is setting a fire anywhere, let alone a dormitory, at 3 a.m., not a violent crime?
Thanks in part to low voter turnouts, etc, under the bail reform laws passed in Albany in April, bail for misdemeanors is eliminated, except for sex crimes and violating orders of protection. Remands for misdemeanors are barred. Bail and pretrial detention is also eliminated for most non-violent felonies, with the exception of witness tampering, murder conspiracy, domestic violence cases, crimes against kids, sex crimes and terror cases. Bail and detention is allowed pretrial in violent felonies, expect for certain burglary and robbery charges. It is eliminated for all class A drug felonies, except for major drug trafficking.
Bottom line is that our politicians don’t want to lock people up anymore. I guess if bad behavior isnt classified as a crime, and you dont arrest or prosecute, it means huge successes in reducing crime… yeah… go back and read that last statement again… and then think twice about not showing up to vote in the next elections.
chash:
I am not suggesting that white collar crime involve little to no negative consequences. It’s just that long prison sentences fail to accomplish the goal. Furthermore, the deterrent factor is questionable. The fact that there is a huge recidivism rate for many types of crime despite prison sentences suggest that even when having having experienced the sentence, one is not deterred from committing offenses again, kal vachomer for someone who has never been locked up not being deterred. I’m not really sure what constitutes an effective deterrent, and the studies about prison do not support these sentences as accomplishing that. And that is even for violent crime – just that the benefit of protecting society is of major benefit to all.