These stories just make me crazy
Tuesday, Mar 10, 2015 - Posted by Rich Miller
* If you have a bit of money in your pocket and you stupidly commit a petty crime, it’s relatively easy to bail yourself out of jail. But if people without any financial means stupidly commit the very same petty crime, they can’t bail themselves out of jail and they rot behind bars for months. And while they’re sitting there, they learn from hardened types about how to be a real criminal.
Our justice system is just way out of whack. Sheriff Tom Dart is sick of it…
At a Tuesday news conference at the county jail, Dart told reporters the system is “not set up to care” about detainees in jail on minor offenses, who sometimes wait for months before for their cases are concluded.
One man spent 114 days in jail, which the sheriff’s office runs, allegedly for stealing packs of Snickers bars—at a cost to taxpayers of more than $16,000, according to Dart, who used the case as one example of “the outrageous amounts of money we spend incarcerating the wrong people.” […]
Beginning next week and continuing weekly, county officials will identify five to ten cases “where we feel people [should] not be there,” Dart said, and meet with public defenders and county prosecutors to brainstorm ways to fast-track those cases. […]
“We need to save our venom, our resources, for violent people,” he said.
* More…
The sheriff said Cook County Jail isn’t just coping with housing the mentally ill, “we also lock up low-level offenders where you cannot find a reason for them to be here.”
“Are we protecting society? No. Are we rehabilitating them? No,” he added.
One woman at the jail has been incarcerated since last summer, awaiting trial for stealing about $4 worth of plums and candy. She was pregnant at the time, and Dart said her incarceration has cost the county $20,000. […]
Dart also wants a new state law requiring cases of retail theft and trespassing to be adjudicated quickly, or suspects should be freed on recognizance bonds or home monitoring, pending the outcome of their case.
He also wants a “rocket docket” for minor drug offenses.
* Look, I’m not saying that everybody who commits a minor crime ought to walk free right away. But they actually locked up a pregnant woman for well over half a year for a $4 theft?
Are you freaking kidding me???
To his everlasting credit, Gov. Bruce Rauner has said he wants sentencing reforms. Let’s hope something substantial is accomplished on this front.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 2:13 pm:
This is the 1 bill the governor can pass. Everybody is behind prison reform
- gopower - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 2:14 pm:
A rocket docket sounds like a good idea. An even better one would be looking at why it seems to take forever to try any offenses.
But Dart is full of of it for saying that it cost $16,000 to house this inmate. That’s the average cost; the marginal cost of one more inmate is relatively trivial, basically the cost of food (much of which might have been thrown out anyway).
Of course, if Dart is prepared to give back $16,000 of his budget for every inmate released early…
- Ahoy! - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 2:18 pm:
Agreed, it’s our modern bail system is way outdated with some studies suggesting it was started in medieval times (not the restaurant). Either way it’s an unfair system with the rich exploiting it and the poor suffering with taxpayers paying for an unnecessary expenditure.
In essence, it costs us money and it’s bad for society, so why are we still doing this?
- Macbeth - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 2:20 pm:
If Rauner focuses on reforming the criminal justice system, he’ll leave an important legacy.
If he focuses on busting unions — and reducing wages — he’ll go nowhere.
- Annon3 - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 2:21 pm:
Recidivism theft can be charged as a felony, felony bail is higher…. So while the amount taken is small the punishment can be serious. Illinois is very good at making what appear to be small offenses serious ones.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 2:23 pm:
This is an issue where the Governor shines
- The Captain - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 2:28 pm:
These issues are a relic from the era when being “soft on crime” was a potent political attack. I’m not sure that’s the case anymore but about a generation ago it was strong. I think the scars of those battles are still visible enough that it will take bipartisan support on an agreed bill to get any reforms passed. They are long overdue, I hope that even in this toxic environment the political will can get this done.
- anonin' - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 2:33 pm:
Very few are for prison reform that looks like early release…remember how the GOPies trashed Quinn
The funniest clown car in BVR’s garage is the “Commission To Get Out O Jail Early” because their handiwork will be hooted down by wing nuts
- titan - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 2:33 pm:
No one should sit awaiting trial longer than the sentence that would be imposed if found guilty of it.
