Submitted by Phil Pavarini Jr. (not verified) on February 15, 2008 - 10:45pm.
After reading the NY Times Article, I couldn't help but wonder if the author knew anything about the surety bail bond industry. First, there should be a distinction made between different bail bonds: Surety Bail Bonds (offered by a private business) and 10% Cash Bail Bonds (offered directly by some courts). Either bond requires a 10% payment to have the defendant released. If you pay 10% to a bail bondsman, that’s non-refundable, but it doesn’t necessarily have to be paid in advance. If you pay 10% directly to the court, in some jurisdictions, that fee can be held by the court to pay any fines or court costs.
How surety bail bonds could possibly discriminate against "poor and middle-class defendants"? As a surety bail bond agent, we often release defendants that haven't even paid our full premium of 10%; if a defendant and indemnitor qualifies, we offer arrangements to make payments on the 10% premium. Without a surety bail bond, most of those defendants would simply sit in jail without being released. If the defendant fails to appear in court, the surety bail bond agent is liable and will make all efforts to find and re-arrest the defendant.
What actually "does nothing for public safety" are the 10% cash bonds offered directly my many local courts. If the defendant is released and fails to appear in court, there is NOBODY LOOKING for the defendant. What the public doesn’t understand is there is no special task force or law enforcement that is actively working on finding and re-arresting the defendant. The only time the defendant would get caught is if they were arrested on ADDITIONAL CHARGES.
Bottom line: Surety bail bondsmen HELP “poor and middle-class defendants.” 10% cash bonds offered by local courts HURT the general public by allowing criminals to run loose in the streets.
After reading the NY Times
After reading the NY Times Article, I couldn't help but wonder if the author knew anything about the surety bail bond industry. First, there should be a distinction made between different bail bonds: Surety Bail Bonds (offered by a private business) and 10% Cash Bail Bonds (offered directly by some courts). Either bond requires a 10% payment to have the defendant released. If you pay 10% to a bail bondsman, that’s non-refundable, but it doesn’t necessarily have to be paid in advance. If you pay 10% directly to the court, in some jurisdictions, that fee can be held by the court to pay any fines or court costs.
How surety bail bonds could possibly discriminate against "poor and middle-class defendants"? As a surety bail bond agent, we often release defendants that haven't even paid our full premium of 10%; if a defendant and indemnitor qualifies, we offer arrangements to make payments on the 10% premium. Without a surety bail bond, most of those defendants would simply sit in jail without being released. If the defendant fails to appear in court, the surety bail bond agent is liable and will make all efforts to find and re-arrest the defendant.
What actually "does nothing for public safety" are the 10% cash bonds offered directly my many local courts. If the defendant is released and fails to appear in court, there is NOBODY LOOKING for the defendant. What the public doesn’t understand is there is no special task force or law enforcement that is actively working on finding and re-arresting the defendant. The only time the defendant would get caught is if they were arrested on ADDITIONAL CHARGES.
Bottom line: Surety bail bondsmen HELP “poor and middle-class defendants.” 10% cash bonds offered by local courts HURT the general public by allowing criminals to run loose in the streets.