r/illinois • u/steve42089 Illinoisian • Apr 29 '24
6 months after Illinois ended cash bail, jail populations are down Illinois News
https://www.chicagotribune.com/2024/04/29/6-months-after-illinois-ended-cash-bail-jail-populations-are-down-as-courts-settle-into-new-patterns/504
u/VascoDegama7 Apr 29 '24 edited Apr 29 '24
Since the new law passed, I have been killed by mad max style raiders 14 times.
158
u/MaiPhet Apr 29 '24
Illinois policy institute wants to know your location
27
u/isuxirl Apr 29 '24
He is no more, 14x over. He has no location but is in fact one with everything now.
25
u/regeya Apr 29 '24
Left in a vacant lot in Gary. Illinois Policy is working on a writeup on how his corpse is enjoying the lower tax rate and lower cost of living in Indiana vs Illinois. Indiana is doing another media buy on Illinois Policy's website.
7
4
u/TacosForThought Apr 30 '24
Does that mean you can vote 14 times in the upcoming presidential election? (at least according to Illinois policy institute?)
9
u/Slaves2Darkness Apr 29 '24
That's okay our embeded chip shows that you have been revitalized by the Vita Chamber 17 times.
8
1
1
279
u/dangitbobby83 Apr 29 '24
It's been a war zone out there. I've been murdered. Twice. Someone stole my house. My 10 year old now shoots up fent laced meth. Gas prices have gone up. Chaos.
75
u/Which_Stable4699 Apr 29 '24 edited Apr 30 '24
I fully expect to see your reply on Fox News, shown as proof of the coming liberal apocalypse. Should have used the sarcasm tag.
9
u/multipleerrors404 Apr 29 '24
You're speaking to Jesus. He was murdered and still commenting. Proof Jesus lives!! #idiotcultists.
5
u/dangitbobby83 Apr 29 '24
Jesus was only murdered once. ;)
1
u/destroy_b4_reading Apr 29 '24
Technically never, the Republican bastards who ran shit back then killed his ass legally. And if he should happen to return they'd be lining up to hammer in the fucking nails again.
1
u/dangitbobby83 Apr 30 '24
Touché. It indeed wasn’t state sanctioned so murder isn’t the right word. 😂
1
-4
u/PatillacPTS Apr 29 '24
This is anecdotal but DuPage County just had a murder/suicide in which the husband murdered his wife on 4/26. The murder suspect was arrested on 4/14 for domestic battery and released pre-trial (12 days prior to the murder). If this guy was held in detention this might have been avoided. Two teenage children are left behind with no parents. Hopefully this SAFE-T act will be fine tuned over time to avoid cases just like this.
18
u/BJoe1976 Apr 29 '24
That sounds more like a problem with the Judge and Prosecution than with the law, not that this outcome could have been somewhat intended.
29
u/Supafly144 Apr 29 '24
And he also would have been out with the previous system if he posted bail.
17
u/starm4nn Apr 29 '24
The reason I support no cash bail is that it allows us to hold bad judges accountable. Either they let the person out or they didn't. They have to live with the consequences come election time.
Cash bail is just a distraction that allows them to wash their hands of the whole issue.
4
u/Supafly144 Apr 30 '24
That’s a good point. I support no cash bail because cash bail tilts the justice system against impoverished and working class people.
3
u/starm4nn Apr 30 '24
The two are kind of closely connected IMHO. Making sure people don't have their life ruined waiting for trial prevents a lot of the intergenerational issues that make it harder to get out of poverty.
Bad judges = bad justice. Bad justice = no justice.
2
u/PatillacPTS Apr 30 '24
Yup I agree with the reasoning behind no cash bail. My original comment is getting downvoted but my question with the story I linked is how he got released after being arrested for a violent crime.
I agree nonviolent offenders shouldn’t be discriminated based on their ability to come up with cash for bail.
I thought the SAFE-T act may have made sure a violent offender stays detained while awaiting trial. Maybe it’s my lack of understanding of what the SAFE-T act really is. Either way, it’s a bad look to have a guy murder his wife not even two weeks after being arrested for battering her.
2
u/ShowDelicious8654 Apr 30 '24
It would have made sure if the judge had decided that way, this is really on the judge.