- Pacman - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 2:43 pm:
In regards to the examples given why not just give the offender a notice to appear in court and send them on their way? If they fail to appear issue an arrest warrant and then lock them up.
- Belle - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 2:50 pm:
Several months ago, there was a Chicago Tonight spot about this with Toni Preckwinkle, Dart and Tim Evans. It was enough to make your head spin.
They all talked over one another, blamed each other, etc. Such a lesson in people who are steeped in bureaucracy and think it is all okay since they’re not the ones spending time in jail…nor paying the tab.
These people are sleeping in rooms not designed for cells, horrendous and over-crowded conditions. We cannot call out the conditions in other countries when prisoners are living like this in our country.
- Cassandra - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 2:50 pm:
Yes, we’ve been hearing about this outrage for years. Various scholarly and popular articles have been written, with vivid examples of low-income folks whose lives have been wrecked by this system (lost their job, lost the kids, lost the apartment or the house). So why hasn’t it changed.
Who actually has discretion here. The prosecutor probably. But prosecutors might suffer politically if they started advocating to let lots of arrestees out on their own recognizance. And then there’s the bail bond industry–huge sums, nationally. Huge profits. So again, I guess we have to look at ourselves on this one. Might not be so easy to fix.
- Muscular - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 2:53 pm:
Sherriff Dart has the authority to place hundreds of additional inmates on electronic monitoring but he chooses not to do so. Instead, he blames others for his problem. He complains rather than leads. In addition, the constitution provides for a speedy trial. In Illinois for misdemeanors, it is 120 days. The inmates can demand trial at their first court appearance, but they do not do so. If inmates want out sooner, the constitution gives them the right to demand it. They fail to exercise this constitutional right.
- Bobby G. - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 2:55 pm:
Two words: prosecutorial discretion.
- Formerly Known As... - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 2:55 pm:
==isn’t just coping with housing the mentally ill==
Good thing we closed those mental health centers a few years ago.
- Michael Westen - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 2:57 pm:
Another point, again while not disagreeing with the need for reform, is the phony budget numbers that elected officials like Dart put out when it comes to this issue. It undoubtedly did not cost anywhere near $16,000 in actual dollars to keep “snickers” incarcerated. I think I read a press release a couple of years back where Dart bragged he had lowered the cost of an inmate’s meal to under $2.00 each.
Unless he is making the argument that he could have made do with fewer guards if only “snickers” hadn’t been there, the $16,000 figure is phony and made up. The guards would have been there whether “snickers” was or not.
Again, still, reform is needed. Just stop with the drama of phony budget numbers.
- MrJM - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 3:03 pm:
“In addition, the constitution provides for a speedy trial. In Illinois for misdemeanors, it is 120 days. The inmates can demand trial at their first court appearance, but they do not do so. If inmates want out sooner, the constitution gives them the right to demand it. They fail to exercise this constitutional right.”
It’s like they’d never been to law school…
– MrJM
- Formerly Known As... - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 3:11 pm:
==county officials will identify five to ten cases “where we feel people [should] not be there,” Dart said, and meet with public defenders and county prosecutors to brainstorm ways to fast-track those cases==
Kudos to Dart. This helps, but it also leaves some questions
How much time will be spent reviewing hundreds or thousands of cases? With such limited staff, what else does this take those county officials, public defenders and prosecutors time away from?
How do these five or ten cases each week come to the attention of the reviewers? Is it fair and equal?
Who gets the benefit of the doubt and makes the cut when there probably could be twenty or thirty cases a week? Prisoners of the most influential county officials? The squeakiest wheels? The best behaved prisoners? Those whose families have the knowledge or connections to get some attention for their incarcerated relative?
- dupage dan - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 3:22 pm:
1 bill like this could be fast tracked! Only 5 more to go.
- Not it - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 3:26 pm:
Imagine the savings to county governments!!!
