* Amanda Vinicky at WTTW…
According to new preliminary data from the Loyola Center for Criminal Justice, shared with Chicago journalists Wednesday during a summit organized by advocates with the Illinois Network for Pretrial Justice, crime has not gone up in Illinois since the Pretrial Fairness Act was implemented.
Loyola’s David Olson compared the first six months of last year with this year, and found property and violent crime down both statewide and in Cook County.
“We’re not saying that the Pretrial Fairness Act reduced crime,” Olson said. “We’re also not saying that the drop in crime might not have been larger (had the law not been in effect). But this is at least to put out that crime has not gone up.”
He also shared data that showed jail population decreases of 14% in Cook County, 14% in other urban counties and 25% in rural counties.
Olson found that in the 77 counties working through the state’s pretrial services office, when someone was arrested on a detainable offense, prosecutors did not ask judges for jail time in 43% of cases. Another 36% of nearly 9,000 cases for detention-eligible crimes resulted in detention, and in 22% of cases, prosecutors’ bid to detain an individual got rejected.
Those 77 counties do not include Cook and most of the collar counties. Click here and scroll down for the map.
- City Zen - Friday, Sep 13, 24 @ 1:49 pm:
==crime has not gone up in Illinois since the Pretrial Fairness Act was implemented==
Context is key. Crime numbers overall are down significantly across the country. Munis are reporting significant drops in homicides. Boston reported a historic low in homicides this year.
Did any other states or cities implement something similar to the Pretrial Fairness Act in the past year? How does Illinois compare? How does Chicago crime performance now compare to other large cities?
- Suburban guy - Friday, Sep 13, 24 @ 2:03 pm:
It would be interesting to see if the reduction in jail populations resulted in significant savings to the taxpayers. I have to think that some people who were ambivalent (or worse) about the social implications of this program might really like the reduced government expenditures.
- Demoralized - Friday, Sep 13, 24 @ 2:06 pm:
@City Zen:
You have completely missed the point here. The hysteria that preceded the passage of this Act was that lawlessness would occur and that criminals would be wandering the streets. That clearly did not happen. You can’t make any arguments disputing that. But you continue with your “but what about this” argument all you want. It doesn’t distract from what has (or hasn’t) happened.
The sky did not fall. Try to keep your eye on the ball.
- JS Mill - Friday, Sep 13, 24 @ 2:14 pm:
=Did any other states or cities implement something similar to the Pretrial Fairness Act in the past year? How does Illinois compare? How does Chicago crime performance now compare to other large cities?=
I hear this a lot in my business, “what is everyone else doing?” etc. I don’t really care what is happening in other states. Is the law working the way we want it to work? Are the results what we wanted?
- NIU Grad - Friday, Sep 13, 24 @ 2:14 pm:
“It would be interesting to see if the reduction in jail populations resulted in significant savings to the taxpayers”
Doubtful. There’s no way Sheriff’s are giving up that money and no way County Boards are cutting “public safety” dollars in the budget. Unfortunately it’s also doubtful that they’re using the extra money they now have laying around to make living improvements in their jails…
- frustrated GOP - Friday, Sep 13, 24 @ 2:17 pm:
I am waiting to see the number of officers back on the street, not needed in the jails.
if that many people were not going to be in jail from the new law that police were worried about crime, there should be correction officers open for patrol
- Occasionally Moderated - Friday, Sep 13, 24 @ 2:17 pm:
I spoke to a states attorney (not an assistant) two days ago. Gathering enough documentation and information to even take a stab at a detention hearing (pun intended) is only going to happen in the worst scenarios. Even when the documentation and information exists, it is not at their fingertips. These cases pop up out of nowhere, have a short deadline and add to an already busy schedule of equally important cases. Not a great system so far.
- Norseman - Friday, Sep 13, 24 @ 2:35 pm:
That long sigh you’re hearing is from all the right-wing extremists who were claiming the new law would increase lawlessness. I don’t recall anyone selling the law as a measure to decrease crime. It was an equity issue where people with money got out and those without stayed in. Those that stayed in couldn’t support their families are maintain a stable base to enable them to re-enter society when all was adjudicated. So far, the sky has not fallen.
- Grandson of Man - Friday, Sep 13, 24 @ 2:46 pm:
Per the article, Bailey is not happy that institutional racism and discrimination against the poor is no longer funding local agencies. Maybe now is the time to start practicing that sermon: pull up those bootstraps and cut local spending.
- Demoralized - Friday, Sep 13, 24 @ 3:08 pm:
==I spoke to a states attorney==
Sounds to me like you need another state’s attorney. Perhaps you should ask them to do their job better.
Again, contrary to the roars of state’s attorney’s around the state, the sky did not fall.
- Anyone Remember - Friday, Sep 13, 24 @ 4:00 pm:
“… there should be correction officers open for patrol.”
Different training curriculums. Generally, once trained in law enforcement, they don’t work jails. DuPage tried it, don’t think it worked. Unless SAFE-T changed it, the could work court security.