Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Viivusvine t1_iuifewi wrote

Reply to comment by teenytinyvoid in They caught the Brighton Peeping Tom by capnlumps

So since rich rapists can be released back to the public, so should poor rapists? That’s BS. I’m not OK with someone being assaulted because some out-of-touch organization is too hung up over single-issue philosophical purism that they can’t exercise common sense.

You can fight to abolish cash bail AND fight to keep dangerous people off the streets at the same time. Criminal justice reform can only work if it’s done holistically, not incrementally and on an issue-by-issue basis.

The MA Cash Bail fund knew what McClinton was being charged with. He was in fact a REPEAT OFFENDER and that was public record. The fact is that they knew but they didn’t care.

−6

teenytinyvoid t1_iuimd3m wrote

To your first point: yes. Equality for everyone means… even rapists. Sorry, dude. I don’t like it any more than you do. The law applies equally is the concept we’re supposed to be all behind, yeah? I’m not picking and choosing my “I like that this one locks up the poors” when it benefits me.

Because I say it again: if the people using the pretrial risk assessments agreed that he could post bail, meaning he scored lower than a certain number on their 1-6 PRA algorithm, which takes into account prior convictions and flight risk and risk of future violent offenses, then it is NOT on a bail fund to know any better. They (rightfully, in my opinion) see someone who would have freedom but the price tag is too high.

The case you bring up sucks. I’ll give you that. But we can’t point get so hyperfocused on an anomaly when we’re trying to overhaul such a complicated system.

To the rest… I have a spent years researching the horrific coercive nature of our criminal legal system, including cash bail and pretrial detention, and I currently work for a national org supporting reform in the system but honestly, John Oliver does my job better: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xQLqIWbc9VM

10

Viivusvine t1_iujzc4y wrote

Why trust the risk assessment in the first place if the system is broken? McClinton was a Level 3 sex offender by the time the MA Bail Fund covered his release.

How egregious does the crime have to be before the bail fund says that the risk assessment was wrong?

The McClinton case doesn’t deserve to be diminished as a mere “anomaly.” This is a known issue with the MA Bail Fund.

−1