Danger, Public Opinion, and Judicial Behavior (From Pretrial Services Annual Journal, Volume 5, P 24-45, 1982, Elizabeth Gaynes, ed. - See NCJ-89690)

• NCJ Number: 89692
• Author(s): M P Kirby; C G McKnight
• Date Published: 1982
• Length: 22 pages
• Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/; NCJRS Photocopy Services
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: Available on microfiche as NCJ-89690

Annotation

Despite statutes allowing consideration of flight risk only in bail setting, this study indicates that judges in Memphis, Tenn., take dangerousness of the defendant into account. This concern for dangerousness and public safety mirrors public attitudes about the purpose of bail.

Abstract

The study examined issues such as the right to bail, the purpose of bail, presumption of innocence, and the right not to be punished prior to adjudication. Data gathered from newspaper accounts, interviews with judges, and a 1982 survey of 225 Memphis residents, indicated that the public views the purpose of bail as both prevention of flight and protection of the community from dangerous persons. However, the public is divided on whether bail should be set in all cases. Former victims of violent crimes are more in favor of bail for all defendants. The public appears to be unconcerned about the 'presumption of innocence' for defendants charged with violent crimes. Appearing to take their cue from the public rather than from the State flight-based statutes, judges consider defendants' potential dangerousness in bail decisionmaking, even though studies show predictions of dangerousness to be unreliable. The public strongly supports pretrial detention or higher bail for persons charged with rape.