I wrote an article on Bail Reform which was printed in the KC Star on February 3, 2022. Here is the link: https://www.kansascity.com/opinion/readers-opinion/guest-commentary/article257747983.html
Goals for pre-trial management of
individuals accused of crimes:
1 1,. Assure they appear for trial.
2.
Avoid additional crimes prior to trial.
3.
Minimize disruption to their lives, their
family’s lives, their fellow employees’ lives and their employer, particularly
for the innocent.
4.
Minimize public cost
Bail addresses the first, third and
fourth goals. Denial of bail addresses
the second goal.
It is clearly harder for
less-affluent people to post bail, thus increasing the number of people in
jail.
Loosening bail requirements has increased
crime.
Electronic monitoring addresses each
of the four goals. State-of-the-art
monitors are harder to remove and can send alerts if tampering occurs. Denial of bail might be used less frequently.
1. 1. They are more likely to appear in court and we can find easily if they
don’t.
2. 2. If
they commit a crime, police could prove they were at the scene and apprehend
them easily.
3. 3. They
can continue to support their families, co-workers, etc.
4. 4. Monitoring
costs less than incarceration and should be borne by the government.
In the article, I listed some
principles that we should keep in mind.
Critics say people wearing monitors suffer job loss and embarrassment.
Such repercussions pale compared to being in jail and can be reduced
with improved technology and procedures. I also addressed other criticisms, such as by
calling on the government to pay for monitoring. Some criticisms related to discontinued
practices or were supported by small studies contradicted by larger studies or
studies with inferior methodology.
The issues surrounding use of
electronic monitoring for parole seem to be similar, albeit not identical, to
using electronic monitoring for people awaiting trial.
No comments:
Post a Comment