Social justice warriors B. Nicole Triplett and Shanequa Levin promised systemic change as a result of New York State’s recent bail reform, while state Assemblyman Ed Ra and NCPD’s Edward J. Perkins Jr. expressed concern for public safety in light of the new legislation.
At a community forum last Thursday at the Unitarian Universalist Congregation at Shelter Rock in Manhasset hosted by Blank Slate Media, Triplett, policy counsel for the NYCLU, and Levin, co-founder of the Long Island Black Alliance, rallied behind recently enacted laws that they said will address racial and economic discrimination entrenched in the U.S. judicial system.
The new legislation, which passed in April 2019 and went into effect on Jan. 1, eliminates pretrial detention and monetary bail conditions for most misdemeanors and nonviolent felonies.
Triplett stated that the majority of those who were held on bail pretrial under the old legislation were there on misdemeanors with bail set at or below $,2500, which she said disproves common misconceptions. She added that those held in jail because they could not afford to post bail were overwhelmingly black or Latinx.
The imposition of cash bail amounts to criminalization of poverty, Triplett said. The old legislation allowing judges to set bail for misdemeanors and nonviolent felonies necessitated legal change addressing deep-rooted racial and economic disparities.
“It’s not ‘you’re innocent until you can afford to cash bail,’” agreed Levin. “It’s ‘innocent until proven guilty.’”
She pointed out that innocent people often end up in jail. Often, they cannot afford to pay bail, and therefore they remain in jail where they are unable to earn an income and support their families. In some cases, this means that their children end up in the foster system.
Many who oppose the reforms worry that defendants will commit more crimes after being released. Ra argued that some offenses that he considers “violent” are now exempt under the new legislation, which puts communities at risk.
“In my opinion, robbery is always a violent crime,” echoed Perkins, vice president of the NCPD Superior Officers Association. Robbery is now exempt from cash bail in most cases.
Perkins said that there has been an uptick in crime since the reform went into effect. He gave the often-cited example of a man accused of robbing Manhattan banks who, upon release, proceeded to rob a Chase bank branch in Brooklyn this past January.
However, Perkins admitted, “There’s not enough time to really analyze how much crime is going up . . . Is it a trend? No.”
Levin argued that the media only reports on the few cases in which people who have released pretrial commit a crime.
“You don’t hear, ‘there were a thousand people released, and only two committed a crime,’ we hear, ‘two people committed a crime,’” said Levin.
The new legislation eliminates a judge’s discretion in determining whether or not a defendant poses a credible risk to themself or others. Judges can take risk of flight into consideration, but must otherwise order the least restrictive conditions necessary.
Ra objected to the limits on judges’ ability to exercise discretion. He said that the bill was passed in the middle of the night, suggesting that curbing judicial discretion to this extent was a spur-of-the-moment decision that legislators would regret.
Levin pointed to the racial bias of judges. She stated that when a black person approaches the bench, a judge will view and treat them differently, consciously or unconsciously.
“When we give [judges] more discretion, we’re giving them more discretion to implement their bias,” said Levin. “Let’s just stick to the law.”
Ra said that we play a role in selecting our judges, and therefore they can be removed if they show bias.
Levin argued that there is very little information available on judges. We are usually unaware of judges’ records unless the media has reason to report on it, she said.
The question of “risk assessment” tests has repeatedly come up since the legislation was passed.
Triplett said that algorithms, not judicial discretion, are often used to determine whether or not a defendant is likely to commit a crime if released. These risk assessment algorithms factor in race, due to the systemic inequalities that lead people of color to be arrested at higher rates.
Ra stated that victims are now in greater danger, regardless of race or income.
“We can talk about racial disparities and income disparities, but… .people of different backgrounds can be victims as well,” said Ra.
Perkins surmised that victims were in no more danger now than before the laws took effect.
“Intimidation has always been there,” he said.
The new legislation also limits the pretrial discovery period. The information must now be turned over to the defense within 15 days of indictment.
Ra agreed that it was necessary to revisit the pretrial discovery period. He said that under the old legislation, the defense would often receive information on the eve of the trial. However, he voiced concern that we swung the pendulum too far the other way. Fifteen days, he argued, is not enough time for prosecutors to compile data.
The pretrial discovery period is the phase in which the defendant obtains evidence regarding the case.
Perkins objected to the newly constricted discovery period on the grounds that 15 days is not enough time to complete scientific processes that are often involved in presenting evidence, such as sending DNA samples to a lab.
Triplett stated that she at first questioned the 15 day period as well. However, she said, due to New York’s incredibly high wrongful conviction record, she believes that 15 days is appropriate.
“Money should not be the determinant of liberty,” asserted Triplett.
