Question about the legality of something...

What is the name of your state? TN

Ok, a person went to court on a matter and through the course of this matter, they have to go back because they are not claiming guilt and wish to explain what was behind the situation. Now, this person had been there once before on a similar matter and is on probation because of it.

While speaking to the judge, his probation officer swas asked how he was doing on his probation. Now, his probation is basically him paying back the fine each month along with a fee to the probation office. This person is behind in payments but each time he would either not be able to make it in he called the officer and was told it was alright. If he went in, he was told it was alright as well, just keep coming and trying to make the payments.

In the court, the officer said he was not doing well at all and was told to see him after they were done. Now, he spoke with the officer and the man apparently said that he had not spoken to the officer but I know for a fact that he called each month he was not able to go. Now, using this as the only explaination he had, the officer tell him that he is going to violate his probation. so, the person is left sitting there not knowing what is going on because this is the first time in their life this person has EVER been in trouble.

Now, this person and his mother sits there and waits, unsure of what is going on because nothing else was said to him. The officer fills out this paper, then goes out and coms back in. He hands 1 to the clerk and then the next thing the person knows, the clerk is on the phone and a sheriff deputy is there telling him to come with him. He is taken to the back, photographed, fingerprinted and locked in a cell. He just was told that he needed a $300 cash bond to get out.

Now, the person did get out after spending the night in a holding cell but the whole way it was handled just does not seem right to me. It does not seem as if the person was told anyhting about his rights and they were trampled all over. I mean, does this seem like a way to treat a first time offender? Is there anywhere I can read up on this to see if i am just uninformed? I am really curious.

What is it that you don't understand? When he was first put on probation he was told what the rules of his probation were and what would happen if he did not follow the rules of probation So now you admit that he did not make every fine payment. Also he has not been to report in person when he was suppose to. So he violated his probation, he got a second chance and he blew it and now he has to face the music. Why did he not report everytime? why did he not make his fine payments as he was told to do?
You said ''the whole way it was handled does not seem right to me. it does not seem as if the person was told anything about his rights, and they where trampled all over.'' He knew that he was on probation. he knew he was to report and make fine payments. Seems to me he was trying to get away with '' ''trampling'' all over the system that had gave him probation instead of putting him in jail in the first place.

What is it that you don't understand? When he was first put on probation he was told what the rules of his probation were and what would happen if he did not follow the rules of probation So now you admit that he did not make every fine payment. Also he has not been to report in person when he was suppose to. So he violated his probation, he got a second chance and he blew it and now he has to face the music. Why did he not report everytime? why did he not make his fine payments as he was told to do?
You said ''the whole way it was handled does not seem right to me. it does not seem as if the person was told anything about his rights, and they where trampled all over.'' He knew that he was on probation. he knew he was to report and make fine payments. Seems to me he was trying to get away with '' ''trampling'' all over the system that had gave him probation instead of putting him in jail in the first place.