NCJ Number
81631
Date Published
Unknown
Length
0 pages
Annotation
Government officials and others concerned with the pretrial release and diversion area comment on issues arising out of a dramatization of a bail hearing, with particular attention to the role of pretrial release agencies in improving the pretrial release and diversion process.
Abstract
A developer of pretrial release and diversion standards in Wisconsin talks about the difficulties involved in developing such standards and emphasizes the need for them in the pretrial area. It is pointed out that those who develop standards need to address the purposes, procedures, and criteria involved. They also need to concern themselves with the recordkeeping function (i.e., how much information should be kept, how long it should be kept and to whom it is to be disseminated, and how it will later affect the client). A defense attorney asserts that pretrial release agencies should maintain their neutrality regarding the evidence they will present to the judge to ensure that the evidence is impartial. A criminal justice planner emphasizes that pretrial release agencies should sell the need for their services to the justice system by establishing their credibility and describes his experience in California in trying to raise municipalities' awareness regarding their ability to influence the criminal justice system. Panel members note that the public can be convinced of the necessity for pretrial release when they consider the alternatives, such as the costs of incarceration, the salaries of correctional staff and others involved in processing the offender, and the effects of imprisonment on those sent to prison. Efforts to gain public support for pretrial services should emphasize the need for victim services. For the final conference report, see NCJ 51935.