[rayiner]

He was in Rikers, a jail used to hold people pending trial, because he was charged with attempted murder on the basis of the eye-witness identification. The article doesn't even say he was charged with a conspiracy or that the Facebook posts were used as evidence to charge him with a conspiracy. It appears the prosecutor uses the Facebook posts to show gang affiliation, which is a factor in deciding whether someone is a dangerous criminal who shouldn't be granted bail (i.e. being set free pending trial).

[e12e]

> It appears the prosecutor uses the Facebook posts to show gang affiliation, which is a factor in deciding whether someone is a dangerous criminal who shouldn't be granted bail (i.e. being set free pending trial).

I might have been unclear. This was my point. It appears that he might have been charged with attempted murder either way, but might very probably have been granted bail if not for the facebook likes. So it's not a far stretch to say that the likes landed him in jail?

[rayiner]

I see your point, but that's a pretty "cute" way to phrase what happened. It makes it seem like he was arrested and charged for what he did on facebook.

[e12e]

It's important to remember that jail is for innocent people, prison is for those that have been found guilty. We don't know why the case was dismissed, but I think it is rather safe to assume that it wasn't a very strong case. So bail might "ordinarily" have been rather likely.

I do think it is pretty bad that you can be jailed for a year because of hanging out with childhood friends in pictures.