Any violent crime is bad, not just murder or carrying a weapon. Zero tolerance for violence. Petty theft, minor drug offensives, etc can all be dealt with without prison.
Violence can not tolerated unless we want a country that continues to increasingly rely on firearms as protection.
Violence can not tolerated unless we want a country that continues to increasingly rely on firearms as protection.
The road back to chaos where offenders know the consequences for illegality are lessened once again. For those old enough to remember the 'revolving door' of the 70's, 80's and early 90's, when murders eventually exceeded 2,200 (now in low 300's) and the outdoors were persona non grata, it took serious zero tolerance strategy to save the city. Why do we need to go thru this again?
1
How about a special less nasty section in the jails for people who cannot make bail where they are accused of minor though viable offenses?
1
One of these days, hopefully before I die, which might be sooner or later, as I approach my 70th birthday, you will figure out why the ADAs clashed with me. I didn't set the bails they asked for. Look again at why Benito Oliver was entitled to bail. I never released him. I set bail, reasonable bail, on a person held in jail on a charge for which there was not a sliver of admissible evidence. The LAW required me to set bail. If the facts were reviewed, someone might even find interference from outside influences which caused the DA to fight to keep him in jail even though they had no hope of a conviction. Had Oliver not killed Komar, a killing that has never been investigated for the why, I would have remained on the bench, not been the target of savage attacks and had a successful career which would right now be coming to an end as I reached retirement age. But no one gave a damn about bail then and no one gives a damn now. Reasonable bail is bail that a person can make that will insure their return to court, not bail that is $1.oo higher, insuring they stay in.
This article breaks my heart to the degree that I feel compelled to respond to it. Just 37 comments from NY Times readers--that's it? I wonder if it's because, like me, others feel strongly that something is wrong, but we don't know what "side" to take.
Maybe the best I can say is that I recognize how deeply being stuck in jail for lack of a hundred dollars or so can affect some one; and I also can feel how deeply repeated minor criminal acts can affect others. I've been involved on both ends of this kind of situation: putting up bail, having someone steal from me who's done petty theft a dozen times before.
I need to learn more. Let me listen. Let's have more articles about this.
Maybe the best I can say is that I recognize how deeply being stuck in jail for lack of a hundred dollars or so can affect some one; and I also can feel how deeply repeated minor criminal acts can affect others. I've been involved on both ends of this kind of situation: putting up bail, having someone steal from me who's done petty theft a dozen times before.
I need to learn more. Let me listen. Let's have more articles about this.
The writer spends a day in a court and tracks one kid's arraignment and thinks some authority is imparted in this piece for criminal justice reform. Ms. Bellafante most have been hired away from her HS weekly journal.
Here's some suggestions for "next time" Ms. B, as I assume this piece meets NYT's "high expectations." Talk to those working the court, like the ADAs and PDs. Let them give you their views on the needs of bail for low level offenders. Ask them, "How backlogged will the docket become if bail is not posted on all of these low level offenses?" And what's the current rate of no-show, even with bail posted? And how often do these orders of protection get violated? And how often tragically?
Talk to a judge? Talk to the guys working the drug court.
You didn't even bother to talk to a parent relying on a report to the police, to find out if their hands were already tied by a Child Protection Report from when they spanked their kid, or sent him to bed without dinner.
Very amateurish piece. I'm embarrassed for you and the paper.
Here's some suggestions for "next time" Ms. B, as I assume this piece meets NYT's "high expectations." Talk to those working the court, like the ADAs and PDs. Let them give you their views on the needs of bail for low level offenders. Ask them, "How backlogged will the docket become if bail is not posted on all of these low level offenses?" And what's the current rate of no-show, even with bail posted? And how often do these orders of protection get violated? And how often tragically?
Talk to a judge? Talk to the guys working the drug court.
You didn't even bother to talk to a parent relying on a report to the police, to find out if their hands were already tied by a Child Protection Report from when they spanked their kid, or sent him to bed without dinner.
Very amateurish piece. I'm embarrassed for you and the paper.
5
Bail is necessary to ensure people appear in Court. For low level offenders its necessary only when there is a history of not appearing for court appearances. For more serious offenenses its critical to allow defendants to remain out of jail while they can properly defend themselves. As long as bail is used in this manner it is proper.
