TEEN MOM Bar’s lawyer says Ashley ‘fudging the facts,’ requests lower bail amount

Teen Mom dad Bariki “Bar” Lockettsmith is still behind bars in Nevada on felony charges of kidnapping, coercion and burglary after he was arrested early last month following an altercation with Ashley Jones.

Bar’s bail was set at $35,000 the day after his arrest, and the judge ordered that Bar must be fitted with a monitoring device if released.

The public defender representing Bar pleaded for a reduced bail amount at the July 8 hearing. Bar’s attorney also pointed out that Bar has a job at a restaurant in California, and the level of monitoring the judge ordered would not allow Bar to leave the state of Nevada and return to work.

In his argument for a reduced bail and lower level of monitoring, Bar’s attorney also called the claims made by Ashley Jones, which is the basis for the criminal charges against Bar, “specious” (superficially plausible, but actually wrong).

“There’s probably a little bit of fudging the facts of this thing,” he added. (More on that below.)

Bar’s attorney filed a motion on Wednesday asking that the judge allow Bar to be released on his own recognizance “with pretrial compliance conditions or, in the alternative, a reduction in bail.”

#TeenMom dad Bariki Lockettsmith (aka Bar Smith) was arrested yesterday on multiple felony charges, including kidnapping and coercion.

The day after his arrest, ex Ashley Jones posted a photo with a new man!

FULL DETAILS: https://t.co/cB506r6czH

— Starcasm (@starcasm) July 8, 2024

Bar can’t afford his bail

The following is taken from the Motion:

“On July 8, 2024, a pretrial custody hearing was held for Mr. Lockettsmith. At the hearing, Judge Stephen George set bail in this case in the amount of $35,000 with the added conditions of Pretrial Compliance Unit Level 4 and to stay away from the alleged victim in the case.

“When Judge George set bail in this case, he failed to take into consideration Mr. Lockettsmith’s financial resources as required by the Nevada Supreme Court’s decision in Valdez-Jimenez v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct…

“Judge George clearly intended that the bail setting be attainable for Mr. Lockettsmith, as he did not state during his finding of facts that the bail setting was meant to act as a detention order. Rather, he specifically added a released condition to Mr. Lockettsmith’s bail of Pretrial Compliance Unit Level 4, indicating that Judge George believed that his bail setting was attainable for Mr. Lockettsmith and that he felt such a release condition was appropriate for when Mr. Lockettsmith was released from custody after posting bail.

“Mr. Lockettsmith is unable to afford the current bail setting of $35,000. Thus, the current bail setting is acting as a detention order.

“Because Judge George did not take into account Mr. Lockettsmith’s financial resources when setting his bail amount in this case as required by Valdez-Jimenez v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., he is entitled to have his custody status readdressed under the factors set forth in that opinion.

“Mr. Lockettsmith is not a danger to the community. He has a very limited criminal record. According to his Nevada Pretrial Risk Assessment (hereafter referred to as “NPR”), he has no prior felonies or gross misdemeanors. He only has two prior misdemeanors, one of which is a DUI from 2021. He comes back as a moderate risk with an NPR score of 5, only one point above being considered a low risk. Furthermore, this is a case where there was no alleged physical altercation or injuries of any kind.

“Mr. Lockettsmith is not a flight risk. According to his NPR, he has no prior failures to appear. While he does reside in California, Mr. Lockettsmith would have no issue traveling back to Clark County for all court appearances. Prior to being arrested, Mr. Lockettsmith at the Cali Sports Bar and Club and would be able to return to work there if he were to be released. If the court imposes release conditions that would require Mr. Lockettsmith to remain in Nevada, he would be able to live with a close friend that is like a brother to him who resides in Clark County. Before March of this year, Mr. Lockettsmith resided in Clark County for two and a half years, so he does have strong ties to this community. Mr. Lockettsmith also has a daughter who resides in Clark County, giving him the strongest incentive possible to make all his court appearances so that he can remain in her life.

“Because Mr. Lockettsmith is not a flight risk nor a danger to the community, he respectfully requests that this court release him on his own recognizance with PCU Level 4. See Valdez-Jimenez, 136 Nev. at 164, 460 P.3d at 986 (2020) (“Where the defendant presents little to no flight risk or danger to the community, release on personal recognizance or nonmonetary conditions will likely be appropriate, in which case bail in any amount would be excessive.”).

“To the extent that this court is concerned about Mr. Lockettsmith’s danger to the community or flight risk, PCU Level 4 would completely mitigate those concerns by putting Mr. Lockettsmith on electronic monitoring. From the facts of this case, Mr. Lockettsmith is only alleged to be a danger to a specific individual. While under PCU Level 4 electronic monitoring, if Mr. Lockettsmith goes anywhere near that individual or their address, police would be immediately notified. Furthermore, PCU Level 4 electronic monitoring would ensure Mr. Lockettsmith’s return to court.

