Translate

Monday, July 24, 2017

Six Months in on Bail Reform

                                   Six Months in on Bail Reform
By Albert B. Kelly

Over the last few years, I’ve commented often in this space that New Jersey needs to move forward with bail reform. Much to the credit of all involved, our State did undertake bail reform and six months in, the numbers seem to suggest that it was the right thing to do.

If you recall, under the old system of bail, it was all about whether you could come up with enough money to post bail. Under the old system, dangerous people with enough cash could get back on the street quickly while low-level low-risk offenders sat in jail for weeks because they couldn’t scrape up enough money for bail.

My concern then was the many individuals losing children, jobs, apartments and most everything else that was part of anchoring them to a more law-abiding and productive life. Without bail reform, it would remain just a vicious cycle of instability, poverty, and incarceration that trap so many people.

In addition to the fact that such a consequence (i.e. losing children, jobs, apartments, etc.) was far beyond the severity of the offense, it was also extremely costly to tax payers. So whether paying in the form of per diem jail costs for the incarcerated person or paying in the form of safety net programs because families unraveled- we were still paying.

But six months in, bail reform, while not perfect, suggests we’re on the right track. Since the start of 2017, the numbers indicate that the jail population in NJ has declined by nearly 20%, In addition, of those arrested; roughly 87% were released under some level of monitoring while roughly 13% were ultimately detained

Closer to home, here in Cumberland County, of the 482 defendants charged over the first half of 2017, eighteen were released on their own recognizance (ROR), 380 were released under some level of pre-trial monitoring, and 75 were detained. The remaining 9 had other pending matters that determined their disposition.

In Salem County, there 137 defendants charged in the first six months of 2017; eleven were released on their own recognizance, 95 were released under some level of pre-trial monitoring, and 27 were detained. The remaining 4 fell into that category with other matters pending.

In Gloucester County, there were 591 defendants charged in that six month period; fifty-five were released on their own recognizance, 474 were released under some level of pre-trial monitoring, and 50 were detained. The remaining 12 had other pending matters.

In terms of overall jail population, using May 2015 as a comparison to May 2017, Cumberland County’s jail population was down 6%, with Gloucester down 39% and Salem down 45.6%.

The new bail reform system is not perfect, there are various aspects of the reform that need to be re-examined and readjusted. For example, some jurisdictions reported an increase in the number of people that they had to arrest again after they were released.

I’m sure that there were individuals that fell through the cracks- meaning that they were released either ROR or under some level of monitoring even though they should not have been released. No one should make light of these occurrences or dismiss them as the cost of doing business.

On the other hand, no one should use them as a basis for doing away with bail reform or throwing the baby out with the bathwater either.

Finally, there are the bails bondsmen. As a group, they understandably oppose the bail reform because it cuts into their bottom line. But that’s not a reason to undue the progress that’s been on bail reform. Monetary considerations of an industry should not take precedence over the due process rights of the larger society.

That same principle is involved when it comes to privatizing prisons- the financial bottom line of the industry can’t be the driving factor when we’re talking about people’s lives, due process, and justice. But that’s for another discussion on another day.

For now, bail reform seems to be working. Jail populations are down, people’s lives are not unraveling because they’re sitting in jail for a lack of bail money, and in some way, whether we meant to or not, we’ve moved closer to the idea that people are innocent until proven guilty.

Going forward, I think we need more thoughtful and careful analysis. I also think we need to remain committed to doing bail reform in a way that respects justice and proportionality.