http:\/\/media.csosa.gov\/podcast\/audio\/2014\/05\/pretrial-america-pretrial-justice-institute-pretrial-services-d-c-national-award-winner\/<\/a><\/p>\n[Audio Begins]<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 From the nation\u2019s capital this is DC Public Safety. I\u2019m your host Leonard Sipes. Today\u2019s show, ladies and gentlemen, pretrial in America, and a topic that I think has great importance to each and every one of us in the criminal justice system. Cliff Keenan the Director for Pretrial Services for the District of Columbia, he\u2019s here, www.psa.gov. Spike Bradford, he is the \u200eDirector of Communications for the Pretrial Justice Institute, www.pretrial.org. And to Cliff and to Spike, welcome to DC Public Safety.<\/p>\n
Spike Bradford:\u00a0 Thank you, Leonard.<\/p>\n
Cliff Keenan:\u00a0 Glad to be here.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 All right, this is a topic that is misunderstood, this is a topic that I think a lot of people do not have a clear sense. But the bottom line behind the pretrial services movement in the District of Columbia and throughout the country is that the person is innocent until proven guilty. A wide variety of conferences, people came together back in the 60s to establish the fact that unless it\u2019s necessary from a public safety point of view, a person should be released before trial. Am I right or wrong?<\/p>\n
Cliff Keenan:\u00a0 Leonard, I think you\u2019re absolutely right. In fact, the conference you\u2019re referring to was convened by then Attorney General Robert Kennedy, who in May of 1964, so almost 50 years ago, convened judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, scholars, academics to look at the issue of bail in America. And this is what he said on the opening day of that conference. He said, \u201cThere is a special responsibility on all of us here, a special responsibility to represent those who cannot be here, those who are poor, those who are unfortunate. The 1.5 million persons in the US who are accused of crime, who haven\u2019t been yet found guilty, who are yet unable to make bail and serve a time in prison prior to the time that their guilt has even been established; for those people, for those who cannot protect themselves, for those who are unfortunate, we here over the period of the next three days have a special responsibility.\u201d On the last day of that conference this is what he said. And keep in mind, this is Attorney General Robert Kennedy, and this is five months after his brother was assassinated \u2013<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 Right.<\/p>\n
Cliff Keenan:\u00a0 Focusing America\u2019s attention back then on the issue of bail in America. This is what he said, \u201cWhat has been made clear today in the last two days is that our present attitudes towards bail are not only cruel, but really completely illogical. What has been demonstrated here is that usually only one factor determines whether a defendant stays in jail before he comes to trial. That factor is not guilt or innocence, it is not the nature of the crime, it is not the character of the defendant, that factor is simply money. How much money does the defendant have?\u201d<\/p>\n
As a result of that conference, Congress back in 1966 passed the Bail Reform Act, which greatly changed at the federal level and for the District of Columbia the way persons were going to be treated in their pretrial context. They were moving away from money as being the sole determining factor and looking more towards whether or not a person posed a danger either to the community or a flight risk. As a result of the Bail Reform Act, the DC Bail Agency, the precursor to the Pretrial Services Agency, for which I\u2019m now the Director, was created, and we have seen many changes over the years. And here in the District we\u2019re happy to say that money is not a factor in terms of persons who\u2019ve been charged with the crime but not convicted yet. Those persons are not being held at the jail because they don\u2019t have money the way Bobby Kennedy recognized. Those persons are either detained because a judicial officer has found that the person is a flight risk or a danger to the community, or more likely, they\u2019re released on personal recognizance or released to Pretrial Services and we provide the supervision and services that the need.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 And I do want to go over the fact that within the District of Columbia the people who remain arrest free for any crime, 88%, people who remain arrest free for violent crimes, 98%, people who make all scheduled point appearances, all scheduled court appearances, because there are many, 87%. Your statistics indicate that you can provide that constitutional mandate of innocence before guilt, of pretrial based upon dangerousness rather than the ability to post money, and at the same time, making sure that people show up and that they show up arrest free during that period of supervision. So the Pretrial Services Agency in the District of Columbia has proven itself time after time to be certainly one of the premier pretrial services agencies in the country.<\/p>\n
Cliff Keenan:\u00a0 That\u2019s correct. I mean we are unique, because we are a federal law enforcement agency, so we do receive our funding through OMB and from Congress. Unlike many other jurisdictions where either a county or state is responsible for this responsibility, under the DC Revitalization Act of 1997, our function, as well as probation, parole functions, the court functions, those all became part of the federal system. However, what we have found, as you point out, is the system that we have is not only fair to the individual arrestees, i.e. the defendants who are pending trial, but it\u2019s also proven to be safe for the community as well as for the fair administration of justice.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 Spike Bradford, Director of Communications for the Pretrial Justice Institute, you\u2019ve heard Cliff go off on his monologue, which I agree with. I buy into single word.<\/p>\n