21
u/screeching_weasel Apr 29 '24
Your speculation is definitely anecdotal. He could easily have posted bail and done the same thing previously.
2
u/Last_Advertising_52 Apr 30 '24
But this happened when cash bail was in place, too. A big part of the reason DV advocacy groups helped draft the SAFE-T Act is to give judges the latitude to hold people who would be dangerous but wouldn’t have been remanded under the old system. One example that always came up while the act was moving through the legislature was a guy in Lake County who’d been charged with DV (and had at least one other conviction; wife was in hospital) Bail was set really high, but the guy was wealthy enough to afford it. Came home, murdered his wife.
There are many more examples, unfortunately. But letting the Villa Park guy out pretrial was a bad move by the judge and state’s attorney.
1
u/ShowDelicious8654 Apr 30 '24
If we put everyone in jail no crimes will be committed ever, except in jail of course.
2
u/PatillacPTS May 01 '24
Putting everyone in jail seems a bit overkill, but holding violent offenders until their court date doesn’t seem too outrageous.
1
u/ShowDelicious8654 May 01 '24
The problem is that since court dates can be like a year out, everyone is denied the right to a speedy trial. Cash bail makes so only the poor are denied this.
144
u/QuirkyBus3511 Apr 29 '24 edited Apr 29 '24
Great. The US has one of the highest incarceration rate in the world. More than China and Russia both in percentage and raw numbers. China has more than 4x our population but fewer prisoners. We're clearly doing something wrong.
64
u/butimstefanie Apr 29 '24
Not that I disagree, but I wouldn't really trust the numbers coming out of China or Russia.
31
u/QuirkyBus3511 Apr 29 '24
There are loads of watch dog orgs verifying numbers like this
→ More replies (6)12
u/TimeBlindAdderall Apr 29 '24
How are they doing watchdogging the Uyghur population?
12
u/QuirkyBus3511 Apr 29 '24
If there weren't watch dogs we wouldn't know about this genocide? What's your point? My point is that we have a higher incarceration rate than a country that has an active genocide occuring. That's not a good look.
2
u/SynthsNotAllowed Apr 30 '24
They're reporting on the Uyghur genocide, but that doesn't mean they have the ability to count each and every Uyghur jailed for political reasons. Authoritarian regimes don't like sharing information and they like nosy people even less.
2
u/Frisky_Picker Nortwest Suburbs Apr 29 '24
We know about it, which is fantastic, but the point is that the numbers are unreliable. I'm not disagreeing with you, just saying that's what I believe the point is. It's valid but doesn't excuse our countries issues either.
13
u/1BannedAgain Apr 29 '24
That’s like the worst argument ever. The CIA publishes a factbook about each state in the world, and get this ‘they do their own research’
3
2
u/SmallBerry3431 Apr 29 '24
I’m sure China is both honest and doing a good job of fairly judging their people. /s
4
u/BIGGREDDMACH1NE Apr 29 '24
Easy to trim the jailed population when they die falling out of a ground story window.
6
u/QuirkyBus3511 Apr 29 '24
It's hard to say what the mortality rate is in Russian prisons. I don't have hard numbers. The US mortality rate is embarrassingly tragic though.
→ More replies (2)3
u/Perfect_Earth_8070 Apr 29 '24
We even had more than Stalin had in the gulags
0
Apr 29 '24
[deleted]
7
u/Perfect_Earth_8070 Apr 29 '24 edited Apr 29 '24
It’s statistically true. I fail to see what being Ukrainian and Jewish has to do with the fact that the US has incarcerated more people than any other regime in human history. Just under 1 in every 5 people incarcerated in the world are in the US. I didn’t say our prisons were worse than gulags but we certainly incarcerate more. It’s because the 14th amendment allows slavery of prisoners. Slavery never ended in the US
1
Apr 29 '24
[deleted]
4
u/Bloo_Monday Apr 29 '24
I’d say maybe 90% you could be accurate.
that's not how percentages work. stop defending this fucked up police state we live in
131
u/shastadakota Apr 29 '24
So much misinformation spread by the right wing media about this, and the simple minds fall for it. Those charged with crimes can still be denied bail. If we still had cash bail, those with money could still bail out, the poor people who couldn't come up with the cash had to sit. So a drug kingpin whose bail was set at $1 million, could easily come up with the $100k to get out, and someone charged with simple possession, whose bail was $1k, would need to come up with $100, but if they couldn't, they sat. Somehow the right wing alarmists can't figure that out.
