Reform within the bail system has received much attention in recent years. Much of this attention has been focused on the substitution of interviews designed to determine a prisoner's likelihood of returning for trial for the traditional setting of bail After a brief account of the bail system's framework, a review of certain problem areas, and a description of a successful experiment in releasing prisoners without bail, this paper presents an analysis of prisoners' characteristics for use in predicting which prisoners, if released without bail, will become fugitives and which will return for trial.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Allington, T.Preventive detention of the accused before trial
. University of Kansas Law Review, 1970-197119, 110-110.
2.
Ares, C.
, Rankin, A., & Sturz, H.The Manhattan bail project: An interim report on the use of pretrial parole. New York University Law Review, Fall 1963, 38, 67-68; 75-75.
3.
Beaudin, B.Bail in the District of Columbia—what it was; is; and will be
. American University Law Review, 1970-1971, 20, 432-432.
4.
Botein, B.The Manhattan bail project; Its impact on criminology and the criminal law process
. Texas Law Review, Fall 1965, 43, 324-324.
5.
Brown, D.Bail: An examination
. Australian Law Journal, 1971, 45, 201-201.
6.
R. C. Weast
& S. M. Selby (Eds.). CRC handbook of tables for mathematics. Cleveland, Ohio: The Chemical Rubber Company, 1970
7.
Davis, S. M.An examination of release on recognizance
. Mississippi Law Journal, 1968, 39, 303-303.
8.
Egehand, D.Bail as a matter of right—in re Underwood
, Hastings Law Journal, 1974,26. 586-586.
9.
Freed, D. J.
, & Wald, P. M.Bail in the United States: 1964. U.S. Government Research Development Report (xrdra) PB207-782, 1972, 72(10), 2-2; 18-18.
10.
Garner, P.Should freedom have a price tag. The Atlanta Journal and Constitution Magazine, December 14, 1975, p. 8-8.
11.
Just, B.Bail and pretrial detention in the District of Columbia; An empirical analysis
. Howard Law Journal, 1973, 17, 845-845.
12.
McCarthy, D., Jr.
, & Wahl, J. J.The District of Columbia bail project: An illustration of experimentation and a brief for change. Georgetown Law Journal, Spring 1965, 53, 736-736.
13.
McCree, W., Jr.Keynote address—bail and the indigent defendant
. University of Illinois Law Forum, Spring 1965, 1965, 2-3.
14.
National conference on bail and criminal justice, 1966. Bail and Summons, 1965, p. 8-8.
15.
Pannell v. U.S., 320 F.2d. 698, 699 (D.C. Circuit 1963).
16.
Paulsen, M.Pretrial release in the United States
. Columbia Law Review, 1966, 66, 114-115; 119-119.
17.
Report of the Cobb pretrial court services agency Cobb judicial circuit. September 1, 1973 to November 30, 1973, p. 2-2.
18.
Report of the pretrial court services agency Cobb judicial circuit. December 1, 1973 to May 31, 1974, p. 1-1.
19.
Ryan, J. W.The last days of bail
. Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science, 1967, 58, 544-544.
20.
Sutherlin. R.Release on recognizance: A proven system
. Louisiana Bar Journal, 1970, 18, 183-183.
21.
Stainback, F.Bail and bailbondsmen: Need for reform in Kentucky
. Kentucky Law Journal, 1972-1973, 61, 601-601; 603-603; 604-604; 609-609; 612-612; 613-613.
22.
Taylor v. Taintor, 83 U.S. 366, 371, (1873).
23.
Wice, P.
, & Simon, R.Pretrial release: A survey of alternative practices. Federal Probation, 1970, 34, 60-60.
24.
Younger, E. J.It's time to forfeit bail
. Southwestern University Law Review, Summer 1973, 5, 268-268.
