OCR Text |
Show AtM HfelOrt by SenatorOrrinHich Bail reform: Considering society's rights too A convicted robber, paroled from the Utah State Penitentiary in December 1980, was rearrested within a month on a charge of selling narcotics. nar-cotics. Despite his record, he was released on bond before his trial on the narcotics charge, only to be arrested again on charges of burglary. Another parolee, arrested on robbery charges, was released before his bail hearing jail officials figured he would be released anyway and they needed the space and within 24 hours he had been arrested again and charged with another robbery. Unfortunately, these aren't unusual cases. Habitual criminals tend to revert back to their oid habits, and free on bail, they tend to commit more crimes. According to two recent studies done in the District of Columbia, 65 percent of those who were out on bail on charges of auto theft were charged with another auto theft while they were out. Overall, 13 percent of those who were released on bail committed another crime while awaiting charges on a previous count. A 1968 study, more disturbingly, showed that 70 percent of those charged with robbery in the nation's capitol committed another robbery While out on bail. These figures become even more, disturbing when considered along with the fact that about half of criminal activity ac-tivity goes unreported, and that only 25 percent of all crimes result in an arrest. In addressing these serious problems, pro-blems, the Bail Reform Act of 1981, sponsored by Sen. Strom Thurmond and cosponsored by myself and several others, corrects a simple wrong required re-quired by the Bail Reform Act of 1966. The 1981 Act, in other words, reforms a reform. The 1966 Act prevents federal judges from considering anything besides an accused criminal's likelihood of showing show-ing up for trial when setting bail. The threat such an individual might pose to society cannot be considered. As a result, most judges, with the good sense to keep dangerous criminals off the sf reet, do so in tehcnical violation of the law, usually by setting unreasonably high bail, which is contrary to the spirit of the Constitution. The major point of the 1981 Act would remove judges from that uncomfortable uncomfor-table position, and allow them to consider con-sider society's safety when deciding whether to give a suspect a chance to go free on bail. The Act is aimed specifically at those who are charged with either a major, flagrant violation, or those with a record of repeated crimes. Ironically, those with criminal records now seem to enjoy the best breaks. With a history of previous convictions, con-victions, they can show off their record of showing up for trial when they were free on bail, thus getting a better chance of going free again. A first time offender would have no such record and thus would be more likely to stay in jail until trial. In addressing these problems, the Hail Reform Act of 1981 is one more atop toward ensuring thnt the rights of law abiding citizens - potential victims of crime -nre considered along wilh the rights of those nui.pected of committing the crime. |