The problem with the U.S. bail system Camilo Ramirez

Since 2000, the annual number of people
convicted of crimes in the United States

has stayed steady, but the average number
of people in jail each year has shot up.

How can that be?

The answer lies in the bail system—

which isn’t doing
what it was intended to do.

The term “bail” refers to the release
of people awaiting trial

on condition that they return
to court to face charges.

Countries around the world
use many variations of bail,

and some don’t use it at all.

The U.S. bail system relies primarily
on what’s called cash bail,

which was supposed to work like this:

When a person was accused of a crime,

the judge would set
a reasonable price for bail.

The accused would pay this fee
in order to be released from jail

until the court reached
a verdict on the case.

Once the case ended,
whether found guilty or innocent,

they’d get the bail money back
if they made all their court appearances.

The rationale behind this system
is that under U.S. law,

people are presumed innocent
until proven guilty—

so someone accused of a crime
should not be imprisoned

unless they’ve been convicted of a crime.

But today, the bail system in the U.S.

doesn’t honor the presumption
of innocence.

Instead, it subverts peoples’ rights
and causes serious harm,

particularly to people
in low-income communities

and communities of color.

A key reason why is the cost of bail.

In order for cash bail
to work as intended,

the price has to be affordable
for the accused.

The cost of bail wasn’t meant to reflect
the likelihood of someone’s guilt—

when bail is set, the court
has not reviewed evidence.

Under exceptional circumstances,
such as charges of very serious crimes,

judges could deny bail
and jail the accused before their trial.

Judges were supposed to exercise
this power very rarely,

and could come under scrutiny
for using it too often.

Setting unaffordably high bail
became a second path

to denying people pretrial release.

Judges' personal discretion
and prejudices played a huge role

in who they chose to detain this way.

Bail amounts climbed higher and higher,
and more and more defendants couldn’t pay—

so they stayed in jail.

By the late 19th century,

these circumstances led to the rise
of commercial bail bond companies.

They pay a defendant’s bail, in exchange
for a hefty fee the company keeps.

Today, the median bail is $10,000—

a prohibitively high price
for almost half of Americans,

and as many as nine out of ten defendants.

If the defendant can’t pay,

they may apply for a loan
from a commercial bail bond company.

It’s completely up to the company
to decide whose bail they’ll pay.

They choose defendants they think
will pay them back,

turning a profit of about
$2 billion each year.

In fact, in the past 20 years,

pretrial detention has been the main
driver of jail growth in America.

Every year, hundreds of thousands
of people

who can’t afford bail or secure a loan
stay in jail until their case is resolved.

This injustice disproportionately affects
Americans who are Black and Latino,

for whom judges often set higher bail

than for white people accused
of the same offenses.

Unaffordable bail puts even innocent
defendants in an impossible position.

Some end up pleading guilty to crimes
they did not commit.

For minor offenses, the prosecution
may offer a deal that credits time

already spent in jail toward
the accused’s sentence

if they plead guilty.

Often, the time they’ve already spent in
jail is the total length of the sentence,

and they can go home immediately—
but they leave with a criminal record.

Defending their innocence, meanwhile,

can mean staying in jail indefinitely
awaiting trial—

and doesn’t guarantee
an innocent verdict.

Bail may not even be necessary
in the first place.

Washington, D.C. largely abolished
cash bail in the 1990s.

In 2017, the city released 94%
of defendants without holding bail money,

and 88% of them returned
to all their court dates.

The nonprofit organization,
The Bail Project,

provides free bail assistance to thousands
of low-income people every year,

removing the financial incentive
that bail is designed to create.

The result? People come back
to 90% of their court dates

without having any money on the line,

and those who miss their court dates
tended to

because of circumstances like child care,
work conflicts, or medical crises.

Studies have also found that holding
people in jail before trial,

often because they cannot
afford cash bail,

actually increases the likelihood
of rearrests and reoffending.

The damage of incarcerating people
before their trials

extends to entire communities
and can harm families for generations.

People who are incarcerated
can lose their livelihoods, homes,

and access to essential services—

all before they’ve been convicted
of a crime.

It’s also incredibly expensive:

American taxpayers spend
nearly $14 billion every year

incarcerating people
who are legally presumed innocent.

This undermines the promise
of equal justice under the law,

regardless of race or wealth.

The issues surrounding cash bail
are symptomatic of societal problems,

like structural racism and over-reliance
on incarceration,

that need to be addressed.

In the meantime,
reformers like The Bail Project

are working to help people trapped
by cash bail

and to create a more just and humane
pretrial system for the future.

