Sean Cook:
What is your overall opinion of the bail industry?

Bill Hunt:
I believe I have an excellent personal and professional understanding of the bail industry and the many problems it faces in Orange County. As sheriff I am committed to ending capping in our jails and improving the overall operation of the jail. This will include changing the current department culture of indifference to one of service. As sheriff I will insist that our deputy’s understand they are there to serve the public and our private stake holders like the bail industry. Service means inconveniencing themselves to make the operation and your interaction with us more efficient.

Sean Cook: In the past it used to take 10 minutes for a deputy to take a defendant from a Bondsman when we surrendered them back to custody. Today it is often in excess of 3 hours. Why do you think the changes occurred and what would you do to change it?

Bill Hunt:
Unfortunately, I know first hand that 3 hours is being generous and that is inexcusable. It is a potential public safety risk to have a handcuffed fugitive sitting in the visiting lobby for 3-6 hours. This is another striking example of the Sheriff’s Department’s lack of responsiveness to the stakeholders it is supposed to be providing service to. When I am sheriff, bail surrenders will be booked on the back dock where police officers book their prisoners. They will be given priority over police department bookings unless medical or security reasons require otherwise. If it takes more than an hour to book a fugitive on my watch someone will have some explaining to do!

Sean Cook:
What is your opinion of OR compared to the private bail industry?

Bill Hunt:
When I am sheriff bail will be the preferred method of release. It makes no sense to release people on OR when there is little accountability to ensure they show up in court. It also makes extra work for the Sheriff’s warrant detail to have to hunt them down when they fail to appear and have a warrant issued for their arrest. Bail has a lower fail to appear rate than OR, bail agents are both personally and financially responsible for ensuring their clients appear in court and are held accountable when they not. It’s a better system all around. OR should be limited to its original purpose of providing an alternative to incarceration for those who are destitute and unable to make bail. This is in line with my overall political philosophy of smaller government. We shouldn’t be creating and expanding government’s version of a more efficient private sector alternative that is at the very least cost neutral to begin with.

Sean Cook:
Currently the Orange County Jail takes about 6 hours to book an inmate and another 6 hours to release an inmate. Would you be willing to “Fast Book”or “Fast Release” inmates when you are aware they will be bailing out?

Bill Hunt:
I am committed to streamlining and improving the booking process. It would be my goal to develop some type of fast track program like Sacramento County has, not just for bail but to make the whole booking process system more efficient. The current booking process is akin to the American auto industry compared to the Japanese auto industry in terms of efficiency. It can and should be more efficient. As sheriff I will meet with department personnel, records personnel and members of the bail association for input and recommendations. We’ll evaluate current practices, look for ways to improve the operation and then do it. It’s not hard; we just need a leader who understands the reason and benefits for it to get things started.

Sean Cook:
Would you assign a sheriff liaison to our association?

Bill Hunt:
Yes, and I’ll do one better. I believe that the Sheriff’s Department cannot become truly responsive to the public without input from the public and the other components of the criminal justice system that rely upon interaction with the sheriff’s department on a daily basis like the bail industry. I am going to commission a Public Safety Committee to meet with me regularly to evaluate our policies and practices to ensure we are providing excellent service and forming productive partnerships with industries like the bail industry, the security industry, criminal defense attorneys’ public defenders, private investigators, etc. I will invite the bail association to select members to be part of this committee on behalf of the bail industry. After all, you aren’t really a stake holder if you don’t have a seat at the table to begin with.

My questions is: Should the Judge also be responsible? Should the DA be responsible? If the judge or District Attorney felt that the defendant posed a risk to anyone or was a flight risk shouldn’t they have held them on a “No Bail”? Why the judge issue a bail amount if he felt the defendant was a risk? And why didn’t the District Attorney argue to keep the defendant in custody rather than issue a bond?

Who’s really at fault here? The answer is: It is the responsibility of the defendant himself to obey and comply with the rules and laws the Government has set forth. It is not the responsibility of the Bondsman, Judge, DA or Family members of the defendant to force him to comply with the law.

Often times articles are written about how a Bondsman is responsible and how it’s the Bondsmen’s fault that the defendant committed additional crimes while on bail. Actually studies show that people on bail are much less likely to commit crimes while on bail than when released on their own recognizance.

If the media needs someone to point a finger at when a person on bail commits a crime they should be pointing the finger at the defendant himself. And if that’s not good enough the media should point the finger at the judge who decided that the defendant did not need a bond and should be released on his own signature.

Bondsmen exist to pay bonds, obviously, but moreover, their services ensure the safety of citizens and society. Bail bondsmen, as confirmed by a number of studies, more effectively bring criminals and offenders to justice than public methods or release on their own recognizance. Bail bondsmen offer decreased failure to appear rates compared to those released on their own recognizance. Because bondsmen have a financial contract or obligation, their main goal is to guarantee that offenders are brought to court.

In contrast, when defendants are released on their own recognizance, it is the duty of police officers to guarantee the appearance of such offenders in court. Unfortunately, police officers have many concerns in their bureaus, and often the re-arrest of a perpetrator might be overlooked. This is why the services offered by bondsmen are so important to society. By bringing defendants and offenders to justice in court, bail bondsmen and bounty hunters safeguard the interests of society as a whole.

