In an Op-ed piece published in the New York Times on 5/30/11, Shima Baradaran writes with intelligence and clarity about how California, and the rest of the country, can reduce overcrowding in prisons and jails, save millions of dollars, and put some normalcy back into the lives of people presumed to be innocent until deemed otherwise in a court of law.
According to Baradaran, American taxpayers foot an annual bill of $66 billion to keep 2.3 million people locked up. But wait, according to Baradaran, approximately a half-million incarcerated souls have not been convicted of a crime. These “guilty-until-proven-innocent” individuals are languishing in prisons or jail awaiting trial.
Bail is often imposed by judges with seemingly little regard as to whether the accused can afford to pay it, Baradaran contends. An alarming number of accused individuals will be found not guilty and released, after spending months locked up for a crime they did not commit, and all because they could not afford bail.
Baradaran offers more disturbing information about those who cannot afford bail. Those who are not freed on bail who go to trial are more likely to be found guilty and are also more likely to receive a prison sentence instead of probation.
Some cities and states, Baradaran writes, are more forward thinking, and have implemented policies that allow some accused individuals to enter into an out-custody supervision program, which might include wearing an ankle bracelet or GPS monitoring device. In the Miami-Dade County area, supervision costs $400 per person annually, as opposed to the $20,000 it costs to lock up a person for a year. It is not surprising that MDC opts for the supervision, when applicable. Using alternatives to pre-trial detention saved one Iowa district $1.7 million in 2009. Not every defendant would be considered for an alternative to detention. Those accused of a violent or serious crime would have to remain locked up if a bail was unaffordable.
Baradaran and Frank McIntyre poured over data pertaining to over 100,000 accused criminals over a 15-year time period. The purpose of the study was to determine which defendants were most likely to re-offend while out on bail. The research concluded that young people with several prior arrests were most likely to commit another crime while out on bail, awaiting trial.
The findings question whether judges make the right decision when they order impossible-to-pay, high bail for those over 30, with no prior criminal history, or those accused of non-violent crimes such as fraud.
Baradaran, who is an associate professor of law at Brigham Young University, as well as the chair of the American Bar Association Pretrial Release Task Force, would like to see the data that she and McIntyre collected be used toward the creation of guidelines that judges could use when making the determination if a defendant might be a candidate for a no-bail release. The indication is that such guidelines would allow almost 25 percent more defendants to be released, without impairing public safety.
Source: New York Times
|
|
|
|
