The precise nature of Bell County bail

An article which appeared today in the Temple Daily Telegram once again brings up the issue of artificially high Bell County bail amounts (“Setting bail not a precise procedure,” by Paul A. Romer, October 5, 2008). Yet again Judge Ted Duffield defends his practice of magistrating defendants with pre-set bail amounts without making any determination as to the ability of an individual defendant to make bail.

Not once in the article, though, did it mention that Judge Duffield inquired as to an accused’s financial situation and whether or not that defendant could make any particular bail amount. No, on the contrary, he apparently continues to set bail amounts according to the usual preset bail schedule without any regard to his legal duty to see that a bail is not oppressively high and without any regard to the ability of the accused to make bail.

County Commission Richard Cortese said the public does not care about bail amounts. He claims that “defense attorneys and family members of the person arrested are the people who usually get upset and complain about high bail amounts.” He then continues by stating that the victims of crime generally believe bail amounts are too low. “They want the person who broke into their house to stay behind bars,” he said. Wow! An elected official that has never heard of the presumption of innocence. Innocent until proven guilty? Not in Bell County! Are there any constitutional rights that can survive in Bell County?

Setting bail in Bell County is a precise procedure, the only problem is that it is precisely wrong.