In the end it's just a product of reading the constitution correctly. They need at least one statement from a victim because of the right to face your accuser in a courtroom.

Bail has always been unconstitutional IMO. Being jailed before trail is a punishment. And the constitution requires a trial before punishment. The redress for this is actual speedy trials. Bail and even being arrested at all was originally intended for really serious crimes and were supposed to be the exception.

An exception to the obvious language of the constitution was needed for people actively committing mass murder and the like. But once the exception is considered constitutional then the mechanism is considered constitutional. And if constitutional why not apply it to everything?

Once we admit that assumed arrest for any charge is wrong, a misdemeanor surely wouldn't be one of those exceptions justifying punishment ahead of trial. And the only alternative to a misdemeanor is a felony. And you can't be trying a felony without lining up the proper witnesses. This isn't soft on crime. This is just having a constitution.