When signed?

Most likely

If so, it's considered bad faith to suggest that it means he willingly signed something he knew he was signing in regards to himself, but then playing on a technicality if he broke the contract.

just wondering if it can be argued,

Could likely be argued, I'm almost certain they'll consider it a bad faith argument/defense though.

I agree, it would be interesting to see it play out though, hypothetically.

Good and bad faith are large determiners in contract cases from my understanding.

Both from the contractor and contractee.

And is based largely on 'reasonable interpretation'

What I've never understood in some cases, where the state is alleging a serious crime like murder is why set bail so high in the millions instead of denying it outright.

They do deny it in some cases.

It's likely due to the heinousness of the crime on the outset, and determined from the prior criminal history of a defendant.

It's about the fear of 'is this person a threat to the public while at large?'

I know, but in the instances it's not denied it's still set at a high amount that no one would expect the defendant to pay it anyways. Is it just a formality?

Is it likely this person will murder again if out on bond?

The amount it's set at is largely to make sure people show back up in court and don't try to flee the country.

Or the state.

Remember, you are talking about the most heinous of crimes, murder.

Oh right, sorry I just forgot, that bail is basically like a security deposit.

Yes, that is incentive not to violate your bond agreements and show up in court.

bail agreements*

Got it, was just something I was thinking about when watching the latest season of Better Call Saul

And I ask you this: Would you rather a chance, albeit slim of being allowed to be out on bail, or just denied bail outright?

@Maw, you just advanced to level 17!

Certainly the former

So I wouldn't consider it a formality!

Thanks for clearing all that up

Just keep in mind, I am a layman like you, I just have a lot of interest in law. I can always be wrong.

@Maw You at least described how it works here. You can sign as "santa clause". If witnesses/counterpart testify you gave the impression you were entering into a contract, the signature doesnt matter. If anything, its your handwriting, and as such proof that you were either entering into a contract or trying to make it seem like you did. The latter would be criminal, and you would still be bound by the contract, so that would only land you a bonus verdict for attempted fraud.

Also NOT a lawyer, but courts are a significant part of my livelihood.

@DrSammyD please list all youtube lawyers you know of

Robert, Vivafrei, Barnes, Nate The Lawyer off the top of my head.

Legal Eagle (dubious)

legaleagle suffers from TDS, hes ok on anything that is not political in nature

anyone play chess?

Uncivil Law

Reketia

need more left wing youtube lawyers

Dont forget R & R law

@ImNotGas, you just advanced to level 1!

@ImNotGas lol that goes without saying here