Spike Bradford:\u00a0 Absolutely.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 Do you have any response, any reaction?<\/p>\n
Spike Bradford:\u00a0 Well, first of all I mean we know that DC Pretrial is a stellar organization in doing things that so many other jurisdictions across the country are not. And at Pretrial Justice Institute we typically frame the issue as what are the problems in pretrial in America, which, unfortunately, there are many, and what are the solutions. And there are two primary problems as we see them, both of which DC has been able to mostly overcome. The first one is that in jurisdictions across the country most of the detention and release decisions pretrial are based on money.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 Right. Now why is that? Considering everything that Cliff\u2019s just run through, the majority of pretrial releases within the United States are not based upon dangerousness to the community, and not based upon a monetary bail, but in the majority of the country they are. So why is that? Is it the rest of country doesn\u2019t get it?<\/p>\n
Spike Bradford:\u00a0 I mean I wouldn\u2019t say that they don\u2019t get it, they just don\u2019t get it yet, we hope in our work. We have a long history of associating money with pretrial release in this country and, unfortunately, we don\u2019t have a huge bank of research that shows that that works. Really, when we do the research we find that there\u2019s no correlation between the amount of money someone can pay to the court and the risk that they pose either of not coming back to court or being rearrested during the pretrial period. So, so much of the release and detention decision is made on money and not risk, which just has numerous outcomes, you\u2019ve got over 60% of local jails in the country are full of pretrial detainees, those people who\u2019ve been arrested and booked but not convicted of that charge yet. So that\u2019s a lot. I mean that\u2019s over 60% of people in jail who are also associating with convicted people in jail are of a pretrial status. But the converse side of that is that you have high-risk defendants, people who when we do test them score a higher risk of being rearrested or not showing up to the court, they\u2019re getting out.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 Because they can make the monetary bail.<\/p>\n
Spike Bradford:\u00a0 Because they pay their bail. Yeah.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 So then I mean in the District of Columbia we take a look at dangerousness and everybody else is taking a look at the dollar unless there\u2019s a no bail provision?<\/p>\n
Spike Bradford:\u00a0 I wouldn\u2019t say everybody else. I mean there are definitely jurisdictions across the country, some states, some counties that are doing it closer to the way that DC does it. And that\u2019s the way that we\u2019re hoping things are moving across the country is that people are realizing, one, jail is expensive and our jails are full of pretrial detainees, so how can we change that, and two, there\u2019s new science out that shows that so many high-risk defendants are getting out just because they pay their way. And there\u2019s wonderful new research that shows that even a short stay in pretrial detention, one or two days, increases negative outcomes like being rearrested, recidivism, up to two years after your offense is cleared.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 But when we have 98% of people in the District of Columbia who have been charged with violent crimes, they remain arrest free through that process, 98%. I mean that\u2019s basically showing that you can manage these individuals on pretrial and not have them get involved in a lot of crime. Some crimes it\u2019s inevitable. Some of our people who are supervised by us on a pretrial basis or on a parole and probation basis, through my agency Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency, it\u2019s inevitable that some individuals are going to find their way back into the criminal justice system by arrest during their periods of supervision. But this is astounding. 98% arrest free for violent crimes in the District of Columbia. So it can be done, it\u2019s being proven in the District of Columbia. Is it a matter that we are federally funded, Cliff, and we have the resources and we have the staff and we have the ratios? We even have money for treatment. We have money that other pretrial agencies will never have. Is it a matter of money, or is it a matter of philosophy, is it a matter of management, or all three?<\/p>\n