My old neighbors were a low level crime family, and we watched them get arrested literally every week. It made our lives miserable. Not only did we get cop cars on Oruro street daily, but when we replaced a damaged fence (on our property) and our neighbor didn't like it, because he liked running through our yard to escape cops, he did things like jump on our roof to tear apart our security system, throw a rock through our window, and urinate in our yard. Yes, he got arrested. Yes, we got a restraining order. No, bail was never over $75, and no, he never showed up in court. And yes, when he was again arrested - for violating the restraining order - the cops were peeved at us for bothering them! It isn't good to have so many people incarcerated for low level crimes, but when do you say "This person is incorrigible and needs to spend time in jail"? How about when he's been arrested at least monthly since he was 16, as his brother told us, and he's 42? What about those of us who just want a quiet life? We ended up selling the house at a loss to get away from the creep. Oh - and a month later, he robbed our local bodega and injured a cop - and got off with next to nothing.
5
Ginia Bellafante is at it again. Her writing states he missed multiple court dates and then cutely writes... he failed to maintain an unerring Google calendar... As Gina states he is on the internet, he has a social media presence. His lawyers contacted him regarding the court dates. All people, and yes I am using an absolute, remember court dates some people choose to ignore them.
There are 2 issues here. First is the whole bail system which is ridiculously unfair to the poor. The greatest "flight risks" are the white collar criminals who can afford even very high bail. The poor have no where to go and no means to go there. So all it does is fleece the pockets of the poor and make their marginal living collapse into failure...which promotes MORE crime. Fixing this system doesn't mean we need to suddenly let violent offenders back on the street. It means we need to fix the broken part of the system in the name of justice.
Issue 2 is the involvement of the justice system in behavior problems of the young. My husband is in his late 50's. In his youth he drank under age, grew and smoked weed, drove without a liscence, trespassed on public land to swim in reservoirs and climb power lines...while high...held underage drinking parties in the wood, set fire to a long abandoned car then called the fire dept, caused lots of problems at school, and in general got into a lot of trouble. It was a small town. People knew who the trouble makers were. Yet the law never got involved. He's white by the way. So he had a chance to live thru his "stupid years" and move on. He is a lawyer and business man, has been a child advocate, runs a company with 50 employees, is a devoted and loving husband and father, doesn't drink or smoke weed or do stupid stuff anymore. The system needs to give people a chance to recover from stupid times and actions of the desperate poor.
Issue 2 is the involvement of the justice system in behavior problems of the young. My husband is in his late 50's. In his youth he drank under age, grew and smoked weed, drove without a liscence, trespassed on public land to swim in reservoirs and climb power lines...while high...held underage drinking parties in the wood, set fire to a long abandoned car then called the fire dept, caused lots of problems at school, and in general got into a lot of trouble. It was a small town. People knew who the trouble makers were. Yet the law never got involved. He's white by the way. So he had a chance to live thru his "stupid years" and move on. He is a lawyer and business man, has been a child advocate, runs a company with 50 employees, is a devoted and loving husband and father, doesn't drink or smoke weed or do stupid stuff anymore. The system needs to give people a chance to recover from stupid times and actions of the desperate poor.
Get out of jail free....
2
Ginia and all the other apologists for criminal behavior need to define immediately what exactly they mean by 'petty' offenses. Are burglary, car theft and break-ins now to be considered 'petty'. Fare beating is petty? Really? How do you think most criminals enter the subway system. I'm low on cash, maybe tomorrow morning I'll skip paying the $6.50 express bus fare. Arguments over stolen sneakers may sound petty to you but not to the kid who maybe worked hard to pay for those sneakers.
3
I sat in traffic court one day and watched a man get taken away to jail because he couldn't pay a fine. What purpose does this practice serve? If the man had a job when he was handcuffed and had his liberty revoked, I'll bet he didn't by the time he finished serving his sentence. The fine was something like $75 or $150. The sentence was, I think, 30 days in jail (with apologies, this was a while ago, and I don't remember the details). What does it cost the community - because that's who pays for incarceration - to house, clothe, and feed this traffic scofflaw for 30 days? Or 10? Why not have the man perform community service, thereby limiting the cost and achieving a benefit in the process? This modern day practice of re-establishing debtor's prison is destructive and punitive and needs to be eradicated.
1
"It was the foster mother, Mr. Goldberg said, who called the police in that case. "
OK I gotta ask: what sort of foster mother calls the cops because her foster son stole her son's sneakers? Either there is a whole lot more to this child's history ... or a whole lot more to the foster mother's..
OK I gotta ask: what sort of foster mother calls the cops because her foster son stole her son's sneakers? Either there is a whole lot more to this child's history ... or a whole lot more to the foster mother's..