- JoanP - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 3:36 pm:
“county officials will identify five to ten cases “where we feel people [should] not be there,” Dart said, and meet with public defenders and county prosecutors to brainstorm ways to fast-track those cases. […]”
Better yet, the Chief Judge should be encouraging bond court judges to set recognizance bonds, rather than cash bonds, in cases like these.
“To his everlasting credit, Gov. Bruce Rauner has said he wants sentencing reforms.”
That won’t have any impact on pre-trial detentions, though.
- Enviro - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 3:55 pm:
The first bill should only deal with pre-trial detentions. The person who stole food and candy should be given a ticket, not put in jail. This reminds me of is a scene out of the 19th century novel of Victor Hugo’s “Les Misérables”.
- Cheryl44 - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 3:59 pm:
~Sheriff Dart has the authority to place hundreds of additional inmates on electronic monitoring but~
does he have hundreds of ankle cuffs or the money to buy them?
Just asking.
- Enviro - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 4:06 pm:
~Sheriff Dart has the authority to place hundreds of additional inmates on electronic monitoring but~
Electric monitoring for stealing candy or food???
That would be really excessive for such a small offense that should only require a ticket similar to traffic misdemeanor.
- Bigtwich - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 4:10 pm:
“- anonymouse - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 2:47 pm:
Lets have “snickers” criminal history so that we can determine why a judge issued that sentence”
Go back and read the story. It sates she is “awaiting trial”. No trial, no sentence.
- Pacman - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 4:10 pm:
The Sheriff runs the jail he can refuse to accept persons arrested for misdemeanor theft or other minor offenses. As I mentioned above just issue NTA’s for minor property crimes.
- Anon - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 4:34 pm:
Rich can someone do a quick check and see how the good Sheriff voted on the tough on crime bills when he was a State Rep? Would be greatly ironic if he were now complaining about housing third time retail theft felons if he voted in favor of the enhanced penalty.
- Rasselas - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 4:35 pm:
Before giving anyone, including Dart, ‘kudos’ for this recognize what’s driving this scam. No one wants to be the Sheriff/State’s Attorney/Judge who kept a guy out of jail pending trial who then goes on to do something heinous. So the Judges go overboard with bail, the State’s Attorneys go overboard with charges, and the Sheriff refuses to exercise his discretion to release people on electronic monitoring. (There is no shortage of ankle bracelets - are you kidding me; Toni Preckwinkle would give up her salary to pay for them if Dart would just use them.) So the three of them - Dart, Alvarez and Evans - keep pointing fingers at each other while the stupid stories pile up. The Chicago Tonight segment was just the tip of the iceberg. These three, and their predecessors, have been squabbling about this for more than 25 years.
- Amalia - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 4:39 pm:
running for State’s Attorney?
- Union pawn - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 5:11 pm:
Sounds like Les Misérables! Mr Quinn closed the Mental health Center in Tinley Park with no hope of any alternative against the legislatos vote to keep it open! Rauner has decided to keep Murray Developmental Center open. So who is the problem here?
- duh - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 5:15 pm:
Am I the only suspicious of Rauner’s reason for looking at criminal reform?
- Ethan Hawk - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 5:24 pm:
Dart for President. Finally a guy who says publicly that “I ain’t going to be the guy who beats up on the little guy for you anymore.”
- walker - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 5:26 pm:
Long overdue, and that’s partly on Dart.
- Wordslinger - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 6:15 pm:
Anonymouse, you have a gambling problem.
Your first “bet” was completely whack, as you based it on ja complete misreading of the post.
Now you want to make another “bet” as to why the it’s wise to have the Snickers thief in jail for 114 days at a cost of $16K?
- Anon - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 6:24 pm:
How many of those awaiting trial are housed outside of Cook County? Many downstate counties “make” money off of housing upstate prisoners. I won’t be sad to see that practice decrease or stop, but local sheriffs in Central Illinois may be wringing their hands( and their budgets).
- ppanda - Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 9:52 pm:
Dart has hit the mark.
- rwt - Wednesday, Mar 11, 15 @ 7:26 am:
It should be noted that the bail bond industry argument holds no water, since that industry is specifically banned in Illinois