“Abolishing money bail and replacing it with a risk-based system will enhance justice and safety.”
Isn’t the money based system based on risk? The greater the threat and the risk of flight, the higher the bail?
Maybe I am missing something here but that seems fair to me. If you skip bail you hurt the people who helped you out of jail.
One amendment to my last comment.
This makes sense for low bail situations (maybe) where people are not flight risks. Let’s say it is an automatic $500 bail situation. If they are not a flight risk (and they have no savings), then holding them might get them fired.
“Isn’t the money based system based on risk? The greater the threat and the risk of flight, the higher the bail?
Maybe I am missing something here but that seems fair to me. If you skip bail you hurt the people who helped you out of jail.”
Actually, I am inclined to agree with you. After all , bail is simply a financial inducement to make sure you show up for trial. One would hope that in cases where there is a significant risk of flight, or to public safety, releasing the perp would still not be happening.
I can also tell you that crazy CA with it’s bail schedules for even driving violations ends up putting people in jail for speeding, running red lights and the like. Furthermore, CA is under federal court order to improve/expand its jails and prisons due to overcrowding. I think we are near or at the top of the list for the percentage of our residents who are incarcerated. The real question should be related to the nature of the crimes charged and the likelihood that the offender represents some sort of threat.
Sure its ‘fair’ as long as you are an illegal, or a known Dem voter. Conservative? Republican? Flight risk, obviously. Hold indefinitely.