1
Peter: Bravo!!!!! Your observations are a direct hit!!!! "FLight, my client can't afford a metro card!" THe justice sysytem is designed to protect the rest of society from those who are the uforetuate one suffering from Ben Carson's diagnosis of poverty's 'state of mind'! As sooon as they correc their state of mind, they will not be tied up in the crimial justice system! Social services, education, job training, and worker training, as well as 'block the box' proposals will al go a far way! A) It does take a community, and B) we are our brother's keepers! But, I guess, with no ACA, no pre-natal care though Planned Parenthood, no housing benefits, and no social services availble based onthe last budget, GOOD LUCK to all those less fortunate no and low income citizens!
2
I agree that getting rid of bail is not the be all and end all of solving the problem. The root of the problem, in my opinion, is teaching people that they should not break the law. Solve that problem, and all the rest of the problems disappear.
2
No mention of the US Constitution in the article?
Amendment 8: "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."
There is a reason this is in the Bill of Rights.
Not Bill of Privileges.
The Bill of Rights.
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
Amendment 8: "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."
There is a reason this is in the Bill of Rights.
Not Bill of Privileges.
The Bill of Rights.
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
I absolutely believe, in the abstract, in the importance of bail reform and other efforts to address petty crime in a different way.
However, just recently a family friend and several neighbors had their houses broken into. The thieves were caught and released as part of NJ's reformed bail system, only to commit additional crimes and then disappear. This of course caused outrage in the town and even made it onto a special segment on TV news about all the problems with bail reform in NJ.
All the sudden what seemed like a good idea doesn't seem like such a good idea, and it highlights how extraordinarily careful we have to be in reforming these things in a way that doesn't end up turning the public against any kind of reform.
However, just recently a family friend and several neighbors had their houses broken into. The thieves were caught and released as part of NJ's reformed bail system, only to commit additional crimes and then disappear. This of course caused outrage in the town and even made it onto a special segment on TV news about all the problems with bail reform in NJ.
All the sudden what seemed like a good idea doesn't seem like such a good idea, and it highlights how extraordinarily careful we have to be in reforming these things in a way that doesn't end up turning the public against any kind of reform.
6
"To many who work in the legal system, the thought that the elimination of bail might prompt a crisis of flight risk seems comically out of touch."
Really? Why, then, do articles like this always seem to show case a defendant whose past includes multiple warrants for failing to appear in court or a record/history of failing to come to court? Not having money is one thing, but not being responsible - repeatedly - is another. Yet there is apparently a never ending source of excuse makers for such behavior; so what would it stop?
Really? Why, then, do articles like this always seem to show case a defendant whose past includes multiple warrants for failing to appear in court or a record/history of failing to come to court? Not having money is one thing, but not being responsible - repeatedly - is another. Yet there is apparently a never ending source of excuse makers for such behavior; so what would it stop?
6
One person's "petty" or "low level" crime is often another's nightmare.
16
What does this have to do with bail?
And note that these 'no cash bail' progressives refuse to define 'petty' or 'low level'. The hoodlum community will find a way to scam this.
3
Bail is used to help secure the defendant's appearance at court, does anyone have a better idea? Many times, defendants are forced to borrow money from a family member or friend, who then becomes financially motivated to ensure that they do return to court, thus getting their money back.
Also, domestic incidents are a huge problem that society hasn't figured out yet. Counseling, anger management, or just simply moving out are great solutions, but they don't work overnight. New York State mandates the police ARREST in domestic incidents. This ensures that the parties are separated until a judge can hear the defendant at arraignment. Then a order of protection is levied to continue to keep the parties separated to allow a long term solution to be developed. The victim's rights, as they should, trump the perpetrator's rights. Additionally, most domestic incidents are adjudicated in family court, which is civil in nature and not criminal. What would be the New York Times article if cops went to a house where this occurred and they refused to lock the child up?
Bottom line: Don't break the law, and you have nothing to worry about.
Also, domestic incidents are a huge problem that society hasn't figured out yet. Counseling, anger management, or just simply moving out are great solutions, but they don't work overnight. New York State mandates the police ARREST in domestic incidents. This ensures that the parties are separated until a judge can hear the defendant at arraignment. Then a order of protection is levied to continue to keep the parties separated to allow a long term solution to be developed. The victim's rights, as they should, trump the perpetrator's rights. Additionally, most domestic incidents are adjudicated in family court, which is civil in nature and not criminal. What would be the New York Times article if cops went to a house where this occurred and they refused to lock the child up?
Bottom line: Don't break the law, and you have nothing to worry about.
