Orleans Parish pre-trial services reports success

27th August 2012   ·   0 Comments

By Zoe Sullivan
Contributing Writer

“In our society, liberty is the norm, and detention prior to trial or without trial is the carefully limited exception.” So affirmed U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist in a 1987 case. Jon Wool, Director of the New Orleans office of the Vera Institute of Justice, offered the remark as an introduction to his report on the city’s new pre-trial services program. The City Council’s Criminal Justice Committee hearing on August 22 received testimony from a range of figures within the criminal justice system about the program, which debuted at the end of April. The Vera Institute of Justice, in collaboration with the Orleans Parish Sheriff’s Office (OPSO) and other criminal justice agencies, screens arrestees to assess which ones are good candidates for pre-trial release. The thrust of the program is to ensure that liberty is accessible to all who merit it, and that it is not simply a reflection of who has the funds to post bail.

Wool participated in the panel along with Judge Gerard Hansen, Magistrate in the Orleans Parish Criminal District Court (OPCDC), Jonathan Friedman, Commissioner of the OPCDC, Major Rochelle Lee (OPSO), and Graymond Martin, representing the Orleans Parish District Attorney and others. The panelists offered a chorus of positive remarks about the program.

Lee spoke plainly when she responded to a question from Guidry about the pre-trial services operation. “It’s been working out pretty good. I was really negative on this. I’m from the old school, and I think change is not good,” she said. Yet, Lee went on, in spite of her expectations that the program would only last for two weeks, “they’re still there, and they’re doing an excellent job.”

Providing substance to the praise offered by Lee and others, Wool’s testimony offered some impressive statistics to committee members Susan Guidry and Jackie Clarkson. One noteworthy “data point” reported that of 112 people who were released on their own recognizance up through August 17th, only one was re-arrested. This figure represents less than one percent of those released, a datum Wool cited when Councilmem­ber Clarkson told the assembly that she had been “scared” about the program. Clarkson said that she still felt “qualms” about the risk assessment and the possibility of releasing someone who should not be free.

In the face of such concerns, Martin reassured the committee that “dockets are moving more quickly, conviction rates are up, and people are making it through the process more quickly.” Martin also stated that while the Vera Institute is conducting criminal record checks on all of the people it screens, the District Attorney’s office is also performing the same work “to make sure they’re doing it right.” He did express the hope, however, that this redundancy could be eliminated once the pre-trial services program has been thoroughly established.

Reportedly, 93 percent of those released returned to appear in court, according to another positive result Wool shared with the committee. He pointed out, however, that six out of seven people who had been released and did not receive a reminder phone call about their hearing date did not present themselves. Wool further noted that many of those who did receive calls said that it was the only notice they had about their court date. This finding supports the value of such calls.

While Wool told the committee that the results showed “an extremely, extremely good beginning,” he also cautioned that the data only reflect the first three months of operation, and so do not necessarily represent “the full force of the operation.”

Elizabeth Simpson, also of the Vera Institute, followed Wool’s introductory remarks. She described the details of the program’s operation and the national attention it is getting. Simpson also highlighted a tool that helps make the program effective: a statistical analysis that considers elements “predictive of re-arrest or return to court.”

The program currently only screens roughly 60 percent of the felony cases that come through the system. As a result, Council­member Guidry asked James Carter, the city’s Criminal Justice Commis­sioner, whether the mayor’s 2013 budget would allow the program to expand to serve all those who go through the arrest process. This would entail covering not only the remaining 40% felony cases but also state misdemeanor charges.

Carter’s initial response to the question focused on the mayor’s “laser-like focus” on reducing homicide and stressed the need to punish those who commit serious crimes. When pressed, however, he told the committee that the budget offer submitted was for $623,000, which would allow the pre-trial services program to scale up sufficiently to fulfill the system’s needs.

While affirming that he is “very pleased with Vera being present,” Judge Hansen also underscored that he continues to make his own assessments and decisions regarding bail and release, using Vera’s information as a support. Hansen pointed out that there are 54 charges that are not eligible for release on recognizance, which prompted Councilmember Guidry to focus on the inequity in this system. She quipped that “if the defendant has enough money, he can get out right there.”

Baptist Community Ministries is expected to support the pre-trial services’ supervision program, Wool mentioned in his closing remarks. The foundation, he said, “has contributed…to improving the system in large and small ways.”

Among the small, mid-afternoon audience sat Norris Henderson, founder and Executive Director of Voice of the Ex-Offender (VOTE). He told The Louisiana Weekly: “This is the first step in a thousand mile journey.” He explained that this was a step in the right direction “for folks who have languished in jail because someone didn’t do an adequate assessment.”

This article originally published in the August 27, 2012 print edition of The Louisiana Weekly newspaper.