Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NYC to Eliminate Bail for Many Non-Violent Offenders

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • NYC to Eliminate Bail for Many Non-Violent Offenders

    New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio is set to announce an overhaul of the city's bail system on Wednesday that is designed to keep low-level offenders out of Rikers Island.

    The plan, which offers 3,000 offenders supervised release in lieu of bail, will help "reduce both the financial and human costs of needless incarceration," New York City Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito told VICE News. The council is also considering proposals to establish a fund to help indigent offenders pay bail and stay out of jail until their cases are decided.

    Rikers is now crowded with thousands of low-level and low-income detainees who simply cannot afford to meet bail. In 8,000 non-felony cases where the bail was set at $1,000 or less, the defendant failed to pay and wound up in Rikers, according to 2013 numbers released by New York's City Council.
    VICE News - Full Article

  • #2
    So, now they walk until they commit another crime and get rolled back into "the system" where they will then face stiffer penalties for having done the equivalent of skipping bail...

    Comment


    • #3
      Considering that the NYPD has for years mandated quotas for arrests, has regularly arrested falsely, and that bail accrues no interest, I'd say that this move is well overdue.
      I was married for two ******* years! Hell would be like Club Med! - Sam Kinison

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
        So, now they walk until they commit another crime and get rolled back into "the system" where they will then face stiffer penalties for having done the equivalent of skipping bail...

        Yeah, it ought to be interesting. You can steal to your heart's content without any impediment. You get arrested, so what-they'll just let you go.

        No real bond, no penalty for no-showing at trial, and if they catch you, its a non-violent offense so they can't hold you.

        This is going to be fun to watch.
        Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by slick_miester View Post
          Considering that the NYPD has for years mandated quotas for arrests, has regularly arrested falsely, and that bail accrues no interest, I'd say that this move is well overdue.
          Those are separate problems from bail. If the NYPD is corrupt (and it likely is to a serious degree), then that needs to be addressed. Letting people arrested out without bail only encourages those who would skip bail in any case to do so every chance they get.
          In the long run, it sets the system up for more cases rather than less, and sets those allowed out without bail who would skip anyway to do so at less penalty.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
            Those are separate problems from bail. If the NYPD is corrupt (and it likely is to a serious degree), then that needs to be addressed.
            The corruption starts with the voters -- who demand that politicians "do something," even if the thing in question is not at all amenable to a political or law enforcement solution. Just remember: Eric Garner was confronted by the police for selling loose cigarettes, the market for which was created when voters rewarded their politicians for enacting punitive taxes on tobacco.

            It's quite similar to how we were saddled with Prohibition, if you'll recall.

            Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
            Letting people arrested out without bail only encourages those who would skip bail in any case to do so every chance they get.
            In the long run, it sets the system up for more cases rather than less, and sets those allowed out without bail who would skip anyway to do so at less penalty.
            The cases in question are of the non-violent and misdemeanor variety. They're not ROR'ing Bonnie & Clyde. Most of those cases get minimal bail anyway. If a violent felon puts up $1,000 of his mom's money, he's still as likely to run, so that canard is off the table.

            ROR'ing these cases takes the onus off of the courts and DAs: now they're not obliged to provide speedy trials.
            I was married for two ******* years! Hell would be like Club Med! - Sam Kinison

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by slick_miester View Post
              Considering that the NYPD has for years mandated quotas for arrests, has regularly arrested falsely, and that bail accrues no interest, I'd say that this move is well overdue.
              It "accrues no interest" but it does collect the bail deposit in it's entirety, and puts a skip tracer on your tail.

              This move by NYC does nothing but encourage people not to show up for court. Why bother...you;ve got nothing to lose and everything to gain.
              Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by slick_miester View Post
                The corruption starts with the voters -- who demand that politicians "do something," even if the thing in question is not at all amenable to a political or law enforcement solution. Just remember: Eric Garner was confronted by the police for selling loose cigarettes, the market for which was created when voters rewarded their politicians for enacting punitive taxes on tobacco.

                It's quite similar to how we were saddled with Prohibition, if you'll recall.



                The cases in question are of the non-violent and misdemeanor variety. They're not ROR'ing Bonnie & Clyde. Most of those cases get minimal bail anyway. If a violent felon puts up $1,000 of his mom's money, he's still as likely to run, so that canard is off the table.

