Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: It all becomes clear
Next Post: *** UPDATED x1 *** Republicans claim Madigan trying to “run out the clock” on budget talks
Posted in:
* Sun-Times…
Cook County Sheriff Tom Dart is calling for abolishing the state’s cash-bond system, saying it’s unfair to low-level defendants who can’t afford to pay and puts society in danger when defendants with violent backgrounds have the money to post bail and are freed until trial.
Dart is believed to be the first elected official in Illinois to propose that the General Assembly scrap the system, said Cara Smith, his top policy official. It would require a change to Illinois’ bail statute — a daunting political challenge.
Currently, judges set bail for most people charged with crimes. Defendants typically need to pay 10 percent of that amount to obtain a bond to get out of jail before trial. In some cases, judges allow for a “recognizance bond,” in which no payment is required.
Dart is proposing a system in which a judge would decide whether a defendant should be released from jail until trial based solely on an intensive background investigation by the court’s staff.
“It would be similar to the investigation that is done on the federal level,” Smith said, adding that it would be more extensive that what is currently being done in Cook County.
* Tribune…
Even advocates acknowledge a switch from the cash-bail system won’t be easily accomplished, in part because of necessary legislative changes and significant cost shifting.
The cash bonds are often used as payment to criminal defense lawyers once a case has been concluded — and to cover part of the fines or fees assessed by judges as well as the 10 percent that goes to cover the expenses of the circuit court clerk’s office. If defense attorneys lose that key revenue source, more cases could go to the taxpayer-funded public defender’s office.
“From the judicial point of view, I think the argument is compelling,” said Winnebago County Chief Judge Joseph McGraw, who chairs the Illinois conference of chief judges. “Looking at the other side of the coin … a lot of other costs will be shifted if we don’t have cash bond.”
Thoughts?
* Related…
* Lawsuit Challenges High Bonds Set by Judges in Chicago
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Nov 15, 16 @ 11:12 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: It all becomes clear
Next Post: *** UPDATED x1 *** Republicans claim Madigan trying to “run out the clock” on budget talks
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Bail reform is a worthy goal. Of course, this being Illinois and all, I’d expect it to include massive unfunded mandates on County governments, followed by property tax caps making it impossible for them to pay for them, culminating in many self-congratulatory press conferences in front of the Capitol.
Comment by CEA Tuesday, Nov 15, 16 @ 11:41 am
Bail reform is a worthy goal. Of course, this being Illinois and all, I predict massive unfunded mandates on County governments, followed by property tax caps making it impossible for them to pay for them, culminating in self-congratulatory press conferences in front of the Capitol.
Comment by CEA Tuesday, Nov 15, 16 @ 11:42 am
==“Looking at the other side of the coin … ==
nails it
Comment by walker Tuesday, Nov 15, 16 @ 11:44 am
I would like to onow the statistics on how many people are in this quandry due to their own voluntary choices and how many are innocent of wrong doing. Hard to have sympathy for people who make bad choices. Easy to be sympathetic to those who are wrongly accused.
Comment by FormerParatrooper Tuesday, Nov 15, 16 @ 12:05 pm
===Hard to have sympathy for people who make bad choices===
This is not about sympathy. It’s about empathy with people who can’t afford a few hundred bucks to get out of jail for really minor offenses.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Nov 15, 16 @ 12:10 pm
Like many things, bail can be useful in some situations, but has become a routine that is abused more than properly used. it will be no great loss, especially w/ electronic monitoring.
Comment by d.p.gumby Tuesday, Nov 15, 16 @ 12:10 pm
Isn’t the State’s Attorney already supposed to oppose bail for defendants likely to be a threat to public safety? What exactly would Dart add to the process?
Comment by gopower Tuesday, Nov 15, 16 @ 12:33 pm
I had a thought about this the other day. Is Rauner’s (admittedly positive) criminal justice reforms an attempt to position himself against a Dart run in two years? I’ve read this board enough to know that there is no reason to believe Dart is actually running until he announces, but I’ve got to imagine he’s on a pretty short list of potential candidates Rauner would truly be worried about.
Comment by Sox Fan Tuesday, Nov 15, 16 @ 12:46 pm
My understanding of the Bond system, is that the 10% goes to a bail bondsman who then turns around and buys insurance to in case the defendant doesn’t show up.