“Therefore, an own recognizance release on PCU Level 4 would be the least restrictive means of ensuring the safety of the community and Mr. Lockettsmith’s return to court as required by Valdez-Jimenez…

“Alternatively, Mr. Lockettsmith respectfully requests that this court reduce his bail. Although he currently does not have the means to attain any setting of bail, it is possible that, with family support, he could attain a lower bail setting. Such a setting would also more accurately reflect Judge George’s original intention of setting an attainable bail amount.”

EXCLUSIVE! Police report reveals terrifying details of why #TeenMom dad Bar Smith was arrested for kidnapping, domestic violence & more! The Ashley has the details here: https://t.co/1CnS7syx29 pic.twitter.com/euBJSURg1m

— The Ashley (@TheAshleysRR) August 8, 2024

Ashley Jones’ account of what happened

The Ashley obtained a copy of the police report from Bar’s arrest, which reveals the details of Ashley Jones’ allegations that resulted in the charges being filed against Bar.

Here is a very brief bullet point recap:

• Ashley posted a photo with a new man on Instagram on July 6

• Bar was in California after breaking up with Ashley in March. He texted Ashley to let her know he was coming to Nevada

• On July 7, Ashley texted her mom Tasheilia (aka PAstor Tea) and told her she was worried that Bar was in her apartment.

‘Ashlee [sic] arrived home, remained on the phone with her mom,’ the incident report reads. “As Ashlee opened the front door, Tasheilia heard a male in the background say “hello baby momma.” She then heard Ashlee respond “hello baby daddy” and the call disconnected.

‘Tasheilia called back Ashlee multiple times and Ashlee never answered her calls. Tasheilia called the police immediately.’

• Police arrived, met with Tashelia, then knocked on Ashley’s apartment door. They heard a male voice say, “She doesn’t live here, wrong apartment.”

• “Eventually Ashlee came out the door and advised the following: Bariki is inside the apartment, he was not invited over, and that she would like officers to accompany her inside to ask him to leave. Ashlee was very scared of Bariki. She was crying, shaking, and very emotional.”

• Ashley told police that when she arrived, Bar took all of her electronic devices and demanded that she take him to her new boyfriend. Ashley refused and Bar blocked the door. Ashley says Bar told her at one point, “Say something again and I will break your f***ing jaw.”

Bar’s attorney questions Ashley Jones’ allegations

The motion to reduce bail includes a court transcript from the July 8 hearing when Bar’s bond and release conditions were initially set by the judge.

In the transcript, Bar’s attorney points out that the charges against Bar rely heavily on Ashley Jones’ account of what happened. He then describes Ashley Jones’ account as “specious.”

Your Honor, I would just point out that the allegations here, they’re a bit specious.

Obviously there’s a bit of a troubled past going on with this too, and yet despite all of these things, it’s kind of almost like an after the fact reporting. Like she’s supposedly getting these text messages, getting these emails but doesn’t call anybody prior to that.

So I think what we are going to find here as this thing shakes out at the end is we’re going to find that there’s probably a little bit of fudging the facts of this thing, maybe going both ways.

Bar’s attorney admits the seriousness of the charges against Bar have “a bit of sticker shock to them,” but he once again casts doubt on the accuracy of Ashley’s claims.

While I get that the allegations themselves there’s a bit of sticker shock to them, I would just point out that it’s weird for as terrified that she claims she was, she doesn’t report anything in the runup to this as he’s supposedly messaging her, emailing her, texting. It’s not until the police show up.

There’s no call for 911. There’s nothing like that. It’s when they show up knocking on the door that she says oh, I’m not here but then decides to come out and then tells the story after the facts.

So I would just point out it’s not quite as cut and dry as it seems and based on all that he is entitled to a release on the least restrictive means and a bail he can afford. I would ask for a nominal amount, if any, and that he be released on whatever PCU level will allow him to travel back to California where he’s from.

Bar’s attorney references his client’s Nevada Pretrial Risk Assessment (NPR), which I don’t believe includes Bar’s arrests in California? However, the judge was aware of Bar’s California rap sheet (and history of incidents with Ashley there) when making his bail ruling.

I appreciate everybody’s representations on this matter. I do have some concerns in the DOA that provided me with information regarding the past criminal history out of California. That does give me some concerns, including the TPO and the violations that were presented there and the past history abuse.

So I do find from the testimony and evidence adduced from this hearing and the facts presented regarding the defendant’s past history and the issues under NRS 178 and under the standards provided under Valdez-Jimenez, I do believe the State has met its burden of proof by clear and convincing evidence that a reasonable least restrictive means in insuring the defendant’s appearance in an amount necessary to protect the safety of the alleged victim and the community.

I am going to go ahead and leave the bail at 35,000 cash or surety, but I will impose a PCU on this 4. I do have some concerns on that. With a stay away order from the alleged victim.

The next scheduled hearing in Bar’s case is September 24.

UPDATE – There is a hearing to address this motion scheduled for August 22.

#TeenMom Exclusive!

Ashley Jones officially filed for divorce from husband Bariki "Bar" Lockettsmith earlier today.

FULL DETAILS: https://t.co/CwbvExA562

— Starcasm (@starcasm) August 1, 2024

Asa Hawks is a writer and editor for Starcasm. You can contact Asa via Twitter, Facebook, or email at starcasmtips(at)yahoo.com