Some people think that the cost of bail is the reason the jails are overcrowded and that the bail bond industry makes the problem worse. Nothing could be farther from the truth . . . and it’s important to understand as politicians are trying to change the whole system to a taxpayer funded one that will cost you money!
Read this very well written response to an uninformed op-ed article in the Shreveport Times…
What’s right with Louisiana’s bail system?
Eric Granof
Tuesday, December 02, 2014
The Shreveport Times recently posted an op-ed article from Marjorie Esman, the executive director of the ACLU in Louisiana. In this article — entitled, “What’s wrong with La.’s bail system?” — Esman is not shy in sharing her disgust for the commercial bail bond industry. In fact, the basic theme of her article is that the ills of the criminal justice system in Louisiana are all due to the bail bond industry.
While Esman is allowed to have and share her opinion, I thought it was important to correct a few of the misstatements in her article and, shall we say, set the record straight on what is right with Louisiana’s bails system and the effective role that bail plays in the criminal justice system overall.
In the article, Esman quickly points out that jails are crowded because people can’t afford a bail bond. She states that 80 percent of those in pretrial status in the Orleans Parish Prison are there awaiting trial because they can’t afford a bail bond.
The problem with this statement is that it is not only misleading, but also shows a lack of understanding of the purpose of jails in the first place. Jails are designed to hold pretrial detainees. So to say that the majority of the jail population consists of pretrial defendants waiting for trial should not be groundbreaking news to anyone.
Additionally, what Esman fails to mention is that many of those defendants who are in jail in pretrial status are not eligible to be bailed out. A recent study proves this point definitively. And the most interesting thing about this study is that it was funded by the ACLU.
In 2013, the JFA Institute conducted a study of the Los Angeles County Jail Population. Much like Louisiana’s jail, the pretrial population in Los Angeles County was found to be between 70-80 percent of the total population.
What is interesting and eye-opening about this study is that the researchers delved further into the makeup of the population to determine why those defendants were in custody and not out on bail. What they found is that many defendants in pretrial status were not eligible to be released for a number of reasons. These reasons include but are not limited to the following:
- Defendants who are there on immigration holds
- Defendants waiting transfer to another jail or prison
- Defendants already sentenced for another crime
- Defendants with outstanding warrants
- Defendants with specific “no bail” designations
- Defendants with assaultive crimes
- Defendants who are classified as high security
When all these types of defendants were eliminated from the pool of pretrial detainees eligible for bail, the 70-80 percent went down to about 12 percent. And those 12 percent do find a way to work with a commercial bail agent to secure their release.
So next time, Esman wants to make a statement about the pretrial populations and why jails are crowded, I recommend that she review this study. Once again, it should be readily available to her because it was funded by her organization.
Next, Esman talks about how much money the big, bad bail bond industry spends lobbying judges and legislatures to increase bail amounts. This statement is also misleading…
. . .
Lastly, what Esman fails to recognize and discuss in her article is the effectiveness of various release mechanisms. While she acknowledges the purpose of pretrial release to be about getting the defendant back to court and keeping the public safe, she doesn’t discuss what forms of release are the best at achieving this goal.
If she had, readers would be able to see that based on every research study done on the subject, commercial bail has been proven to be the most effective form of pretrial release time and time again. Instead of sharing these important facts, she gets lost in her discussion of blaming commercial bail for overcrowded jails and unfair incarceration.
If Esman were to look at the facts, she would see that defendants who are released on a commercial bail bond are significantly less likely to “fail to appear for court” (28 percent less likely to fail to appear, according to Helland and Tabarrok in 2004) than those defendants released through taxpayer funded pretrial release programs. Additionally, those released on a commercial bail bond are also less likely to remain a fugitive (53 percent less likely to remain a fugitive) and be rearrested for an additional crime while out on pretrial release than those released through a public sector pretrial program.
While arguing against commercial bail for ideological reasons is one thing, ignoring the facts and research is another. In this circumstance, especially when public safety is at stake, facts shouldn’t be overlooked.
Don’t get me wrong, Esman didn’t do anything wrong in bringing this important issue to the forefront. In fact, I applaud her for taking the time to share her opinion about Louisiana’s criminal justice system and for starting what could be an important dialogue on the topic.
. . .
For the full article, visit MultiBriefs.com.
Thank you Eric Granof for your very polite, compelling, and reasonable response to an attack on our industry
