Discussion
  • Read More
    Sean BrodyJay Hathaway
    6/08/15 10:22am

    Hey, imagine that: a system where we let people go home, maybe give them an ankle monitor or send someone to check in on them, remind them of their court dates, and trust them to appear. That’s so crazy, it just might work.

    It might. But most people vote mainly based on their wallets and their fears. Appealing to their altruism or their sense of justice never really gets you very far.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      The Noble RenardSean Brody
      6/08/15 10:27am

      If they were voting based on their wallet, they would absolutely vote in favor of this system because an order of magnitude cheaper (seriously, the numbers cited in the video are 1/10th the cost of detaining people in jail if they can’t pay bail)

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Sean BrodyThe Noble Renard
      6/08/15 10:30am

      If they were voting based on their wallet, they would absolutely vote in favor of this system because an order of magnitude cheaper (seriously, the numbers cited in the video are 1/10th the cost of detaining people in jail if they can’t pay bail)

      For sure. That’s the case to be made. Focusing on the manifest unfairness is a waste of time.
      Tell people that the state is wasting their tax money and they get angry.

      Or that’s how it appears to me.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    The Noble RenardJay Hathaway
    6/08/15 10:22am

    Fantastic piece, though I wish he had talked more about the collateral consequences part. As an immigration lawyer, there are a whole host of other immigration consequences that come out of this system as well, especially in New York City. I have multiple clients who plead guilty to minor charges that they swear up and down they were innocent of, because the option was either get out of jail immediately by pleading guilty, or losing their jobs by staying in jail to fight the case. But even misdemeanor offenses that a person spent no time in jail for can get someone deported, and it wasn’t even until 2008 that the Supreme Court required defense attorneys to inform immigrants that taking a plea might lead to being deported.

    You can get your green card stripped and be deported for being convicted of two marijuana violations (a $100 ticket in NY that’s not even a misdemeanor). Or you can be deported for shoplifting a can of beer, or jumping a turnstile. Or passing a bad check, or other misdemeanor offenses that won’t even get you any jail sentence.

    So the bail problem can be especially bad for immigrants who are wrongfully arrested, because they end up stuck between a rock and a hard place. For them, the only realistic options are usually to take a plea to something that they know won’t get them deported, or languish in jail for months until they go to trial and have to take the chance that they will be convicted for something that will get them deported.

    On a related note, his piece is also incredibly sadly timed with the death of Kalief Browder, the poster child for our broken bail system. Just tragic.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      deuxmittensThe Noble Renard
      6/08/15 10:39am

      My ex was almost one. Misdemeanor pot as a teenager, years later a overzealous ass tried to deport him. He found out at the last minute he was a citizen (too old when he arrived, but siblings and Mom became citizens so he qualified). Got an expidited passport, showed up with it in hand to the court, judge bitched out the ass.

      Dumb luck really, and that’s fucking scary. A year after that two people showed up at his stepdad’s place saying they needed to confiscate his passport (of a legit US citizen ffs). His stepdad claimed not to know where he was. Whole thing was completely absurd.

      And yeah, first thing I thought of when I saw the video title this morning - Christ, timing. Poor kid.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      BlatheringThe Noble Renard
      6/08/15 11:00am

      Great points.

      It is very similar in subsidized housing. Housing Authorities love the tough line about keeping families safe by throwing dad/son/grandson out at any brush with the law.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    PopChipsJay Hathaway
    6/08/15 10:19am

    Nobody is found “innocent”, but you do still owe the bail bondsman if you’re found “not guilty” or even better, the charges are dropped. So, if you’re falsely arrested on a Sunday and by Friday the DA determines that there’s absolutely no evidence to charge you with a crime, then you’re out the money you gave the bail bondsman, which is just absurd.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Sara-Slaughter607PopChips
      6/08/15 10:36am

      That is exactly why I sat once for 48 hours... I knew the charges would be dropped (I got pulled over with a loose Ritalin under my passenger seat that belonged to a friend, it had fallen out of her purse during a ride we took together)

      I wasn’t willing to part with $500 of a $5000 bond that I knew I wouldn’t get back. Fuck that. I’ll sit thank you.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      MynameisKimPopChips
      6/08/15 11:21am

      WHY? The Bondsman is taking a chance on you! If you don’t show the bondsman is out the full amount of the bond, not just the amount you paid. Think about it!!!

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    BlatheringJay Hathaway
    6/08/15 11:12am

    Every time I was in court on a bail matter, I was frustratingly reminded (I’m an Old) of George H.W. in a grocery store and not understanding the price scanner. There are probably a million more relevant “let them eat cake” examples the kids would get, I’m sure. But the judges and DAs seemed to not have the slightest idea that 10% of a $10,000 bail was more cash than a family might see in a month, much less have available.

    And the collateral consequences are huge. Lost jobs because in jail. Lost jobs because now have criminal record. Less concern about criminal record because everyone has one. Less focus on education and achievement because it doesn’t matter when you’re guaranteed to have a criminal record. etc.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      donkeyteethBlathering
      6/08/15 11:42am

      Yeah it's impossible for some people to fathom that others might not have a thousand dollars readily available. Much like the piece Oliver did awhile back detailing how people get screwed by getting a ticket they can't afford that leads to even larger fines they can't afford. And suddenly they're having to pay several thousand dollars on a ticket that was for $100 or something.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Blatheringdonkeyteeth
      6/08/15 11:45am

      When I’ve brought up the cost issue, I’ve been told (by lawyers and judges) “They’ll come up with the money when they need it” as if the poor are gleefully poor and have thriving rainy day funds. Yeah, some people can come up with it—usually by not paying rent or by borrowing from others in their community who are already poor themselves.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    RealAmurricanJay Hathaway
    6/08/15 11:11am

    Haven’t watched last night’s episode yet, but even Oliver’s take is going to be hard to stomach after reading about Kalief Browder this morning.