自 2000 年以来,美国每年
被定罪的人数

一直保持稳定,但每年入狱的平均
人数却猛增。

怎么可能?

答案在于保释制度——

它没有
做它打算做的事情。

“保释”一词是指释放
等待审判的人

,条件是他们
返回法庭接受指控。

世界各国
使用多种保释方式

,有些国家根本不使用。

美国的保释制度主要
依赖于所谓的现金保释,

它应该是这样运作的:

当一个人被指控犯罪时

,法官会
为保释设定一个合理的价格。

被告将支付这笔
费用以便从监狱中获释,

直到法院
对案件作出判决。

一旦案件结束,
无论被判有罪还是无罪,如果他们全部出庭,

他们都会拿回保释金

该系统背后的基本原理
是,根据美国法律,

在被证明有罪之前,人们被假定为无罪——

因此被指控犯罪的人
不应被监禁,

除非他们已被定罪。

但是今天,美国的保释制度

不尊重
无罪推定。

相反,它颠覆了人民的权利
并造成严重伤害,

尤其是
对低收入社区

和有色人种社区的人们。

一个关键原因是保释金。

为了使现金保释
能够按预期

发挥作用,被告必须能够负担得起
价格。

保释金的成本并不意味着
反映某人有罪的可能性——

当保释金被确定时,法院
没有审查证据。

在特殊情况下,
例如被指控非常严重的罪行,

法官可以
在审判前拒绝保释和监禁被告。

法官应该
很少行使这种权力,

并且可能会
因为过于频繁地使用而受到审查。

设置无法承受的高额保释金
成为

拒绝人们审前释放的第二条途径。

法官的个人裁量权
和偏见

在他们选择以这种方式拘留谁方面发挥了巨大作用。

保释金越来越高,
越来越多的被告付不起钱——

所以他们留在了监狱里。

到了 19 世纪后期,

这些情况导致
了商业保释债券公司的兴起。

他们支付被告的保释金,以
换取公司保留的巨额费用。

今天,保释金的中位数是 10,000 美元——

对于几乎一半的美国人

和多达十分之九的被告人来说,这个价格高得令人望而却步。

如果被告无法支付,

他们可以
向商业保释金公司申请贷款。

完全由公司
决定他们将支付谁的保释金。

他们选择他们认为
会偿还的

被告,每年赚取约
20 亿美元的利润。

事实上,在过去的 20 年里,

审前拘留一直是
美国监狱增长的主要驱动力。

每年,数十万

无法支付保释金或贷款
的人被关在监狱里,直到他们的案件得到解决。

这种不公正不成比例地影响了
黑人和拉丁裔美国人,

法官通常为他们设定

比被指控
犯有相同罪行的白人更高的保释金。

负担不起的保释金甚至使无辜的
被告处于不可能的境地。

有些人最终对
他们没有犯下的罪行认罪。

对于轻微罪行,如果被告认罪,检方
可能会提供一项交易,将

已经在监狱中度过的时间
计入被告的刑期

通常,他们已经在监狱度过的时间
就是刑期的总长度

,他们可以立即回家——
但他们带着犯罪记录离开。

与此同时,捍卫他们的清白

可能意味着无限期地待在监狱中
等待审判——

并且不能
保证无罪判决。

一开始甚至可能不需要保释

华盛顿特区
在 1990 年代基本废除了现金保释。

2017年,全市94%
的被告人在没有保释金的情况下获释

,88%的被告人回到
了所有出庭日期。

非营利组织
The Bail Project 每年

为数千名低收入人群提供免费的保释援助

消除
了保释旨在创造的经济激励。

结果? 人们在

没有任何钱的情况下会回到90%的约会日期,

而那些错过约会约会的人
往往是

因为儿童保育、
工作冲突或医疗危机等情况。

研究还发现,
在审判前将人们关进监狱,

通常是因为他们
无力支付现金保释金,

实际上会增加
再次逮捕和再次犯罪的可能性。

在审判前将人监禁的损害会

扩展到整个社区,
并可能伤害几代人的家庭。

被监禁的人
可能会失去生计、家园

和获得基本服务的机会——这

一切都发生在他们被判有罪之前

它也非常昂贵:

美国纳税人
每年花费近 140 亿美元来

监禁
在法律上被认为是无辜的人。

这破坏了
法律规定的平等正义的承诺,

无论种族或财富如何。

围绕现金保释的问题
是社会问题的征兆,

例如结构性种族主义和过度
依赖监禁

,需要解决。

与此同时,
像保释计划这样的改革者

正在努力帮助
被现金保释困住的人,

并为未来创造一个更加公正和人道的
审前制度。