The 10% doesn’t go into a kitty for the county to use. Only forfeited bonds (meaning someone who doesn’t show up, or breaks the terms of the bond) go to the county/state.
But facts aren’t important these days…..
Comment by Doug Tuesday, Nov 15, 16 @ 12:47 pm
=== Hard to have sympathy for people who make bad choices. ===
And if they are poor, it’s their own fault so they should sit in jail, while more affluent accused go free.
Comment by anon Tuesday, Nov 15, 16 @ 12:51 pm
@ Doug -
Your understanding is wrong.
There are no bail bondsmen in Illinois. 10% of the bond set is tendered to the clerk (so $1,000 on a $10,000 bond). Fines, costs and restitution are taken out of that 10%, as well as attorney’s fees if that is part of the retainer agreement (and it usually is).
But, hey, facts aren’t important . . .
Comment by JoanP Tuesday, Nov 15, 16 @ 1:18 pm
–I would like to onow the statistics on how many people are in this quandry due to their own voluntary choices and how many are innocent of wrong doing.–
They’re all presumed innocent until found guilty in a court of law, are they not?
We’re not talking about accused violent criminals here. You have people rotting away for months in Cook County on Mickey Mouse charges, at enormous expense, because they can’t come up with a couple hundred bucks.
There’s a lot of common sense to this proposal.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Nov 15, 16 @ 1:28 pm
New Mexico voters just decided to do away with cash bonds altogether. http://www.governing.com/topics/public-justice-safety/gov-new-mexico-bail-ballot-measure.html
Comment by Dan Vock Tuesday, Nov 15, 16 @ 1:47 pm
let’s put aside the money issue, though that is a big issue in some places as they use the money for expenses.
a judge is not required to give a cash bond. they can give an I bond. the question is, what is the crime at hand and what, if any, is the record of the defendant. Maybe they can get an I bond, maybe not. I’d feel better about this if we could get an actual look at who is up for what crime and if they have a record. Perhaps there is a way to do that with anonymity as this is discussed, giving the sample of those in right now. Is there are study of the population? It is just not as simple as the offense at hand being some small thing. If it were, and the judge did not give an I bond, then that is on the judge. But these things are usually more complex.
and, who is the victim. the victim should be remembered.
Comment by Amalia Tuesday, Nov 15, 16 @ 2:09 pm
There he goes again, the sheriff with soul as TIME Magazine called him. Refreshing to have a creative public cfficial with the backbone to shake things up.
Comment by Quad Cities Tuesday, Nov 15, 16 @ 2:47 pm
=== If defense attorneys lose that key revenue source, more cases could go to the taxpayer-funded public defender’s office.
So these folks can’t really afford a lawyer, but because we have some money from them we’ll just use it.
Or we could fund public defenders properly and stop trying to tax the poor.
Comment by ArchPundit Tuesday, Nov 15, 16 @ 3:48 pm
Don’t get me wrong, I understand the mickey mouse charges and I find such tactics as an abuse of power. Bail reform won’t change these tactics.
Reform to to help those held for minor charges is fine, they should have either bail low enough to post or released under thier promise to return. Bail should be set to the severity of the offense they are accused of, not as an additional punishment. This concept was lost when States looked for new revenue sources.
I do support the idea of reform and support common sense ideas.
Comment by FormerParatrooper Tuesday, Nov 15, 16 @ 4:22 pm
Bail bond really has only one purpose: to insure that the accused appears in court on his/her court date.
The more unlikely it is that the subject will not appear, the higher the bond will be.
So in theory, the only reason severity of offense comes into play is if the severe penalty for an offense makes it likely that the person will not come to court. Flight risk etc.
As romantic as Sheriff Dart makes this sound, it is probably a problem that needs attention mostly in Cook County. And it probably isn’t a symptom of heartlessness and lack of caring for the downtrodden, it is probably more a symptom of a really big jail and criminal justice system that is unmanaged. Sheer numbers. Huge scale. Inefficiency and lack of accountability.
Comment by Freezeup Tuesday, Nov 15, 16 @ 8:55 pm
Forgot to add: Judges release the accused on reduced and signature bonds all the time. Happens every day.
That is supposed to be the safety valve.
Comment by Freezeup Tuesday, Nov 15, 16 @ 8:58 pm