                ROR'ing these cases takes the onus off of the courts and DAs: now they're not obliged to provide speedy trials.
                The drinking public did not ask for Prohibition, but opposed it forcefully.
                Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                  The drinking public did not ask for Prohibition, but opposed it forcefully.
                  That portion of the public that desired drink opposed Prohibition, no doubt about it. You're overlooking the various temperance movements of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. They may have started out small, fringe movements with few vocal adherents, but by the second decade of the 20th century they had coalesced, and had gained enough mass in order to push two-thirds of both Houses of Congress and three-quarters of the states' legislatures into passing the XVIII Amendment in a breathtakingly short span of time.

                  Think about it: within the space of thirty years, temperance went from being a joke to making the overwhelming bulk of the US' political establishment dance to its tune. When viewed like that, it's pretty scary, and compels the question, what goofy political movements today can grow like that?
                  I was married for two ******* years! Hell would be like Club Med! - Sam Kinison

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Good way to increase the Democratic voter base.
                    My worst jump story:
                    My 13th jump was on the 13th day of the month, aircraft number 013.
                    As recorded on my DA Form 1307 Individual Jump Log.
                    No lie.

                    ~
                    "Everything looks all right. Have a good jump, eh."
                    -2 Commando Jumpmaster

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
                      Wouldn't be a bad idea. Nonviolent offenders typically aren't major flight risks. It would be a good for the budget since the taxpayer doesn't have to shell out feeding and locking them up.

                      John Oliver highlighted a pretrial system that sounds pretty effective:

                      A new life awaits you in the off world colonies; the chance to begin again in a golden land of opportunity and adventure!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Pirateship1982 View Post
                        Wouldn't be a bad idea. Nonviolent offenders typically aren't major flight risks. It would be a good for the budget since the taxpayer doesn't have to shell out feeding and locking them up.
                        They aren't?

                        They tend to show up for court because bail bondsmen have hirelings who ensure that that occurs. Otherwise thieves, vandals, paper-hangers, and the like are not terribly responsible people.

                        On the plus side, they will be out stealing while they're awaiting trial so only the taxpayers that are their victims will be out anything.

                        Like I said, this ought to be interesting. This isn't the first time, or the tenth, that somebody has tried this sort of thing.

                        But maybe this time the results will be different.
                        Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
                          They aren't?

                          They tend to show up for court because bail bondsmen have hirelings who ensure that that occurs. Otherwise thieves, vandals, paper-hangers, and the like are not terribly responsible people.

                          On the plus side, they will be out stealing while they're awaiting trial so only the taxpayers that are their victims will be out anything.

                          Like I said, this ought to be interesting. This isn't the first time, or the tenth, that somebody has tried this sort of thing.

                          But maybe this time the results will be different.
                          Under the system John Oliver was spotlighting, it sounds like there are still "hirelings" that ensure they show up. They just don't waste time imprisoning misdemeanor first offenders who will probably show up without Dog standing over their shoulder.

                          But yes. We'll see.
                          A new life awaits you in the off world colonies; the chance to begin again in a golden land of opportunity and adventure!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Pirateship1982 View Post
                            Under the system John Oliver was spotlighting, it sounds like there are still "hirelings" that ensure they show up. They just don't waste time imprisoning misdemeanor first offenders who will probably show up without Dog standing over their shoulder.

                            But yes. We'll see.
                            I don't know who oliver is, but he did not design the system NY is putting in place, and its cutting loose a lot more than first time misdemeanor subjects.

                            Nor do they appear to be adding anyone to ensure that the released subjects appear for court. Of course, FTA warrants will be issued, but that is small security for the victims...especially since the offenders be released without bail again.
                            Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
                              I don't know who oliver is, but he did not design the system NY is putting in place, and its cutting loose a lot more than first time misdemeanor subjects.

                              Nor do they appear to be adding anyone to ensure that the released subjects appear for court. Of course, FTA warrants will be issued, but that is small security for the victims...especially since the offenders be released without bail again.
                              Ah. Point taken.
                              A new life awaits you in the off world colonies; the chance to begin again in a golden land of opportunity and adventure!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X