Pretrial Risk Assessment Tools Used For Setting Bail Not Working As Planned
Pretrial risk assessment tools used for setting bail bonds aren’t working as well as planned. Many legal scholars are taking note of possible flaws in currently-used pretrial risk assessment tools, with a focus on metrics that may be overly broad or fail to meet the goal of identifying defendants who represent a higher risk demographic. Inaccuracies in some of these formulas have been highlighted, lending credibility to the notion that actuarial pretrial risk assessment tools might be falling short of properly addressing real threat risks. Now, professionals around the legal and bail bonds industry are re-examining the criteria used in pretrial risk assessments, as well as how they are applied to better locate defendants who pose a higher risk of rearrest or failure to appear. The large number of variables involved in these formulas makes it absolutely critical to maintain only the highest degree of accuracy, and apply them in the proper way to achieve results that can be repeated and scaled across the judiciary.
The previous subjective and qualitative assessments used throughout the 70’s relied solely upon a judge’s opinion and professional experience to decide whether bail should be granted, only later to be deemed unreliable because of inconsistencies among judges. This led to the implementation of empirical models, such as structured pretrial risk assessment tools, that use various factors about the defendant to conclude whether they are suitable for bail. Today, few could imagine having their personal credit score based solely upon the opinion of a single financial lender, but that’s exactly how loans were issued prior to the adoption of impartial scoring systems like FICO in the late 80’s and early 90’s. Risk assessment tools now demand a similar evolution to ensure consistency and impartiality throughout the bail-granting process, though as of today, we continue to lack the consensus models so prevalent throughout the world of credit lending.
The Impact of Using Pretrial Risk Assessment Tools to Determine Bail Bonds
The impact of this is that many of the metrics used for granting bail, such as prior arrest records, may be overly broad and fail to appropriately or fairly identify cases of threats to the community and flight risks. In other scenarios, dangerous criminals may be wrongly released and go on to commit additional violations of the law or threaten the safety of law-abiding citizens. If flaws persist in our pretrial risk assessment tools or how they are applied, we are likely to witness these errors magnified through faulty rulings and unforeseen consequences Therefore, to fully understand the role that pretrial risk assessment tools ought to play in the future of bail decisions, we must first identify the two main approaches when calculating these assessments and how they differentiate from one another.
Estimating The Likelihood of Rearrest or Failure To Appear
The overall goal of pretrial risk assessment tools is to estimate the likelihood of a defendant to face either rearrest or a failure to appear. The two underlying theories driving these assessment tools include those centered upon predictive validity and those focused around the impact on decision-making. Predictive validity has a more robust field of research behind it, and has delivered the lowest rates of failure to appear and rearrest among all pretrial risk assessment tools. However, even the best pretrial assessment tools can be vulnerable to failure unless they are correctly implemented. While pretrial risk assessment tools can help manage risk, they are no substitute for an independent decision, leaving many to demand that any conditions set for release be based solely upon improving a defendant’s likelihood to appear in court with no new arrests.
The purpose of pretrial risk assessment tools should not be to completely replace independent judicial decision-making, but rather to facilitate such determinations by allowing judges and jurors to make more informed rulings. Using risk assessments accurately means taking into account any risk factors and protective factors involved to develop a solid estimation about how likely a given outcome is to occur. Through basing an assessment on objective evidence and empirical reasoning, judges are far more likely to minimize the potential for missed court dates or rearrests. There will always be a degree of uncertainty involved in any release, but having solid parameters in place to narrow-down high-risk situations can help to produce the best possibility for a successful outcome.
Southern Bail Bonds Dallas believes that when correctly understood and properly applied, pretrial risk assessment tools, in conjunction with using a judge’s experience and expertise, can be a significant way to lessen risk and make better choices regarding bail release. That being said, there are still many inconsistencies and failures that need to be addressed when it comes to pretrial risk assessment tools. While people who come from underprivileged communities may show a statistically higher likelihood of rearrest, it would be unfair to hold each individual from these communities to the standard outlined by this statistic. Instead, we must look beyond the broad demographic categories, into specific behavioral patterns or clear indications that can help pin-point threats for fairer and more accurate decision-making. Continuing to progress toward this goal and establish clear principles and standards for the way pretrial risk assessment tools are applied can have a dramatic positive impact in the realm of justice, if it is fostered with due care and attention.
Need Dallas Bail Bonds?
If you or anyone in your family are in need of Dallas Bail Bonds, Southern Bail Bonds Dallas is ready to assist. Our professional agents help answer your questions and carefully explain the bonding process to you. If your loved one has been given a surety bond we can help you get that bond posted as quickly as possible. Give us a call at 214-372-2500. Our agents are standing by.