8
What would happen to the victim's rights in this example of the boy who stole the shoes of his stepbrother? I think he could live with it a lot better than if the "bad" kid is sent to jail for several weeks because he can't afford bail. I can think of many times I did something illegal and never got caught when I was a teenager many years ago. And somehow I grew up to be a responsible citizen.
Victim's rights trump defendants rights? Leaving aside the use of Trump as a verb, where in the Constitution are victim's rights mentioned? Who determines whether the law has been broken and where does this happen? Who makes the determination? Cops? DAs? My career was ruined over a domestic violence case.
Ms. Bellafante writes: "But in cases where people might benefit from the kind of conflict resolution that the education system has so emphatically embraced, the action seems counterproductive."
Have "education systems... emphatically embraced conflict resolution?" I'm not so certain. I've read countless articles on how the well-intentioned placement of police in schools had led to a criminalization of typical adolescent behavior. In some cases, the presence of a price officer leads to their intervention in conflicts between children that can result in legal consequences. Schools can only provide the far more effective conflict resolution methods if they have the social workers, counseling staff, and training necessary. Given the choice between "good guys with guns" and social workers, too many schools embraced "safety" over "well-being".
Have "education systems... emphatically embraced conflict resolution?" I'm not so certain. I've read countless articles on how the well-intentioned placement of police in schools had led to a criminalization of typical adolescent behavior. In some cases, the presence of a price officer leads to their intervention in conflicts between children that can result in legal consequences. Schools can only provide the far more effective conflict resolution methods if they have the social workers, counseling staff, and training necessary. Given the choice between "good guys with guns" and social workers, too many schools embraced "safety" over "well-being".
5
Poor people are unduly burdened by bail. However, the 16-year-old jumped the turnstile, was in possession of marijuana and is accused of stealing. He didn't have the money for the subway and maybe he had reason to steal the shoes, but there is no excuse for being in possession of a currently illegal drug. Where will we draw the line of when an accused needs to post bail? I was surprised the other day when a very famous golfer was released without posting bond when everyone else would have had to.
Obviously, we need more social services in the court system. The money saved by not sending petty criminals to jail could be funneled into a system which would offer training and advice about not having to interact with the court in the first place. Non-violent offenders would not be forever labeled as felons, those with jobs would not lose their jobs because of the many court dates and other time wasters associated with the system.
However, I consider breaking and entering to be a violent crime even if the person doesn't interact with the occupants. It removes the feeling of safety from the people who have had their home invaded by criminals. Having my house robbed is petty to you but major to me. Where will we draw the line? Burdening the poor with bail which they can't pay is not the answer, but what about bail they can pay? Committing a crime should have consequences.
Obviously, we need more social services in the court system. The money saved by not sending petty criminals to jail could be funneled into a system which would offer training and advice about not having to interact with the court in the first place. Non-violent offenders would not be forever labeled as felons, those with jobs would not lose their jobs because of the many court dates and other time wasters associated with the system.
However, I consider breaking and entering to be a violent crime even if the person doesn't interact with the occupants. It removes the feeling of safety from the people who have had their home invaded by criminals. Having my house robbed is petty to you but major to me. Where will we draw the line? Burdening the poor with bail which they can't pay is not the answer, but what about bail they can pay? Committing a crime should have consequences.
7
Marijuana has been decriminalized in NY state for quite some time now
This just smacks of privilege. I have a comfortable life now, but there have been enough "there but for the grace of God" moments in my life, that a teenager smoking pot does not threaten me. In many parts of the country, it isn't a crime, and it certainly isn't a crime with a victim, neither is jumping a turnstile. And stealing shoes? Everything that can be done should be done to keep kids out of the criminal system, everyone benefits from that.
Where do you impose the consequences? Do all incidents where people have committed a crime deserve a jail sentence in a hell hole like Rikers?
Are we missing the rest of this story? It is a good subject to write about, but ilthe article seems incomplete. For example, what exactly is a bail fund? What are some cities doing in place of bail? What has happened with mothers who call the police on their children, only to regret it? Thanks.
10
Gina - your predetermined formula seems to be , "well, these are minor crimes," followed by "we shouldn't have bail"
Please think of the large majority of residents ho want safe stairwells, clean & safe & hassle free streets - just take a moment - then tell all of us how your obvious slant helps make that possible for us
Please think of the large majority of residents ho want safe stairwells, clean & safe & hassle free streets - just take a moment - then tell all of us how your obvious slant helps make that possible for us
20
You do realize how expensive keeping someone in jail is right? In some states, the prison budget is far larger than the education budget. Every time a low-level non-violent offender has to be publicly housed we all lose.