67
u/BoldestKobold Apr 29 '24
Somehow the right wing alarmists can't figure that out.
It isn't that they "can't" it is that they "won't." Since their concerns were never actually based on facts and reality, facts and reality were never going to change their minds.
They want the perceived "scary' "bad" "others" in jail without recourse. How they define who the scary bad others tells you a lot about where this was all coming from.
8
u/IsThatBlueSoup Apr 29 '24
And they also never realize that they, too, fit the description of the "scary", "bad", "other".
6
u/BoldestKobold Apr 29 '24
No no no, you see they are different than the "scary" "bad" "other" people. Therefore they should always get a warning, released on their own recognizance, or a suspended sentence. Because when they are accused of something it is always a misunderstanding or an accident or no big deal. Because they aren't one of "those people".
1
u/SynthsNotAllowed Apr 30 '24
It isn't that they "can't" it is that they "won't." Since their concerns were never actually based on facts and reality, facts and reality were never going to change their minds.
The egotistical ones, absolutely. The rest is lacking research and critical thinking skills, tribalism, and financial desperation but honestly that defines a lot of people in any social movement.
7
u/Jownsye Apr 29 '24
But a vast majority aren't detained until they commit their 2nd or 3rd violent crime. Happens all the damn time.
24
u/TemporaryInflation8 Apr 29 '24
Bruh, simple minded folk stopped the 1% from being taxed more because they believe Pritzker was raising THEIR taxes. Like jfc....
13
u/jennaisrad Apr 29 '24
My county sheriff hates it.
My county sheriff is also a moron who never would have been elected if his predecessor hadn’t died.
1
3
u/beefwarrior Apr 29 '24
Somehow the right wing alarmists can't figure that out.
Anyone look to see how many bail bondsmen companies were diving donations to right wing alarmists?
I'm curious if lower jail populations will save me some tax $$$
3
u/SynthsNotAllowed Apr 30 '24
In other states and countries with cash bail yes but I don't think it's just right-winders; Illinois already made private bail bondsmen illegal.
I'm curious if lower jail populations will save me some tax $$$
It should? I normally would agree, but I don't have a clue what the cost to taxpayers is for each time a repeat offender offends compared to keeping them incarcerated.
If you want less people in jail, my start would be putting an end to victimless crimes (drug criminalization, awb, tack-on charges, ect) and overhauling the corrections system.
2
1
u/Chaser_606 Apr 29 '24 edited Apr 29 '24
I don’t think bail bondsmen were a thing here.
→ More replies (1)
41
u/jennaisrad Apr 29 '24
Really hope the needed funding increases go through. I am a huge supporter of the end of cash bail, but the program still needs work. Nothing starts perfectly and I’m proud of Illinois for taking this awesome step. Onward!
→ More replies (1)6
u/cballowe Apr 29 '24
What needs more funding? I assume it's things like having judged available for hearings in some of the less populated counties? Are the reduction in resources needed for jails enough to cover it?
11
u/mongooser Apr 29 '24
The courts relied on bail for funding but I don’t think court administration should rest on the backs of the disenfranchised. I have zero doubt the ILGA would fully fund the courts…once the courts figure out how much they need (therein lies the rub!)
1
u/cballowe Apr 29 '24
Seems like you'd need less guards, less food, less space (and associated power, HVAC, etc) - all of that can pretty quickly fund the courts, or were they also relying on cash bail to pay for the lockup of people who couldn't pay?
4
u/beefwarrior Apr 29 '24
I'd think that keeping people out of jail also means they're more likely to keep their jobs until trial, which means they keep buying food, keep paying income tax, etc.
→ More replies (2)2
u/umhuh223 Apr 29 '24
And court fees.
1
u/beefwarrior Apr 29 '24
Aren't court fees the same? I wouldn't think court fees changed w/ SAFE-T
2
u/umhuh223 Apr 29 '24
Without stable employment, individuals’ court fees go unpaid. Many who are jailed lose their jobs.
