Pretrial Decision Making and Officer Safety. SACOP SafeShield Committee Meeting Nashville, TN March 10, 2013

Transcription

1 Pretrial Decision Making and Officer Safety SACOP SafeShield Committee Meeting Nashville, TN March 10, 2013

2 Consequence of Uninformed Pretrial Release Decision Making Officer Renninger Officer Griswold Officer Owens Lakewood, WA November 29, 2009 Officer Richards

3 IACP s Stance on Pretrial The IACP supports pretrial reform that would result in safe, fair, and effective pretrial release based on individual risk, rather than on the suspect s financial means.

4 Voters say they would pay the most attention to judges and law enforcement officials, followed by crime victims groups and the Sheriffs Association. Retired judges, attorneys general, and public defenders also hold some sway. Judges* Law enforcement officials* Crime victims' groups* The Sheriff's Association* Retired judges* Attorneys general* Impact of Public Figures and Institutions No Attention Attention Net Public defenders* *Split-sample question. Darker colors indicate intensity

5 Three Key Questions Is risk assessment used for bail decision? Is it possible to hold a defendant on no bail? Is no bail preventive detention used?

6 The Purpose of Bail 1. Protect the integrity of the court process 2. Protect the public 3. Protect against punishment prior to conviction

7 Stack v. Boyle, 342 U.S. 1 (1951) Bail must be fixed for each individual defendant according to standards relevant to assuring the presence of that defendant.

8 Bond Schedules Sometimes called standard bond The predominant mechanism for assigning bail according to the National Pretrial Justice Survey

9 Bond Schedules Static/one dimensional Fail to factor individual risks and strengths of defendant Legislative mandate considerations Consideration of danger not part of process No individual conditions tailored to mitigate risk imposed/monitored

10 Offense-Based Risk Assessment Offense Severity Bond Amount

11 Actuarial Risk Assessment What it is Data driven Research informed Objective aid to decision making Used for decades in commerce Health, education, national security, etc. What it isn t Person-specific A replacement for judicial discretion

12 Risk Assessment Auto Insurance Age Distracted driving Peer(s) in vehicle with driver Low driving skills Low compliance with traffic laws

13 Risk Mitigation Auto Insurance Drivers education Restrict nighttime driving Prohibit peers as passengers Strict enforcement Seat belts, texting, etc.

14 How Does it Work? Data sample is drawn and examined Shared characteristics measured for predictive strength Risk level assigned according to probabilities (low, medium, high) Model is tested to prevent unintended bias

15 Pretrial Outcomes in Kentucky Overall Release rate: 70% Non-financial release rate: 66% Rearrest rate: 8% Failure to appear rate: 10%

16 Criminal Justice System?

17 The Goal of the EBDM Initiative Test a Framework for evidence-based decision making at the local level -- using evidence to inform decisions that lead to risk and harm reduction.

18 RECIDIVISM: a tendency to relapse into a previous condition or mode of behavior; especially : relapse into criminal behavior - Merriam Webster

19 Key Decision Points Arrest Decisions Pretrial Status Decisions Charging Decisions Plea Decisions Local Institutional Release Decisions Local Institutional Intervention Decisions Sentencing Decisions Community Intervention Decisions Violation Response Decisions Discharge from Criminal Justice Intervention

20 Impact of Risk Level on Recidivism Recidivism rates absent treatment Likely recidivism with effective corrections intervention

21 Applying the Risk Principle Low GET OUT OF THE WAY. Intensive treatment for lower-risk offenders can actually increase recidivism ZERO IN. Target those medium and high-risk offenders with a greater probability of recidivism LIVE IN THEIR BACK POCKET. Provide most intensive control to extreme high-risk offenders High The Carey Group 2008;

22 RESULTS DRIVEN PRACTICE Professional judgment alone Use of actuarial tool Use of actuarial tool with professional judgment Source: Patricia M. Harris, What Community Supervision Officers Need to Know About Actuarial Risk Assessment and Clinical Judgement, Federal Probation, Vol. 70, Nr. 2 (September 2006)

23 The Big Four Criminogenic Need Response Anti-social cognition Anti-social companions Reduce anti-social cognition, recognize risky thinking and feelings, adopt an alternative identity Reduce association with criminals, enhance contact with pro-social Anti-social personality or temperament Build problem solving, self management, anger management, and coping skills Family and/or marital Reduce conflict, build positive relationships and communication, enhance monitoring/supervision Source: Andrews, Donald A. (2007), Principles of Effective Correctional Programs, in Motiuk, Laurence L. and Serin, Ralph C. (2007). Compendium 2000 on Effective Correctional Programming. Correctional Service Canada. Available at

24 The Lesser Four Criminogenic Need Response The Carey Group 2008; Substance abuse Reduce usage, reduce the supports for abuse behavior, enhance alternatives to abuse Employment Provide employment seeking and keeping skills School Enhance performance rewards and satisfaction Leisure and/or recreation Enhance involvement and satisfaction in pro-social activities Source: Andrews, Donald A. (2007), Principles of Effective Correctional Programs, in Motiuk, Laurence L. and Serin, Ralph C. (2007). Compendium 2000 on Effective Correctional Programming. Correctional Service Canada. Available at