It isn't a slant. It's in the Constitution. Doesn't that mean anything to you? Bail isn't designed to accomplish your ends. It is designed to find a just sentence after a fair determination of guilt or non guilt.
Putting people in jail for petty non violent crimes because they are unable to pay bail is a modern form of debtors prison. These offences follow these people for the rest of their lives. Often incarceration leads to loss of jobs and sometimes even loss of home. We incarcerate more people than any other developed country. Our criminal system needs a serious overhaul.
17
The propensity for poor (often single) parents to call police to sort out issues with their children is what drives my husband's CPS caseload to the 60s, low 70s. He would argue it's not a lack of services available but rather an opposition to making any use of services. The parent eventually throws up their hands and refuses to take care of the child and whether the child is an infant or 17 years old, they know that means the state is obligated to take custody. Let's call a spade a spade. In many cases it's not a lack of services, it's unwillingness to participate in those services.
13
I'm going to express doubt that the main reason he didn't appear in court when previously ordered to do so was a glitch in his calendaring system. Cash bail is an obvious problem, but this column offers no solution at all to the problem of offenders failing to appear in court, which is expensive, disruptive, and disruptive to the administration of justice. I wish the author would tell us how he intends to solve that actual problem.
14
Seriously. What are you talking about?
It seems to me the comumns solution is i an offender fail to appear in court, close the case and let him go free.
1
he committed crimes. repeatedly. if you don't think that these crimes are real "crimes", then work to change the laws on the books. but until that happens, they are still crimes. selective enforcement of laws based on subjective opinion only creates anarchy because who knows what's really a crime. and at what point do you draw the line to say this is a crime that should be enforced and this isnt?
10
It's not that the young man didn't a commit crime, repeatedly, as you emphasis. At issue here is what constitutes an effective way to mete out consequences (or punishments) for those crimes, in manner that is proportional, just, and takes into limited state resources. The articles seems to highlight the importance of "discretion" as opposed to "selective enforcement".
8
There are two issues being discussed here. In our country and under our constitution, you are innocent until proven guilty. The first issue is that many people prefer to use cash bail as a substitute for a trial by a jury of one's peers. They want to lock people up as soon as they are arrested, BEFORE they are found guilty of a crime. That is the issue being discussed here. What should happen AFTER a person is found guilty should have nothing to do with your opinion about the need to post cash bail.
The second issue is how should petty conflicts between people be resolved. It seems obvious that many disputes don't belong in court, any more than a schoolyard scuffle does. How do we help people resolve these conflicts without criminalizing them? Can we use the same kind of conflict resolution tools that are used in business disputes, divorce cases, etc. , e.g., mediation, arbitration, counseling, etc.? It seems a worthy question which should not be avoided by simply saying all disruptive or anti-social behavior is "criminal" and should be punished by jail.
The second issue is how should petty conflicts between people be resolved. It seems obvious that many disputes don't belong in court, any more than a schoolyard scuffle does. How do we help people resolve these conflicts without criminalizing them? Can we use the same kind of conflict resolution tools that are used in business disputes, divorce cases, etc. , e.g., mediation, arbitration, counseling, etc.? It seems a worthy question which should not be avoided by simply saying all disruptive or anti-social behavior is "criminal" and should be punished by jail.
24
Selective enforcement IS the use of discretion.
The criminalization of petty, non-violent offenses has only negative consequences for the individual and society as a whole. Money used for enforcement of these offenses is wasted and starves social agencies from being able to help those who need it most. A criminal record will follow someone throughout life and keep them from becoming productive members of society.
20
Bernie Madoff committed non violent crimes. Should we cut him loose?
Looking the other way on petty crimes can create a sense of disorder and seriously damage a community. My drinking beer and making noise outside your apartment building late at night is a petty crime but to the people in the apartment building who have to get up for work in the morning it's a capital offense
Criminal record reform is necessary especially when committed by young people.
Looking the other way on petty crimes can create a sense of disorder and seriously damage a community. My drinking beer and making noise outside your apartment building late at night is a petty crime but to the people in the apartment building who have to get up for work in the morning it's a capital offense
Criminal record reform is necessary especially when committed by young people.
1
And it wouldn't be surprising to surmise that his family probably exists solely on Government handouts. How else would he have time to plot his next crime rather than spending time working to help support the family. So to ask for even more money for such losers is insane.