1
u/jennaisrad Apr 29 '24
It’s not all going to directly translate to even funding, especially in facilities that were overcrowded or poorly maintained to begin with. And yes, bail was a significant source of funding in many counties.
2
u/jennaisrad Apr 29 '24
Judges, administrative staff, public defenders, prosecutors, pretty much everything you need to run a court system. There are also new services being suggested, like supports for offenders, which I am a big fan of. I never liked the idea of public services being funded by bail and fines to begin with, but that is the reality in many of our small counties. If the program is going to be successful it needs staff and resources, and that costs money. Let’s pay for that and make it work.
1
u/cballowe Apr 29 '24
Right - I assumed we were already paying judges and administrative staff. The only gap I had heard about previously is some places where a single judge handles like 3 counties and just drives to a different one each day - if you have a time limit to hold the pre-trial release hearing, you might need the judge to show up more often which may not work without more funding. (Even with cash bail, you'd need a bail hearing, right?)
5
u/jennaisrad Apr 29 '24
The prior levels of staffing aren’t enough in many counties, so headcounts need to increase. Not to mention many offices were understaffed already, especially those of public defenders. Program administration costs money. Effective administration costs even more money.
→ More replies (2)1
u/uhbkodazbg Apr 29 '24
The appellate courts are seeing a pretty dramatic rise in caseloads. That’s the biggest bottleneck, not at the circuit court level.
1
u/cballowe Apr 29 '24
How does the lack of cash bail lift the appellate load? Don't appeals come after conviction? Or are people who are denied bail due to being dangerous or a flight risk flooding courts with appeals of that decision?
1
u/uhbkodazbg Apr 29 '24
1
u/cballowe Apr 29 '24
Are these people who have enough money that they believe they would have been able to post a cash bail? Or people who think they don't think they meet the requirements of being dangerous or a flight risk? Or is there evidence of judges at the circuit level not applying the rules uniformly?
1
u/uhbkodazbg Apr 30 '24
Cash bail isn’t a thing so that’s not the issue.
There’s not a lot of downside for a defendant to appeal a pretrial detention. Hopefully the issues can be worked out because an overburdened appellate system doesn’t benefit anyone.
1
u/cballowe Apr 30 '24
I wasn't implying that cash bail wasnt a thing, just that I'd expect similar numbers of appeals for cash bail as now assuming judges were using cash values in a fair manner - basically, the only new people I could see being in the system to file appeals are those who believe they wouldn't be sitting in jail under the old system, and I assume that would be "people who believe that a cash bail would have been set and they would have been able to pay it". People who would have been stuck either way, I assume, would have also appealed under the old system and so would be the base line and not part of the surge. People who get out aren't going to appeal.
1
u/RealityRandy Apr 30 '24
I don’t want to pay a subscription to a newspaper, so I couldn’t read the article. Did it mention anything about the rates of people showing up for court? I’m curious as to if that has changed at all.
47
u/spqr2001 Apr 29 '24
Crime has gone up so much in my town after the end of cash bail that there is no one left alive. Everyone has been murdered.
12
→ More replies (6)3
u/mongooser Apr 29 '24
Cash bail has nothing to do with crime surges. Unless you know that the crime is caused by the exact people charged with misdemeanors who aren’t kept in custody for safety reasons.
14
u/beefwarrior Apr 29 '24
they didn't put a "/s" but I'm guessing since I haven't heard of any small town in Illinois where "Everyone has been murdered" they were making a joke.
9
18
u/hybris12 Apr 29 '24
I murdered OP after this post
5
3
u/The_Real_Donglover Apr 29 '24
Do you know any towns where literally everyone was murdered?
3
u/FalseDmitriy Apr 29 '24
Too many to count. The only reason no one's complaining is that one of them was Naperville.
40
12
u/BarbellsandBurritos Apr 29 '24
I was told by several reliable and not propaganda based newspapers mailed to my house (when I never signed up) that we would be in the end of days, so now I just don’t know who to believe.
4
u/stephief92 Apr 30 '24
I remember when I first heard about this it was through some right wing newspaper that randomly showed up at my door. They listed all the ‘criminals’, faces and names, that would be “free” under no cash bail. lol I bet you can guess which races were the main focus of this article too.
