5 ms·

Keeping a person in jail because they can't afford bail is obviously horrible for that person, and that should be reason enough to oppose it, but it can also be

Keeping a person in jail because they can't afford bail is obviously horrible for that person, and that should be reason enough to oppose it, but it can also be harmful for other people. A poor person who is finally acquitted after months of waiting in jail is likely to be released to homelessness, unemployment, and debt. They will also be suffering from the mental and physical trauma of their incarceration, which makes it more difficult for them to deal with their situation. Crime may be the only realistic means for them to survive, even if they have never committed a crime before.

s1artibartfast 5y ago
Eliminating cash bail doesn't get more people out of jail. It keeps more people in it. The purpose of pre-trial release is to let those out who are unlikely to cause harm or flee while they await trial. 1) If someone poses no risk, they are released. 2) If someone poses a risk, they are detained. 3) If someone poses a risk and is detained, bail is a tool to allow them out and ensure they return. Without it, you just keep them in jail. Cash bail certainly provides advantages to those with assets or credit, but this is a separate issue.
- DangitBobby 5y ago
  > bail is a tool to allow them out and ensure they return. Without it, you just keep them in jail. This is where it breaks down. I don't think you need bail to make sure they come back.
  - s1artibartfast 5y ago
    You can already let those who pose no risk go without bail. What alternative do you propose for people who pose a flight risk?
    - DangitBobby 5y ago
      Denying bail, which is a thing they already do for people who pose a flight risk.
      - s1artibartfast 5y ago
        So then you just keep everyone with a flight risk, which is more people than now. Today those who are a low flight risk can put up collateral to make sure they come back
        DangitBobby 5y ago
        Unless they are poor. And, again, I don't believe you when you say a monetary stake is required to make them come back.
hajile 5y ago
If a person is proven innocent, they just should get two more questions. First, they should be asked if they believe the innocent person should be compensated for time and defense costs. Second, if they believe compensation is in order, they should be asked if they believe the prosecutor or the state should pay that bill.

s1artibartfast 5y ago

Eliminating cash bail doesn't get more people out of jail. It keeps more people in it. The purpose of pre-trial release is to let those out who are unlikely to cause harm or flee while they await trial. 1) If someone poses no risk, they are released. 2) If someone poses a risk, they are detained. 3) If someone poses a risk and is detained, bail is a tool to allow them out and ensure they return. Without it, you just keep them in jail. Cash bail certainly provides advantages to those with assets or credit, but this is a separate issue.

DangitBobby 5y ago
> bail is a tool to allow them out and ensure they return. Without it, you just keep them in jail. This is where it breaks down. I don't think you need bail to make sure they come back.
- s1artibartfast 5y ago
  You can already let those who pose no risk go without bail. What alternative do you propose for people who pose a flight risk?
  - DangitBobby 5y ago
    Denying bail, which is a thing they already do for people who pose a flight risk.
    - s1artibartfast 5y ago
      So then you just keep everyone with a flight risk, which is more people than now. Today those who are a low flight risk can put up collateral to make sure they come back
      - DangitBobby 5y ago
        Unless they are poor. And, again, I don't believe you when you say a monetary stake is required to make them come back.

hajile 5y ago

If a person is proven innocent, they just should get two more questions. First, they should be asked if they believe the innocent person should be compensated for time and defense costs. Second, if they believe compensation is in order, they should be asked if they believe the prosecutor or the state should pay that bill.