A homeless man arrested for walking in a public park after receiving a verbal warning that he was not allowed there served 33 days in jail because he could not post $100 bail.
A single mother was sentenced to nine days behind bars because she could not pay $420 in fines after she stole clothes for her two children.
An unemployed man charged with a misdemeanor-level offense was threatened with jail time when he could not pay his public defender’s attorney fees.
These three criminal cases arose from incidents several years old, but the underlying issues persist in New Hampshire’s criminal justice system, according to proponents of a bail reform bill that sailed through the House on Thursday.
A yearslong investigation by the American Civil Liberties Union of New Hampshire in 2015 showed that circuit court judges consistently were jailing individuals too poor to pay fines, and as a result the courts were shifting the expense of incarceration to taxpayers. Today, the ACLU argues, a similar situation is playing out across the state with judges not taking into account a defendant’s income and ability to pay when setting bail for low-level offenses.
Senate Bill 556, introduced by Sen. Dan Feltes, D-Concord, aims to change that. Under the bill, the majority of criminal offenders — who a judge determines are neither a danger to themselves or the community — are released on personal recognizance, not cash bail.
Although the bill has gained swift bipartisan backing in the House and Senate, not everyone in the criminal justice community is on board. S. 556 faces newly raised opposition from members of the law enforcement community who say the bill in its present form poses serious public safety concerns.
The New Hampshire Association of Chiefs of Police voted on April 10 to oppose S. 556.
That vote came after Tuftonboro Police Chief Andrew Shagoury, who also serves as the association’s president, backed the bill during a House committee hearing last month. His support, however, came with several reservations attached.
Shagoury said in an interview on Thursday that the chiefs raised roughly 10 issues with S. 556 and were particularly worried about the absence of new or expanded pre-trial services for those released into the community.
“We’re not saying all of this is bad, but we feel some parts need to be carefully looked at and considered,” Shagoury said. “It’s possible there’s considerable expense to make this work the way it’s theoretically intended.”
Shagoury said he doesn’t think people should be held just because they can’t afford bail, but he fears the reform effort could go too far.
He spoke of the slaying of Yarmouth K-9 Officer Sean Gannon by a man with more than 100 prior offenses as an outcome of a criminal justice system too focused on leniency for defendants.
Concord police Lt. Sean Ford expressed similar concerns about the bill, adding, “We’re going down a slippery slope with this.”
He said most offenders are granted release on personal recognizance bail within a couple hours of arrest, and that those who are not face a judge within 24 hours.
“If someone is held on a couple hundred dollars, there is usually a reason,” he said. “It’s often because they have already been released on bail a couple of times and have a history of not showing up.”
Data requested from Manchester’s Valley Street jail by the ACLU in late March shows that 40 people were being held pre-trial on $1,000 bail or less. Of those 40 prisoners, 30 were charged with nonviolent crimes.
At the Merrimack County jail in Boscawen, 50 inmates were incarcerated Wednesday on $1,000 bail or less. Four of those prisoners were held on $200 or less, according to statistics requested by the ConcordMonitor.
As the bill makes its way through the Legislature, the state court system is exploring a national bail reform program called 3DaysCount to see whether its guidelines will work in the Granite State. The goal is the same for both efforts: to make sure defendants who pose the greatest danger are being detained, not those who simply can’t afford to post bail.
Under current law, judges must assess whether an offender poses a danger to her or himself, or others. The court can consider threats of suicide, acute depression, a history of violent protective orders, stalking and numerous other factors in making that determination. Current statute mandates that only certain types of offenders be evaluated, whereas under S. 556 it would occur in every case.
Proponents of the bill say that change enhances and does not jeopardize public safety.
The bill will return to the Senate because of a minor amendment made Thursday on the House floor. If it passes the full body, it will head to the governor’s desk where it faces a more uncertain fate.
Gov. Chris Sununu’s office said it is monitoring the legislation and does have some concerns.