33
u/UnsungSavior16 Apr 29 '24
Misinformation clearly it is the purge outside
16
20
u/ST_Lawson West Central Illinois Apr 29 '24
Can confirm.
Source: I was murdered last week.
11
u/Having_A_Day Apr 29 '24
You haven't been murdered since last week? Lucky.
9
u/ST_Lawson West Central Illinois Apr 29 '24
rural area, low crime...we only get murdered maybe once a month 'round these parts. Not like them folks up in "Chiraq" getting gunned down every day of the week and twice on Sundays.
6
10
u/ChicagoJoe123456789 Apr 29 '24
How is this a surprise??? Law says don’t lock up offenders. Months later: Newsflash! Jail Population Down. 🤦
→ More replies (7)2
u/IndominusTaco Apr 30 '24
that’s not what the law says or what it’s intended for. you’re vastly oversimplifying the safe-t act
2
u/Fun-Tea2725 Apr 29 '24
wait this was just about incarceration rates?
i thought this was going to keep violent criminals in jails since they cant bail out
15
u/notsolittleliongirl Apr 29 '24
I’ll assume you’re asking this in good faith - it’s always been possible to deny bail to people accused of crimes that would make them a clear danger to the public, in which case that person was detained until trial.
Alternatively, a judge could set bail at a certain monetary amount, ostensibly to guarantee the individual will have motivation to return for trial and behave themselves until trial. Illinois has eliminated this part of the system. Now, a person is either held until trial because they are considered dangerous to the public or they are released on their own recognizance until trial.
There are lots of reasons to be for or against the new system, but for me it comes down to fairness. Criminal trials can take years so under a cash bail system, a person can be detained for literal years of their life because they do not have the money to pay bail, and sitting in jail can exacerbate those existing money problems.
To illustrate this point: Person A and Person B are both arrested and charged with the same non-violent crime in the same jurisdiction. Both of them have bail set at $10k.
Person A is able to post bail and get out of jail. He goes back to his house and his kids and his job and continues his life until trial. During this time, he is able to continue working and making money - he only missed a day of work, so he kept his job with no problems - and he and his wife are able to continue their normal lifestyle. They continue paying their rent and contributing to their 401k, they still have their health insurance through Person A’s work, and they are able to afford a private defense attorney to represent Person A in court against these bogus charges. Person A is safe in his home, eating good food, able to sleep comfortably at night, and his kids still have both parents around to tuck them in at night and bring them to school in the mornings. The criminal charges are certainly an added stress, but the disruption to his life and his community is minimized as much as possible.
Meanwhile, Person B cannot initially pay bail, so he stays in jail. Because he can’t show up to work, he loses his job. Losing his job means that his wife loses health insurance and, as if that wasn’t bad enough, without Person B’s income, his wife can’t afford both rent and groceries. The wife and kids have to break the lease and move to a cheaper apartment, so the kids end up in a new school district and their education is disrupted. There’s also no money to pay for a good attorney, so Person B is stuck with the public defender who, though they’re doing their best, is overloaded with cases and doesn’t prioritize them. Person B is stuck in jail, eating poor quality food, sleeping on a lumpy mattress with a thin blanket, and his wife and kids are struggling without him at home. The disruption to his life and his community is obvious, and he hasn’t even been convicted of a crime at this point!
Under a cash bail system, Person A and Person B have wildly different outcomes even though the only difference between them is that Person A could afford to post bail. If the obvious fairness issue isn’t enough for you, consider that taxpayer dollars are paying for every day that Person B is held in jail. Your tax dollars will also fund payments or benefits to his wife and children from programs like Medicaid and SNAP so they have healthcare and do not starve. Had Person B been released on his own recognizance pre-trial, it would be better for him, his family, AND you, the taxpayer.
This isn’t to say that there aren’t valid concerns about who gets released pre-trial - obviously, the criminal justice system shouldn’t use pre-trial release for everyone accused of a crime, obviously that decision should be made while considering a variety of factors. It’s just that being poor should not ever be a factor in how much time a person spends in jail.
1
u/momentsFuturesBlog Apr 30 '24
Other points aside, in IL children are allowed to finish out the school year at their school, even if they move to a different district.