Cliff Keenan:\u00a0 I think it\u2019s all three, but it\u2019s also culture, Len. Many jurisdictions, as Spike alluded to, have been using a money bond schedule probably for generations, and it\u2019s very hard for judges, many of whom in some jurisdictions are elected, so they\u2019re worried about making a decision that a person who he or she releases may end up doing something bad on the outside. Many judges are probably reluctant to move away from a system that they have been using for many, many years. The Unites States and the Philippines, as far as I know, are the only two countries left in the world which still utilize some form of commercial surety. And commercial surety, for those who don\u2019t know it, that\u2019s where if a judge imposes a $5,000 bond and if the person doesn\u2019t have the $5,000 personally they could secure the services of a commercial bond company to put up, usually for 10% of the bond amount, an insurance policy in order to get the person out of jail. So it\u2019s very, very much a commercial activity, which has, again, been in place for many, many years. Our jurisdiction, Kentucky, Colorado, there are number of jurisdictions which are moving away from a straight up bond schedule. But once again, you\u2019re dealing with judges and prosecutors and defense attorneys who are accustomed to doing things the way they\u2019ve always been done and changing that culture along with having the resources to put in place probably contribute to some of the length of time it\u2019s taken to get change.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 There\u2019s a wide variety of organizations out there that have contributed to the pretrial movement since the 1960s. But in essence, it says the standards use the least restrictive conditions of release that reasonable will assure the defendant\u2019s appearance in court and protect public safety. Now, is that a constitutional right to the least restrictive pretrial arrangements? Or it\u2019s obviously not, because we have hundreds of jurisdictions throughout the country being in violation in of the constitution. Where does the constitutionality of pretrial stand for pretrial release?<\/p>\n
Cliff Keenan:\u00a0 Well, the constitutionality, again, I mean at the federal level, that what you just read is basically written into the federal law as well as the DC law. Many jurisdictions, if not most, also have the same language within the statute, which give to the judicial officer who has the responsibility for making that release or detention decision. There should be presumption of starting point that release because of the presumption of innocence should be what is triggered first. Once again though, in many jurisdictions, which do rely upon schedules, if the charge is burglary, the bond schedule which has been put in place by that court system could be $5,000 \u2013<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 Right,<\/p>\n
Cliff Keenan:\u00a0 And the judges don\u2019t look at the individual, they don\u2019t look at the individual\u2019s ties to the community, they don\u2019t look at the individual\u2019s potential risk based upon substance abuse, mental health issues, prior criminal record, doesn\u2019t look at the employment history of the individual. They see the 5,000 dollar amount as being tied to that charge and that\u2019s what they go with.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 So, Spike, you think that this is simply the way that we\u2019ve done business throughout the Unites States for the last couple century and we\u2019re so inculcated with that way of doing business that we can\u2019t see a pretrial release model?<\/p>\n
Spike Bradford:\u00a0 I think that\u2019s a lot of it. I mean a lot of the questions that I get when I start talking about moving away from a money-based release decision are just, \u201cWell, if we don\u2019t charge them money, what do we do?\u201d And the answer to that really is a number of things. We sort of we measure their risk along those two measures. Are they going to come back to court and are they likely to be rearrested pretrial? And then we have a graduated system where really low-risk people can just get out on a promise to return, maybe they get court date reminder via text or e-mail or something like that. Medium risk folks might have supervision or monitoring. They have to someone like Cliff in Cliff\u2019s office. They might have GPS monitoring and ankle bracelet. Really, truly, people who measure to be dangerous, and particularly for violent crime, we support preventive detention. And a lot of states don\u2019t really actually have that statute where you can detain someone without bail. So what they typically do in lieu of that is they just throw out a huge number and hope that that person can\u2019t meet it.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 In essence what we\u2019re saying is, \u201cLet\u2019s judge that individual who\u2019s been arrested based upon his or her dangerousness, let\u2019s not judge that person based upon their ability to put up 10% of the bail amount.\u201d Is that what we\u2019re saying?<\/p>\n
Spike Bradford:\u00a0 Absolutely. And \u2013<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 Well, that seems to be awfully commonsensical.<\/p>\n
Spike Bradford:\u00a0 Well, you would think so, but there really is a tie to money. I think people just really, really are tied to using money, and we want to move that towards the understanding of risk.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 We\u2019re more than halfway through the program talking about pretrial in America. We\u2019re talking to Cliff Keenan, Director of Pretrial Services for the District of Columbia, www.psa.gov, www.psa.gov . We\u2019re also talking to Spike Bradford; he is the \u200eDirector of Communications for the Pretrial Justice Institute, www.pretrial.org, www.pretrial.org. Gentlemen, in most of the conversations I\u2019ve had with individual citizens throughout my 25 years representing correctional agencies it has been, \u201cWhy in the name of God is this person back on the street? He was arrested. I saw him assault Mr. Smith five hours ago and he\u2019s back in the community. Why in the name good God is he back in the community?\u201d And then they pick up the phone and then they call me and then we have to get into a discussion as to what pretrial is and what pretrial is supposed to be. So what do we say to people? I mean the guy\u2019s back in the community five hours later. We saw him assault Mr. Smith down the street, but he\u2019s been released on pretrial. Cliff, how do we justify that to the average person?<\/p>\n