Bail bondsmen more effectively serve the community because of their over 50% reduction in failures to appear over those released on their own recognizance. Moreover, bail bondsmen save time and money for police precincts and communities. They decrease the amount that would need to be spent on the re-arrest and court costs imposed by an offender who has jumped bail. Bondsmen therefore exist to bring criminals and defendants to court, protecting the interests and safety of society. Without the efficiency displayed by bail bondsmen, certainly more criminals would be roaming the streets. Bail bondsmen ensure that a defendant will be present in court, and if that defendant fails to show, the bounty hunters employed by these bondsmen will find the bail jumpers, re-arrest them, and bring them to court promptly.

There are a number of different factors that are considered when a judge sets bail. Often, the bail determination begins with a rate schedule, which differs by locality. A judge will also take the following considerations into account when he sets bail:

Severity of the Crime
Once the judge reviews the particular crime for which the defendant is accused of committing, the judge will determine how severe the crime appears to be. There are situations where a defendant is accused of committing a violent crime that, if released, the defendant could commit again or could pose a threat to society. In such situations, the judge might even deny bail for a defendant.

Generally speaking, the understanding is that the higher the bail, the more likely the defendant is to return to court on the day of his or her trial. As such, higher bails are usually set for more severe crimes when a judge wants to ensure that the defendant returns to court to serve trial for the charges against him or her.

Prior Criminal History
If the defendant has a prior criminal history, the bail will generally be higher (or non-existent). On the contrary, if the defendant does not have a prior criminal history, then the judge may set a lower bail.

Flight Risk
The final consideration that the judge will make is whether or not he believes that the defendant will be a flight risk. If a judge has any reason to think that the defendant may not show up in court for his or her trial, then the judge will increase the amount of bail (or eliminate the bail option altogether). In the event that the defendant does not show up to court, then the defendant may forfeit the money that he or she put up for bail. If the judge believes that the defendant will show up to court, then he may set the bail bond at a lower rate.

Also, there are situations where a person can be released from jail on their own recognizance. In such a situation, a judge does not believe that the person is a flight risk, they probably don’t have a criminal history, and the crime is not viewed as a violent crime. The defendant will merely have to sign a statement that they will return for trial in such a situation.

If a judge does, however, grant bail, the amount of the bail will vary based on the locality and based on a variety of circumstances. In many cases, a defendant will call upon a bail bonding agency for help meeting bail. The bail bonding agency will supply the bail for the defendant to be released. The bonding agency is then responsible for ensuring that the individual shows up in court for his or her trial.

Bonding agencies get reimbursed by the defendant in cash, using loans from the defendant’s family and friends, and by taking advantage of the defendant’s collateral. Generally, the bonding agency requires a 10% cash payment in order to post bail. For example, if a defendant has a $10,000 bail, then the defendant may have to pay the bonding agency $1,000 in cash.

If the defendant doesn’t have this much money in cash, he may borrow money from family and friends. The bonding agency will then review the assets of the defendant (and possibly of the defendant’s supporters as well). The agency may take out a mortgage on the defendant’s house, for example, so that if the defendant fails to show up for court, the agency can acquire its portion of the assets.

To recap: the general purpose of bail is to offer the court some sort of guarantee that the defendant will return to court to stand trial. It is to give a defendant and a defendants cosigner the financial incentive to make sure the defendant appears for their court case.

Obviously, the benefits of bail bondsmen are clear. They more effectively ensure that offenders are brought to justice in court on their assigned dates. Moreover, because bail bondsmen utilize the expertise of bounty hunters to track down defendants and perpetrators, they can guarantee the appearance or re-arrest of offenders. By guaranteeing that offenders appear in court, bail bondsmen and bounty hunters have the responsibility of protecting society from offenders who attempt to jump bail. Because of their financial obligation to an offender’s case, these bail bondsmen will use any means necessary to bring these criminals and offenders to justice, thus safeguarding the interest of citizens and society.

Not only do bail bondsmen and bounty hunters protect the interests of society, but they also provide services that save money for the citizens and taxpayers. When an offender fails to appear after being released upon their own recognizance, it is the responsibility of the police bureau to re-arrest this offender. However, often police resources are not readily available, and these offenders go without re-arrest for months or even years. These FTAs financially cripple the police bureaus and taxpayers. However, funds can be rescued from the depletion caused by release on their own recognizance by utilizing the more efficient methods of private bail bondsmen.

Private bail bondsmen and bounty hunters serve justice to offenders, not only protecting the safety of citizens, but also guarding their wallets. The efficacy of bail bondsmen is affirmed in the statistics provided by Helland and Tabarrok, and the impact of a 50% decreased FTA rate can most surely be tabulated. The calculations would certainly show how successfully bail bondsmen can provide reduced costs to police bureaus and taxpayers. Bail bondsmen and the bounty hunters they employ provide a twofold service to society both by safeguarding the lives of citizens and decreasing the financial burden of FTAs on taxpayers and police bureaus.