    “Innocent until proven guilty” has been bastardized beyond recognition. You are guilty until you can afford bail, and an acquittal won’t ever refund your payment to a bondsman. There is no presumption of innocence to a police officer or prosecutor - they’re just focused on building the best case possible to have you convicted. A public defender may presume your innocence, but almost inevitably lacks the bandwidth to mount an informed, vigorous defense, and “innocent until proven guilty” quickly turns into bargaining for the best plea agreement.

    Even if you’re able to pay for an attorney, the system just becomes trial-by-combat, between the prosecution and the best lawyer you can afford.

    The rhetoric of our values is in stark, jarring contrast to the reality of our entire justice system. As infuriating as it is whenever some asshole fear-mongers about Sharia Law or self-righteously castigates Norway for its “country club prisons”, it’s becoming even more enraging to hear vehement appeals to closing Guantanamo - as if it’s just one prominent aberration discrediting our tightly-held ideals - when the entire system is just bleakly and impossibly fucked from top to bottom.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      EL34RealAmurrican
      6/08/15 7:29pm

      ^I hate it, but all the strars, right there^

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    GurvinderJay Hathaway
    6/08/15 10:14am

    That’s so crazy, it just might work.

    That would get in the way of the private profits of jailing people. Imprisoning people is a business and there’s very little chance those forces behind those corporations would allow for civil rights to get in the way of their profits.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Macabre KittenGurvinder
      6/08/15 10:21am
      GIF
      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      toothpetardGurvinder
      6/08/15 10:23am

      Thankfully legality has little to do with ethics.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    gramercypoliceJay Hathaway
    6/08/15 10:24am

    I posted this comment in the earlier Gawker post on Kalief Browder’s suicide, and it’s specifically about him, but it probably fits this post even better:

    From The New Yorker:

    In order for a trial to start, both the defense attorney and the prosecutor have to declare that they are ready; the court clerk then searches for a trial judge who is free and transfers the case, and jury selection can begin. Not long after Browder was indicted, an assistant district attorney sent the court a “Notice of Readiness,” stating that “the People are ready for trial.” The case was put on the calendar for possible trial on December 10th, but it did not start that day. On January 28, 2011, Browder’s two-hundred-and-fifty-eighth day in jail, he was brought back to the courthouse once again. This time, the prosecutor said, “The People are not ready. We are requesting one week.” The next court date set by the judge—March 9th—was not one week away but six. As it happened, Browder didn’t go to trial anytime that year. An index card in the court file explains:

    June 23, 2011: People not ready, request 1 week.

    August 24, 2011: People not ready, request 1 day.

    November 4, 2011: People not ready, prosecutor on trial, request 2 weeks.

    December 2, 2011: Prosecutor on trial, request January 3rd.

    The Bronx courts are so clogged that when a lawyer asks for a one-week adjournment the next court date usually doesn’t happen for six weeks or more....

    With every trip Browder made to the courthouse, another line was added to a growing stack of index cards kept in the court file:

    June 29, 2012: People not ready, request one week.

    September 28, 2012: People not ready, request two weeks.

    November 2, 2012: People not ready, request one week.

    December 14, 2012: People not ready, request one week.

    By the end of 2012, Browder had been in jail for nine hundred and sixty-one days [much of it in solitary confinement] and had stood before eight different judges. He always maintained his composure, never berating his attorney or yelling protests in court. O’Meara was impressed by his control. “I can’t imagine most people sitting in there for three years and not becoming very upset with their attorney,” he says. “He just never complained to me.” Privately, though, Browder was angry. About the prosecutors, he would tell himself, “These guys are just playing with my case.”

    In the end, the prosecutors dropped the case because the accuser had returned to his home in Mexico and would not return to testify. No one knows when the prosecutors knew they had no witness, or how many extensions they requested because they knew they had no witness. The defendant refused to take a plea bargain, even one that would let him go free with time served, insisting he had never robbed the plaintiff and would not take a guilty plea for something he hadn’t done.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      JustMadeThisBurnerJay Hathaway
      6/08/15 10:17am

      Ninety-nine percent (99%) of released defendants were not rearrested on a violent crime while in the community.

      Yeah, but that ain’t 100%, so people got to suffer. If they didn’t want to be in jail, they shouldn’t have gotten arrested for something they did.

      - One’s uncle at Thanksgiving dinner (the idea they may not have even committed a crime never passed his mind).

      Reply
      <
      • Read More
        BlatheringJustMadeThisBurner
        6/08/15 11:01am

        Of course they committed a crime. They are black. -my uncle in response.

        Reply
        <
    • Read More
      Cherith CutestoryJay Hathaway
      6/08/15 10:19am

      And for most crimes avoiding having a warrant out for your arrest (which will happen if you miss court dates) is more than enough reason to show up. Cops can check your warrants immediately now. You could get arrested at anytime. In any jurisdiction in the US. That is just as much an incentive to not flee as not losing your money or a bail bondsmen coming after you.

      Reply
      <
      • Read More
        toothpetardJay Hathaway
        6/08/15 10:21am

        without being found guilty of any crime

        The system works!

        Reply
        <