Cliff Keenan:\u00a0 Well, I\u2019m going to ask Spike in a moment to address it, because I know that PJI has actually done some market surveys asking regular people their impressions about pretrial release and the use of bail and risk assessments and that sort of thing. But I know here in DC we have a number of community courts. So we have the community court judges, we have the prosecutor, the defense, and pretrial, and other actors in the criminal justice system go out to community meetings. And that question is often first on the mind of the citizen \u2013<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 Yes.<\/p>\n
Cliff Keenan:\u00a0 Saying, \u201cThis person continues to come back time after time.\u201d<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 Right.<\/p>\n
Cliff Keenan:\u00a0 The most important thing is making sure that citizens understand and appreciate the American criminal justice system, starting with that presumption of innocence. And the judges and the defense attorney and the prosecutors and we at pretrial remind them, \u201cIf you or one of your family members were arrested and charged with an offense, wouldn\u2019t you want that same presumption of innocence? Wouldn\u2019t you want the ability to be able to be free pending the case\u2019s disposition in court in order to be able to help prepare your defense, in order to continue working, to continue caring for your family, without having to worry about putting up thousands of dollars for a cash bond or a surety bond that you may not be able to meet?\u201d And when you put it in that perspective, they say, \u201cWell, I could see it in that situation, but, again, this guy who continues to litter my property \u2013\u201d<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 Right.<\/p>\n
Cliff Keenan:\u00a0 \u201cOr deposit trash.\u201d They don\u2019t have the same tolerance level for that. So I think in a philosophical way most people would agree. But when they\u2019re talking about the recurring nuisance or the frequent flyers we call them here, that\u2019s a separate issue, and I\u2019m not sure that that\u2019s the vast majority of people who\u2019re being held without bond in the jails around the country.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 Cliff, you want to take a shot at what seems to be on every citizen\u2019s mind, the idea of people who just get out time after time after time and come back to the community?<\/p>\n
Spike Bradford:\u00a0 Well, sure. I mean Cliff had mentioned the polling that Pretrial Justice Institute did almost two years ago, and we\u2019re getting ready to do that polling again in this next year. So we talk to just normal people and ask them questions about pretrial and risk and commercial bail bonding and that kind of thing. And what I think was most surprising from those findings were that, yeah, people want dangerous people to stay in jail and people understand we can\u2019t hold everybody in jail. But when you say to them, \u201cWhat do you think about using a risk assessment to measure a defendant\u2019s risk and then base their release on that measure?\u201d They say, \u201cIsn\u2019t that what you\u2019re doing? How are we doing it now? Why aren\u2019t we measuring risk?\u201d They\u2019re really surprised.<\/p>\n
And, again, I think there\u2019s a tendency to associate money with risk, but we know that that doesn\u2019t correlate. So it\u2019s not a really hard sell, once you do the sort of ground level education to people, say, \u201cThis is what we\u2019re doing now. This is what it looks like with risk.\u201d And you get a lot better outcomes and you don\u2019t have our jails full of primarily poor people, low-risk poor defendants who are just there because they can\u2019t afford to get out.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 Our bottom line is to individually assess every person that comes into the criminal justice system and to individually assess that person on a variety of factors, but certainly one of them being the danger to community. If the person presents a clear and present danger to the community there\u2019s no problem in terms of detaining him until trial, but that does not apply to the vast majority of people that come into the criminal justice system. Very few people fall into that clear and present danger category. Am I right or wrong?<\/p>\n
Cliff Keenan:\u00a0 You\u2019re correct. And, again, when we did a very informal analysis last year to try to address this very question, at the time there were 2,300 persons who were detained at the jail and its various facilities, including its halfway houses. Out of that 2,300 we estimated about 300 were true pretrial defendants who had a single charge pending against them. And for the most part those were individuals charged with murder, assault with intent to kill \u2013<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 Right.<\/p>\n
Cliff Keenan:\u00a0 Serious, serious violent offenses.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 Right.<\/p>\n
Cliff Keenan:\u00a0 The rest of the individuals so 2,000 of them were charged with already having been parole violators, they were being held for probation violations, they were multiple offenders, there were things other or they were sentenced, there were other factors holding them. And when you compare that number, so slightly more than 10%, with what PJI statistics show that over 60%, if not more, of jail arrestees around the country are pretrial defendants, that\u2019s astounding, it\u2019s astounding.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 Yes. It is. All right, so the bottom line is if done right it works the vast majority of the times. It\u2019s never going to be perfect. We understand that. We in the criminal justice system understand that it will never be perfect better than anybody else. But the overwhelming majority of the people who are on pretrial throughout the United States do show up for their court appointments. And that\u2019s the whole idea, right, Spike?<\/p>\n
