Statement from Illinois Network for Pretrial Justice
Today, the Joliet Police Department and Will County State’s Attorney Jim Glasgow held a press conference regarding 21-gun, drug, burglary, and retail theft-related arrests as part of “Operation Street Sweeper.” During the press conference, State’s Attorney Glasgow shared misleading and some outright untruthful information regarding the Pretrial Fairness Act.
Statement from the Illinois Network for Pretrial Justice:
“We are disappointed but unsurprised to see Will County State’s Attorney Jim Glasgow trying to confuse the public about the Pretrial Fairness Act. From the moment this historic legislation was passed into law, the State’s Attorney has tried to derail and undermine this law aimed at confronting economic and racial injustice. Being untruthful about reforms aimed at addressing mass incarceration makes our communities less safe.
The State’s Attorney’s remarks were nothing more than a retread of the same tired tactics employed over the last several years. While legislators across Illinois were working to make people safer by passing the Pretrial Fairness Act and its trailers, he was fearmongering and pontificating on Fox News where he wrongly predicted that the Pretrial Fairness Act would lead to “jail doors swinging open” and the “end of the days.
During the press conference, State’s Attorney Glasgow called for removing protections for accused people, allowing judges to jail all defendants while awaiting trial, no matter how minuscule the charge. We know precisely what this mentality leads to, because we have seen it before. It is what has driven mass incarceration and previously ensured that hundreds of poor people facing low-level charges were incarcerated in the Will County Jail. We know it led to people pleading guilty not because they committed a crime but because they wanted to go home to their families. We know that it drove racial disparities and tore apart families and communities.
The Pretrial Fairness Act is helping ensure that judges and prosecutors focus their time on cases that involve allegations of violence, rather than deciding that everyone should sit in jail unless they can purchase their freedom.
The reality is that since the Pretrial Fairness Act went into effect, both crime and pretrial incarceration are down. Additionally, millions of dollars in bail money that would have previously been extracted from our state’s most marginalized communities is now staying in those communities, making us all safer.”
Fact-Checking State’s Attorney Glasgow:
During the press conference, State’s Attorney Glasgow said that three of the people arrested were not eligible for pretrial incarceration under the Pretrial Fairness Act. While our Network hasn’t received a full list of everyone charged, we want to stress that this is extremely unlikely. Police referenced people facing gun, burglary and retail theft charges. All of these are detention-eligible unless the retail theft charge was below a Class 3 felony. This would not be the first time an elected official has misrepresented the charges that are detention eligible under reform.
State’s Attorney Glasgow seemingly claimed that one of the individuals who could not be detained on a burglary charge also had a prior conviction for armed robbery and murder.
Ten minutes later, he admitted no such case existed. His attempt at fearmongering is dangerous. People should not be scared into feeling unsafe by lies. And of course, a person with a current burglary charge could be detained if the state showed a risk of willful flight, and if the person is currently under Illinois Department of Corrections supervision after having previously been convicted of murder or any other charge, then they could be detained for violating the conditions of their supervision.
State’s Attorney Glasgow complained that the Pretrial Fairness Act had initially instituted a 90-day speedy trial requirement. The 90-day timeline for trial has been the law for more than two decades for people who are denied pretrial release – it was existing law (see 725 ILCS 5/110-6.1(f)).
Further, State’s Attorney Glasgow failed to mention that it is common practice for both sides of a case to agree to extend these timelines to prepare for trial. The December 2022 Pretrial Fairness Act trailer bill actually increased flexibility for the court to extend the timeline. Now, the court can omit from its tally “any period of delay resulting from a continuance granted at the request of the State with good cause” under the speedy trial statute. What that means is that if the prosecutor has an important reason to delay the trial to obtain evidence or for another purpose a judge deems “good cause,” they will not be subject to the strict 90-day clock.
State’s Attorney Glasgow claimed that the law originally prevented a judge from issuing warrant if someone missed court. While the law was never intended to deny judges the option of issuing a warrant, the language was amended long before the law ever took effect to clarify that point. Glasgow surely knows this but elected to mislead the public anyway.
He also cited New Jersey’s pretrial reforms as a better example of pretrial reform. But Illinois’ court system is fundamentally different from New Jersey’s, which is why our laws are different too. New Jersey has a centralized court and prosecution system where all prosecutors and judges in all counties follow the same rules and standards in determining who to detain. Were we to have a system where everyone could be detained in Illinois, where each States’ Attorney and Judge is individually elected, we’d see wide disparities between counties, with some counties locking up lots of people for minor charges and others not. That’s why the Pretrial Fairness Act includes rules about who can and cannot be detained, so that the same system is used throughout the state.
General Background on the Pretrial Fairness Act
Pretrial Release Upholds Public SafetyThe Pretrial Fairness Act ensures that people are only jailed when necessary to ensure public safety or prevent them from willfully evading prosecution. It is a myth that public safety is negatively impacted by pretrial reform, and it is a myth that more people fail to appear in court after bail reform efforts. The fact is, public safety is not jeopardized by pretrial release—it is jeopardized by pretrial detention. Pretrial incarceration can make people more likely to be arrested in the future, even when they are found not guilty or their cases are dismissed. People incarcerated for as little as 72 hours are 2.5 times more likely to be unemployed one year later, and past incarceration reduces annual income by as much as 40%. Far from creating safety, money bonds criminalize poverty and make it less likely that people who are jailed awaiting trial are able to gain economic stability in the future. A pretrial detention practice that produces these outcomes represents the real threat to the well-being of individuals and communities.People Can Still Be Detained PretrialWhile the Pretrial Fairness Act does eliminate the use of money bond as a means to detain someone and mandates that most arrested individuals are given a chance to succeed on pretrial release, it does not eliminate the court’s ability to jail someone awaiting trial.
Section 110-6.1 of the Pretrial Fairness Act outlines the charges for which an individual can be denied pretrial release and outlines the process by which the state can seek detention. After the state petitions the court for denial of pretrial release, the court may deny release due to a safety threat to any person or persons on the basis of many charges, including violent felonies, all sex-related charges, all domestic violence charges, and most forms of gun-related felonies. The full list is below:
A person can be detained because they pose a threat to the community if they are charged with:
Any charge with a mandatory prison sentence upon conviction.
All forcible felonies (including murder, robbery, residential burglary, carjacking and any other crime that includes the threat or infliction of great bodily harm);
All sex crimes (all forms of criminal sexual assault, criminal sexual abuse, child pornography-related charges, and various charges relating to sexual misconduct with children and human trafficking);
All domestic violence and stalking charges (including misdemeanor and felony domestic battery and violations of orders of protection);
All non-probationable gun-related felonies (including all forms of discharge of a firearm, sale of firearms, and most forms of possession of a firearm).
Various other serious crimes, including threatening a public official, hate crimes, and certain serious DUIs.
A person can also be detained, even if they don’t pose a threat to the community if:They are charged with any Class 3 or greater felony and have a high likelihood of willfully fleeing prosecution.
They were on probation, parole, or pretrial release at the time of the new charge.
More Like This
Source link : http://www.bing.com/news/apiclick.aspx?ref=FexRss&aid=&tid=66df0bdf957a4d3ba0d430d5f4ccc85a&url=https%3A%2F%2Fthetimesweekly.com%2F2024%2F09%2Fillinois-network-for-pretrial-justice-slams-prosecutor-for-misinformation-on-pretrial-fairness-act%2F&c=16283191042612127288&mkt=en-us
Author :
Publish date : 2024-09-09 03:32:00
Copyright for syndicated content belongs to the linked Source.
