SNEK POLICY
Pretrial Detention Should Be About Risk, Not Bank Accounts
Being accused of a crime is not being convicted. Whether someone goes home before trial should not depend primarily on how much cash they have.
Focus on actual risk
Pretrial decisions should focus on violence risk, witness intimidation, serious flight risk, the nature and evidence of the alleged offense, the defendant’s history, and whether reasonable conditions could allow safe release.
Explain detention
When detention is genuinely necessary, a judge should explain why. When it is not, a person’s bank balance should not decide their freedom.
Due process for both sides
Victim and public safety matter. So does the presumption of innocence. The system should evaluate the person and the case rather than use money as a shortcut.
READ THE FULL POLICY
Why SNEK thinks this
Pretrial detention is supposed to address risk, not wealth. Two people accused of the same conduct should not face radically different freedom simply because one can write a check and the other cannot. SNEK wants judges focused on flight risk, danger, obstruction, and the facts of the case.
How it would work
Judges should use individualized hearings to determine whether release conditions can reasonably manage risk. Conditions can range from release on recognizance to travel restrictions, reporting, electronic monitoring, or detention when the evidence shows no lesser condition is adequate. Money bail should not be the default shortcut for deciding who waits for trial in jail.
Where we’re flexible or still working it out
Some financial conditions may still make sense in limited situations, but they should be connected to ensuring appearance rather than functioning as a wealth test. The stronger the restriction on liberty, the stronger the evidence and judicial explanation should be, with prompt review as circumstances change.
Related SNEK policies
A Right to an Attorney Has to Mean a Real Defense • Better Police. Higher Standards.