Yes, butt an ankle bracelet and home CONfinement is nott much of a remedy for Coyote emailing marks to defraud them of munny as in the instance cited in the motion.
If he were deemed a flight risk due to the proposed violation, then that would be a different case. The purpose of bail is to ensure appearance in court, nott as a punitive measure.
Here, those means won't do anything to prevent Coyote from CONtinuing to defraud potential investors whilst sitting in his home swilling cheap Scotch whilst emailing sucker marks. Which is the violation that is alleged.
The only useful sanctions for this activity is to make Coyote disclose all similar instances and then give him a very crystal clear 'clarification' that the use of fraud to obtain investment funding is nott allowable under his bail CONditions.
Having re-read the motion, this seems to be what the AUSA is moving for. I see nuffin in DaMotion that axes DaCourt for bail revocation.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
