CT judges to vote on expanding bail options for defendants. Bail bondsman argue it could eliminate their jobs.
A vote expected Friday could give defendants charged in a crime the opportunity to put 7% of their bail up for bonds up to $50,000, circumventing the need for a bondsman.
Connecticut judges on Friday are expected to vote on a rules committee recommendation that would make it less expensive for a defendant charged in a criminal case to post their own bail and easier to circumvent the use of a bail bondsman — something critics say would be a step closer to eliminating the bail industry in the state.
The vote, which will take place at the annual Judges of the Superior Court meeting Friday afternoon at the UConn School of Law, would expand on a judicial branch revision in 2020 that allowed defendants with a bond of $20,000 or less to post 10% of the bail — money that is returned once the case is resolved if a defendant shows up to their scheduled court hearings. Prior to 2020, a defendant could only post 10% of their bail if a judge ordered it upon a defendant’s request at an arraignment hearing.
Friday’s vote would lower the percentage a defendant has to put up to 7% and expand it to be available for any bond that is $50,000 and under. Like the 2020 change, that money would be returned once a case is adjudicated if a defendant makes their court dates.
Critics of the potential change include the more than 1,000 bail agents in Connecticut, according to Ann Baldwin, a spokesperson for the bail agents. The statement, in part, said “there seems to be a movement out there by a few judges” to “eliminate professional bail agents in Connecticut.”
Money collected by a bail bondsman is not returned whether a defendant shows up to court or not.
“Why is that a problem?” the statement continued. “Because who will hold these individuals accountable when they don’t show up for court? That is what we do. As surety bond professionals when someone doesn’t show up, we go find them and hold them accountable, not only to the courts but to their victims who deserve their day in court, too.”
Mike Lawlor, associate professor at the University of New Haven’s Criminal Justice Department, said the argument is not supported by data that shows that, in other states, individuals are more inclined to show up to court if they put up their own money and have a chance to get it back if they attend their hearings.
“It’s money out of their pockets,” Lawlor, who served as former Gov. Dannel Malloy’s undersecretary for criminal justice policy and planning in the Office of Policy and Management, said of bail agents and their opposition to the proposed change.
“The arguments they’re making are very disingenuous,” added Lawlor, who noted a bail bondsman can charge no more than 7% of a defendant’s bond to post their bail and put defendants on a payment plan.
Bail bondsmen in the state have pointed to the many news stories about crime in Connecticut and the thousands of outstanding failure-to-appear warrants pending as the reasons they believe the change being voted on Friday would do more harm than good.
“Every day in the news we hear stories of catalytic converters being stolen, purse snatching, people being beaten in the driveway of their own homes. If we don’t hold criminals accountable for their crimes, they are only going to get caught when they get arrested again and again,” the statement said.
“Take the state of New York where in 2019 they eliminated bail bond agents for non-violent felony charges and most misdemeanors. That has had such a devastating impact on public safety that they are trying to now roll it back.”
Lawlor, who said he expects Friday’s vote to pass, said Connecticut bondsmen are worried that their “cash cow” could be dwindling.
“It’s got nothing to do with public safety or failure to appear rates,” Lawlor said.