Are there existing protocols/precedents within the judicial for deciding who would be eligible, and not be a risk to the public?
My first thought was that politicians/judges/etc will be afraid to be seen as "soft on crime", or, "releasing murderers and rapists," etc. In other words, that the social and political aspects of Promise would be the most challenging part.
Thank you. Every jurisdiction has their own protocol. Bail is usually set based on a bail schedule. In CA, every county has their own bail schedule. The judge can then listen to arguments to either increase or decrease the bail amount based on different factors around whether they will be a flight risk and whether they will be a danger to the community. Once a bail is set, most people who have money bail out. Those that don't sit in jail until their case is resolved. In many counties, courts do have the option of releasing someone on their own recognizance or with some type of supervision. New laws like In re Humprey (a recent decision out of SF) is changing the way that courts can set bail.
Are there existing protocols/precedents within the judicial for deciding who would be eligible, and not be a risk to the public?
My first thought was that politicians/judges/etc will be afraid to be seen as "soft on crime", or, "releasing murderers and rapists," etc. In other words, that the social and political aspects of Promise would be the most challenging part.