Journal of Student Research 2018

64 Journal Student Research Initiative (PRJI), 35% of African American males have higher bond rates than White males and 19% of Hispanic males have higher bond rates than White males (“Race,” n.d.). There is a clear correlation between race and bail settings. Additionally, Alabama law ensures the right to bail, and it should also recognize that those of lower wealth need to have the same access to bail as individuals of greater wealth. The Pretrial Justice Initiative (PJI) states that 47% of the defendants remain in jail until their trial because of the price of their bail (“Race,” n.d.). Sigler & Formby (1978) suggest Alabama’s justice system lacks in the ability to to protect the public from dangerous persons and enforces the structural violence against poor, non-violent offenders. This example of structural violence is because defendants of lower socioeconomic status find it difficult to find a cosigner or collateral for bail bonds. When bail is set at hyper-elevated amounts, defendants find difficulty paying for all aspects of the trial, and thus it affects the case both initially and throughout the course of courts (Billings, 2016). It also causes extreme effects in defendants’ everyday lives through loss of income, occupations, housing, and custody of children as they await their day in court. The pretrial process and mass incarceration itself has been defended so that the government can seem “tough on crime,” when in reality the bail bond system is counterproductive and “fiscally irresponsible” (“Mass incarceration,” n.d.). The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) states that prison system costs account for “1 out of every 15 state general fund discretionary dollars,” making it the second largest cost in American finances (“Fiscal Cost,” n.d.). It is difficult to see any type of alternatives because of the power of special interest groups like the bail bond companies, which make about one and a half billion dollars every year in nonrefundable fees from defendants and their families (“Mass Incarceration,” 2017). That being said, there clearly is an opportunity, and need, for reform. The key issue is not that the bail schedule is too low for violent crime, but rather the bail schedule is too excessive for non-violent crime. Non-violent crimes are more common, and thus create higher revenue, which makes sense for bail bond companies, but the benefits for the constituents are basically nonexistent and the disadvantages are plenty. Different actions can occur that will maximize constituents’ benefits and safety as well minimize the loss of revenue from the bail bond system. The following table offers three possible actions. Evaluation Criteria & Projected Outcomes