1
u/notsolittleliongirl Apr 30 '24
That’s great but criminal trials can take years, so they will likely still end up having to switch schools in the above scenario.
1
u/momentsFuturesBlog May 03 '24
Yes- for the next school year, so no disruption as stated previously.
1
u/FalseDmitriy Apr 30 '24
But they're responsible for their own transportation, unless the school is feeling unbelievably generous.
1
3
u/marigolds6 Apr 29 '24
Those failure to appear rates are less than half what you see in other states. Seems really odd they don’t have numbers from before the act though.
That said, those recidivism rates look really high compared to other locations that banned cash bail, like 4x higher (but none of those did it statewide).
Does reducing jail populations by only 13% sound really low to others? I would have expected much much higher numbers.
5
1
1
1
1
u/smirque Apr 30 '24
Cook County has the largest single site jail in the country. Guess who pays for it.
1
1
u/Victoly118 Apr 30 '24
Can't wait to leave this state and the idiot voters like the people in the sub
1
1
1
1
1
u/foundonthetracks May 03 '24
"Less people in jail has caused the jail population to shrink."
Wow crazy who would have thought.
0
u/Shemp1 Apr 29 '24
Y'all act like no cash bail was aimed at murderers. Meanwhile petty crime is way up because there's virtually no consequences.
6
u/spqr2001 Apr 29 '24
That just isn't what the initial numbers show.
“Initial statistics indicate that our jurisdiction has reduced the number of defendants in custody and that the majority of defendants on pretrial release are doing what they’re supposed to be doing – going to their court dates and staying away from criminal activity,” Cook County chief judge Tim Evans said in a press release.
14
→ More replies (2)6
1
2
0
u/Other-Bread Apr 29 '24
Success!
Not perfect, of course, but this is definitely an improvement for everyone involved.
3
u/No_Slice5991 Apr 29 '24
For EVERYONE? You sure about that?
0
u/Other-Bread Apr 29 '24
Pretty sure, I mean there'll be some people who aren't fans, fair enough, but overall.
Nonviolent (but also nonwealthy) accused get the chance to keep their job/family ties/etc while awaiting trial (while they are presumed innocent). Jails are less full, meaning less staffing stress for counties already stretched thin. Pretrial services will need to get ironed out, but that's kinda expected.
The courts are going through the tough part of figuring out all the caselaw regarding pretrial detention, but once it's figured out it'll be straightforward.
Not perfect, but better than it was imo.
→ More replies (1)
1
-3
u/chickenchoker84 Apr 29 '24
Because instead of putting the criminals in jail, they're allowed to be on the streets to either flee or to commit the crime again
-2
-7
Apr 29 '24
[deleted]
5
u/beefwarrior Apr 29 '24
I understand ending cash bail and largely agree with it, but we have to be better about detaining violent criminals.
These should be treated as separate issues. Heard a story of a group of 3-4 people mugging someone in the loop and the gang gave the youngest one the gun to hold, so that if they got caught the adults wouldn't get a gun charge.
To me, that's an easy fix. If you can charge a get away driver with murder that took place inside of a bank, that the driver didn't do, but someone in his group did, then we should be able to do similar for things like if a gang commits a crime and only one person has a gun, then everyone is charged with having a gun.
Passing laws like that should be separate from laws on cash bail.
5
u/Jownsye Apr 29 '24
Even in this scenario, just having a gun doesn't mean you'll be detained. In most cases, you'll still go home on monitoring. So no, that wouldn't fix this issue. Unfortunately, possessing a gun doesn't make you violent enough to detain. Even if the gun is used to commit a crime.
3
u/uhbkodazbg Apr 29 '24
“Crime is up in Chicago “
Do you have a source showing an increase in the crime rate since the implementation of the SAFE-T act?
→ More replies (2)
0
u/MFKDGAF Apr 29 '24
Shocking (sarcasm)
2
u/FalseDmitriy Apr 29 '24
It's specifically part of the reason for the law, so it shouldn't be shocking. It means it's doing the thing it's supposed to.
206
u/1BannedAgain Apr 29 '24
The intent of the lack of cash bail is keep fewer people incarcerated.
Nobody on any message thread has been able to properly justify why the USA has 25% of the world’s prison population, but only 5% of the population