Here's an odd story about our legal system that will leave many of you scratching your head in confusion.
Earlier this month a man was arrested in Pasadena, Texas for purportedly robbing four local pharmacies.
Jakouri Jones, 18, was charged with four counts of aggravated robbery and assault for crimes that were all caught on camera.
Police say Jones robbed a Walgreens at gunpoint on Jan. 4 and less than an hour later he held up a CVS a few miles away.
Officer Jessica Ramirez of Pasadena police said, "We knew after those first two this was definitely somebody we wanted to get off the streets."
Assuming Jones is guilty, it's hard to disagree with that point.This guy allegedly fired his gun at a witness and children who saw the crime take place.
Almost two weeks later, on Jan. 13, police received a call about a robbery at another Walgreens with a suspect who matched the same description as Jones.
Officers rushed to all Walgreens and CVS locations in the area and one officer witnessed Jones running on foot - a short chase ensued.
According to police, Jones pointed a gun at the officers but was eventually caught and arrested.
While police are still looking for a second suspect (the driver the getaway car) they felt a sense of satisfaction knowing they may have arrested a very dangerous person.
So now the purported bad guy is off the streets, right?
Not so fast there, folks.
On Tuesday Chief Josh Bruegger released a statement explaining that Jones had been released from jail on a PR bond.
All he had to do was sign a piece of paper and they let him go free.
A man accused of committing armed robberies and endangering the lives of law enforcement officials is now on the streets again.
Here's the wildest element of this news: Jones was also arrested on January 6th for unlawfully carrying a weapon and, again, released from jail on a bond.
Less than two weeks later he was arrested for armed robberies and released with nothing more than a signature that promises he'll come back for court.
This man was arrested for multiple violent felonies and released with nothing more than a promise he’ll come back to court even though he's potentially facing years in prison for the violent crimes he may have committed. Now I ask you: does it sound like the judge in this case had the best interest of the public in mind?