Spike Bradford:\u00a0 Absolutely, absolutely. I mean I think we instantly sort of get an image of an arrestee that\u2019s the worst of the worst, but honestly you or I could be arrested today and the chances are overwhelmingly that we\u2019re going to make our court appointments. We don\u2019t want any more disruption in our lives than possible. One thing I wanted to say about risk assessments, pretrial risk assessments is that what\u2019s exciting right now is there\u2019s a whole bunch of new science about how to do them and what\u2019s important. And the way that they\u2019ve been done and created previously has been consensus based.<\/p>\n
So a bunch of players from a jurisdiction all get around a table, judges, prosecutors, everybody in the system, and they say, \u201cWell, what do you think is important? What are important factors for returning to court or for community safety?\u201d And these people have wealth of experience. That\u2019s fine. But when you sit down and you actually take data from previous cases and you run that and say, \u201cWell, who came back? Who didn\u2019t? Who got rearrested?\u201d Those set of factors from the consensus model towards the evidence-based model are quite different. For example, how long have you been in the community? You would think, well, a stable community person, that makes you more likely to comply.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 Right.<\/p>\n
Spike Bradford:\u00a0 Scientifically, that\u2019s very low on the list. How many kids do you have? Nope, doesn\u2019t really show up statistically \u2013<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 What does show up?<\/p>\n
Spike Bradford:\u00a0 On the list of factors. Sort of there\u2019s a short list of static factors that are the most relevant, and they are. What\u2019s your current charge? Have you been arrested for a violent felony? Have you been convicted of a misdemeanor? How many failure to appear warrants have you had? And how many convictions have you had? And there\u2019s a few more that I can\u2019t recall right off my head. But what\u2019s interesting is that they\u2019re all static factors that most jurisdictions keep data. And you can really just punch it in a computer and get a score. Now that score should be used to inform a decision by a person about what happens to that individual.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 What percentage of defendants, what percentage of jurisdictions are individually assessing defendants as they walk in through the door, do you have a guess?<\/p>\n
Spike Bradford:\u00a0 If I had to guess, I mean it is a very small percentage, I would say 10%. There\u2019re over 3,000 counties in the United States, and we did a survey a few years ago that showed there were 300 pretrial services programs. Now that\u2019s different from using risk, they had a legitimate program. And it\u2019s not just the small percentage that are using risk, there\u2019s even smaller percentage that have a validated risk assessment tool which has gone through a process to really show that it\u2019s reliable and replicateable.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 Cliff, you want to come into the conversation?<\/p>\n
Cliff Keenan:\u00a0 Well, one important thing that I think we need to keep in mind when we\u2019re talking about a validated risk assessment or any risk assessment instrument is the fact that this is a predictive tool, it is not something that will guarantee a person will not fail while on pretrial release. It\u2019s a predictive tool, and many judges, many prosecutors, even though they understand the science associated with having an evidence-based statistically validated risk assessment, still ask the question, \u201cWell, can you assure me, can you promise me this person is not going to screw up if released?\u201d And then answer is no.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 Well, that\u2019s impossible.<\/p>\n
Cliff Keenan:\u00a0 Exactly.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 It is utterly and completely impossible to make a promise like that.<\/p>\n
Cliff Keenan:\u00a0 But there are expectations, and for some jurisdictions, who have relied upon the way of doing business, they\u2019ve always done it, they\u2019re willing to basically go with the way they\u2019ve always done it, because nobody can make a promise or an assurance that would necessarily satisfy them.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 Well, when I take a look at your report, which is up on your website, when I take a look at people who remain arrest free doing pretrial release, and it\u2019s violent crimes in 98%, that\u2019s pretty close too. I guarantee that 98% of the violent remain arrest free doing the period of pretrial release. And that the overwhelming majority close to 87, close to 90%, 87% make all scheduled court appearances. So once again, gentlemen, I ask the eternal question. If we\u2019re doing this in the District of Columbia and we\u2019re doing it well, again, we\u2019re not promising 100% accuracy 100% of the time, that\u2019s impossible to deliver, but if we\u2019re doing it this well and we\u2019re not relying upon monetary bail, why isn\u2019t everybody else throughout the country embracing what it is that we\u2019re doing? There\u2019s got to be a reason.<\/p>\n
Spike Bradford:\u00a0 I think what we\u2019ve got already.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 Tradition.<\/p>\n
