You know, that's also potentially letting criminals run free and escape the law.

If you're against that, there should be no bail. Not just enough so the poor can't pay.

I absolutely agree. Bail is a horrendous idea.

This fund is great though.

How so? Because bail is bad, we should bail more people out?

I'm not arguing that releasing possible offenders and adding another crime to the list if they don't go to court is good or bad. I'm arguing that this shouldn't be a money issue. If the option is there, it should be there for everyone in equal cases.

That said, I think releasing them until the court hearing is actually a good thing at least for potential minor offenders.

There's so much wrong with keeping innocent people in a cell until they can prove their innocence.

"You know, that's also potentially letting criminals run free and escape the law."

No more so than anyone else that posts bail...

I'm with steephie - innocent until proven guilty.

I feel like incarceration before court hearings should at least be more like house arrest. Might be better in terms of money too.

In Southern California at least, most minor offenders are already released on their Own Recognizance (OR) at arrest with no bail required. There's simply no space in the jails for them.

Sounds good!
Is that before or after hearing?

If you can't do the time, don't do the crime

No tears here

Unless you have to do time but didn't do a crime.

"If you can't do the time, don't do the crime"

At the risk of stating the obvious, incarceration for want of bail money happens before anyone is convicted of anything.

At the link: "60% of our clients [sic] cases are dismissed. More than half of our clients would have spent time in jail for no reason if the Bail Fund wasn't there with up to $500 plus a non refundable $40 fee."

The toll our justice system exacts from anyone *accused* of a crime is disgusting. That it strikes hardest against those who are most in need is doubly so.

I was initially going to remark that the "Justice" system in the USA is more about select groups making money, eg private prison operators, than it is about delivering the best practical solutions to civil disputes and crime...and expand on that...
However after reading a few other posts, I'm wondering whether one or two contributors are serious or being flippantly "hard asses"... If they're serious then a dissertation on the history of, and principles enshrined in habeus corpus, and innocent until proven, beyond reasonable doubt by a jury of one's peers of being guilty would be a largely wasted exercise.

The bail bond fund mentioned sound more about providing a service more than making money, but can this be said of all bail bond operators ?

In theory, the difference is that any money made goes straight into the fund and none of the people working on it gain a cent from it, but I do wonder what the $40 fee is for then.

Oh I think I misread. The fund has to pay a non-refundable fee of $40?

I'm pretty sure everyone has to pay $40 for the privilege of staying in jail. I don't think it has anything to do with the fund, per se.

Wow, seriously?

"Congrats, you're innocent! Now don't forget to pay us $40. It's the least you could do after we locked you up for no reason."

To be clear, I was under the impression that you had to pay a $40 fee to post bail. I know it's not specifically related to the fund, but obviously they pay that fee in the cases where they post bail.