Los Angeles Court Officials Claim New ‘Zero-Bail’ System Working – So Far

Via Public Domain Pictures
Public Domain

By The Vanguard Staff

LOS ANGELES, CA – Frontline court officials are claiming the controversial zero-bail system that began in Los Angeles County in early October appears to be working, according to a new report from ABC News here this week.

“Those who present a risk are being held based on risk, and not based on whether they have access to money,” said LA County Presiding Judge Samantha Jessner in an ABC interview about the system, where people can be cited and released almost immediately. 

Officials said re-arrests of those released without bail are “less than three percent. Out of 5,113 bookings this month, 40 percent covered crimes under the old bail system and 27 percent went before a magistrate.”

David Slayton, the Clerk of Court for Los Angeles, told ABC, “It does appear when they’re using it that it’s in cases where there is an enhanced risk, our magistrates have found that as well. So I think that part of the thing is to make sure that individuals know that it’s available.”

Doubters in and around law enforcement aren’t convinced, and former L.A. County Sheriff Jim McDonnell said, “Three weeks of data is interesting, certainly, but I think to be fair, we need a lot more data than that to make public policy.”

And then, ABC reported, there is a lawsuit filed by a dozen cities in Los Angeles County to stop the new system.

Still with no court date yet, the lawsuit was transferred from Los Angeles County to Orange County Superior Court.  

“The zero-bail policy jeopardizes the well-being of our West Covina residents and businesses, and is a significant threat to the kind of law and order that every city deserves. As leaders, it is our duty to voice our dissent strongly against policies that threaten West Covina’s public safety,” West Covina Mayor Rosario Diaz said in a statement.

“These 12 cities that sued don’t normally do that kind of behavior, so I think the fact that they’re weighing in with substantial concern over this procedure is worthy of a lot of thought in moving forward with this,” McDonnell added.

About The Author

Disclaimer: the views expressed by guest writers are strictly those of the author and may not reflect the views of the Vanguard, its editor, or its editorial board.

Related posts

Leave a Reply

X Close

Newsletter Sign-Up

X Close

Monthly Subscriber Sign-Up

Enter the maximum amount you want to pay each month
$ USD
Sign up for