Spike Bradford:\u00a0 Tradition, sort of cultural norms. And I think it\u2019s institutionalized. And pretrial reform I think is moving faster than a lot of sort of other institutional reforms, healthcare, education, things like that, where we know there are a group of people with science behind them that have a good direction. It\u2019s just a matter of education, getting out there. Exciting thing that\u2019s happening is Bureau of Justice Assistance and PJI is the initiative coordinator for this project called Smart Pretrial Demonstration Initiative and applications are being accepted now for this pilot program. So they\u2019ll be going to three jurisdictions in the country to sort of set up a model system to get a risk assessment tool going and to use supervision and monitoring as well as some other conditions that are in that program. So we\u2019re pushing out the good model and it\u2019s just going to reach critical mass soon I hope, especially with the increased awareness of over-incarceration and all the money that gets wasted. And we spend over nine billion dollars every year detaining pretrial defendants when a vast majority of those could be supervised in the community.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 We\u2019ve got a minute and a half left. I hear this all the time from everybody within the criminal justice system. It costs millions; tens of millions of dollars to run jails, only put the people who pose a clear and present danger to the community in the jails, everybody else put out under pretrial supervision. That will save cities, counties, states literally billions of dollars over time. Am I right or wrong?<\/p>\n
Cliff Keenan:\u00a0 You are absolutely correct. And the unfortunate thing is it is taking 50 years since the first bail reform conference, but I do applaud Attorney General Eric Holder who three years ago now convened the second bail reform conference, and a lot of the pretrial reform that you\u2019re seeing taking place recently is certainly due to him and the work of the Pretrial Justice Institute in making sure that this stays on everybody\u2019s radar.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 Cliff, you\u2019ve got 30 seconds, you got the final word. What\u2019s your sense of all this, conclusions? I\u2019m sorry, Spike.<\/p>\n
Spike Bradford:\u00a0 Okay. Oh, wow! So, yeah, I mean I would agree with Cliff that the tide is moving in the right direction, it\u2019s been 50 years. We have a group called the Pretrial Justice Working Group along with BJA. It\u2019s over 150 organizations that are all working towards this same goal of moving from money to risk safe effective pretrial systems.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes:\u00a0 All right, gentlemen, I can\u2019t tell you how important this topic is, pretrial in America. Ladies and gentlemen, we\u2019ve had Cliff Keenan the Director for Pretrial Services for the District of Columbia, www.psa.gov, and Spike Bradford, \u200eDirector of Communications for the Pretrial Justice Institute, www.pretrial.org. Ladies and gentlemen, this is DC Public Safety. We appreciate your comments, we even appreciate your criticisms, and we want everybody to have themselves a very pleasant day.<\/p>\n
[Audio Ends]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Welcome to \u201cDC Public Safety\u201d \u2013 Radio and television shows, blog and transcripts on crime, criminal offenders and the criminal justice system. The portal site for \u201cDC Public Safety\u201d is http:\/\/media.csosa.gov. Radio Program available at http:\/\/media.csosa.gov\/podcast\/audio\/2014\/05\/pretrial-america-pretrial-justice-institute-pretrial-services-d-c-national-award-winner\/ [Audio Begins] Len Sipes:\u00a0 From the nation\u2019s capital this is DC Public Safety. I\u2019m your host Leonard Sipes. Today\u2019s […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"nf_dc_page":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[23,15,247,21],"tags":[82,248],"class_list":["post-1148","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-audiopodcast","category-interviewswithpolicymakers","category-pretrial-2","category-whatworks","tag-pretrial","tag-pretrial-in-america","entry"],"aioseo_notices":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/pBoKk-iw","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/media.csosa.gov\/podcast\/transcripts\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1148","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/media.csosa.gov\/podcast\/transcripts\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/media.csosa.gov\/podcast\/transcripts\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/media.csosa.gov\/podcast\/transcripts\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/media.csosa.gov\/podcast\/transcripts\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1148"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/media.csosa.gov\/podcast\/transcripts\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1148\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1149,"href":"https:\/\/media.csosa.gov\/podcast\/transcripts\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1148\/revisions\/1149"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/media.csosa.gov\/podcast\/transcripts\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1148"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/media.csosa.gov\/podcast\/transcripts\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1148"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/media.csosa.gov\/podcast\/transcripts\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1148"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}