Editorial: Charts cannot take place of judgments

Tuesday, June 18, 2002 | 9:20 a.m.

Recognizing standardized numbers and applying them to public or private policies is a widespread practice. This is how insurance rates are set, school test scores are measured and many pay scales are established. This common and generally faultless practice, however, does not work in every circumstance. The manner in which a judge sets bail is one example. Can a judge run her finger down a chart and learn in a moment at what level to set bail for the accused violent criminal standing in front of her?

A case in Justice Court earlier this month has local judges, prosecutors and defense attorneys talking about this issue. A man was arrested in September after allegedly raping a woman at knifepoint. In January, his bail was set at $65,000 -- precisely what the "standardized bail chart" indicated. He made bail, pleaded guilty in April, and remained free until his sentencing June 4. On June 5, after he had been sentenced to four to 30 years in prison, police questioned him after learning that he may have raped a second woman while out on bail. According to the police report, the man confessed to the second rape and faces a preliminary hearing on June 24.

Our view is that standardized bail charts need to be the focus of serious review by the justice system. Charts themselves, offering general guidelines, are not necessarily bad. But judges need to think long and hard about how they use them. While bail is not meant to be punitive, judges are required, before setting the amount, to assess whether the suspect poses a further risk to the community. This is not something that can be learned from a generic chart.