Michael McKee has now been formally arraigned on the indictment in the Tepe murder case. At that hearing, he entered not guilty pleas to all counts through his attorney, Diane Menashe. As expected, the defense elected to pass on any bond argument at this stage.
None of this should come as a surprise. In a case of this magnitude, a not-guilty plea at arraignment is routine and legally necessary to preserve every defense right. There was also no realistic reason to litigate bond. Given the charges, Mr. McKee was not going to be released, and it is unlikely that any bond package acceptable to the court exists while this case is pending.
To put this in practical terms, even if the court were to set a hypothetical one-million-dollar bond, release would still be extremely unlikely. Either the full amount would have to be posted in cash, or a bondsman would have to agree to write a bond of that size, typically requiring ten percent up front. That is a substantial amount of money that would otherwise need to be preserved for trial preparation, expert witnesses, investigation, and overall defense strategy. From a defense perspective, spending scarce resources on an unattainable release makes little strategic sense.
There is also an important procedural consequence of remaining incarcerated. When a defendant is held in jail, the State is under pressure to move the case forward quickly. Speedy-trial timelines are tighter, and the prosecution must be prepared to try the case, not simply continue it indefinitely. From the defense standpoint, there can be a strategic advantage to forcing the State to show its hand sooner rather than later, particularly in a complex, evidence-heavy case like this one.
At this point, the case is in a brief holding pattern while the court assigns the first substantive court date. Behind the scenes, however, the defense work is already underway. Mr. McKee’s legal team is expected to be meeting with him multiple times per week as they begin the intensive process of case review, evidence analysis, and trial preparation.
That said, jail is never an ideal environment for preparing a client for trial. Access is limited, visits are constrained, and meaningful preparation is more difficult than it would be in a non-custodial setting. These realities are well known to both sides, and they factor into how aggressively each side approaches the early stages of litigation.
As always, this case will continue to move in stages rather than dramatic moments.
CALL OR TEXT (614) 884-1100 OR COMPLETE A CASE EVALUATION FORM