25 Recidivism Reductions as a Function of Targeting Multiple Criminogenic vs. Non- Criminogenic Needs* Better outcomes 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Poorer outcomes -10% -20% More criminogenic than noncriminogenic needs More noncriminogenic than criminogenic needs Source: Andrews, Donald A., Dowden, C., and Gendreau, P. (1999). Clinically relevant and psychologically informed approaches to reduced reoffending: A meta-analytic study of human service, risk, need, responsivity, and other concerns in justice contexts. Unpublished manuscript; Dowden, C., (1998) A meta-analytic examination of the risk, need and responsivity principles and their importance within the rehabilitation debate, unpublished master s thesis

26 The Big Four Principles of Evidence- Based Practice Risk Need Responsivity Fidelity

27 Based on Research + 4 Principles The professional judgment of criminal justice system decision makers is enhanced when informed by evidence-based knowledge. Every interaction within the criminal justice system offers an opportunity to contribute to harm reduction. Systems achieve better outcomes when they operate collaboratively at the individual, agency, and system levels. The criminal justice system will continually learn and improve when professionals make decisions based on the collection, analysis, and use of data and information

28 Snapshot of Jail Average Daily Population by Status Awaiting Sentencing, 2% Violation, 7% Other, 6% Sentenced, 25% Pretrial, 60%

29 Other LE Agencies Mental Health District Attorney Private Defense Bar Parole CJS Leadership Group Public Defender Probation Criminal Justice Services Judges Sheriff

30 Collaborating Networking Cooperating Coordinating Himmelman, A., Collaboration For a Change: Definitions, Models, Roles, and a Guide to Collaborative Processes (1994).

31 RETHINKING OFFENDER MANAGEMENT Addressing challenges through GPS tracking The Greensboro and Charlotte North Carolina Experiences Ken Miller, Chief of Police Greensboro, NC

32 Criminal Justice System Understaffed, underfunded, and overloaded NC case resolution: 8-15 months Dismissals or pleas to lesser offenses Probation in lieu of incarceration Introduction Repeat Offenders Robbery, burglary, larceny from auto, auto theft Insufficient structure or accountability

33 Pre-trial myths Secure bonds equate to reduced risk Pre-trial programs create unnecessary community risk Pre-trial programs waste valuable CJ System dollars Introduction Bonding regulations do not prevent abuse May issue and intentionally revoke bond Bonding via extension of credit Agreements do not require judicial approval Agreements are not public records Unreasonable payment plans fuel crime

34 Rethinking offender management Leverage technology and structure CJ System-wide prioritization of offenders Low-risk offenders = no/low bond and structured release Hi-risk offenders = high bond and structured release Optimal utilization of existing jail beds Magistrate/Judge ordered conditions of release Curfews, territorial restrictions, rehabilitation services, etc GPS reinforced Police/Sheriff monitored Can pair GPS data with RMS for crime correlation Introduction

35 Goals Leverage technology/structure to reduce recidivism violence property crimes Promote community safety Objectives Reinforced structure for offender Provide offender support for success Full and swift accountability for violations Success > 88% compliance rate < 4% recidivism rate < 8% administrative rules failure rate Electronic Monitoring Program

36 Offender Set Up Home Curfew /7 Exclusion Zone

37 Gang Exclusion Zones Exclusion Zone #2 Exclusion Zone #3 24/7 Exclusion Zone Exclusion Zone #1

38 911 report of shots fired in a community park A vehicle is on fire in the park Police arrive within minutes Body discovered in the charred vehicle EMU contacted and suspect developed within minutes of 911 call Murder Crime-Correlation November 28, 2009 Charlotte, NC

39 Murder Crime-Correlation

40 Murder Crime-Correlation Historical points were able to track the offender back to a gas station purchasing gas prior to the murder.

41 Prosecutorial Fewer crimes from prior offenders Stronger prosecutions Quicker adjudication CJ System Benefits Judicial Greater assurance of no additional crimes Greater flexibility in release/probation conditions Greater confidence in offender behavior Less expensive alternative

42 Changing our priorities and focus Conclusion GPS-reinforced structure can improve system effectiveness and reduce recidivism Prioritization of offenders improves CJ System performance at all levels Pre-trial services perform valued function for low risk offenders of modest means Offenders more inclined to put their lives back on track

43 Call to Action Ask the Three Key Questions Is risk assessment used for bail decision? Is it possible to hold a defendant on no bail? Is no bail preventive detention used? Engage in state-level conversation Continue the conversation with us

44 Contact Information Stan Hilkey Mesa County Sheriff Tim Murray Pretrial Justice Institute Ken Miller Chief of Police Greensboro, NC Dianne Beer-Maxwell IACP