Algorithims were supposed to fix all the ills of the Bail System.
Since before 2014, the Pretrial Justice Institute has encouraged states to use mathematical formulas, called "risk assessment tools" to try to eliminate racial inequities. New Jersey adopted algorithmic risk assessment in 2014 at the urging, in part, of the nonprofit Pretrial Justice Institute. The influential Baltimore organization has for years advocated use of algorithms in place of cash bail.
However, earlier this month, PJI did a complete about face. It suddenly reversed itself. The group now says that risk-assessment tools (like the ones it previously promoted) have no place in pretrial justice because they perpetuate racial inequities.
In a statement released by PJI the group said:
- Regardless of their science, brand, or age, these tools are derived from data reflecting structural racism and institutional inequity that impact our court and law enforcement policies and practices.
- About three years ago, we heard but did not fully appreciate the opposition to pretrial risk assessment tools.
- We made a mistake—we did not have the right people at the table when we were designing our road map to decarceration
Asked to name a state where risk-assessment tools didn’t work out, a spokesperson for PJI pointed to New Jersey. Figures from this state released last year show that the demographics of defendants stuck in jail stayed largely the same: about 50 percent black and 30 percent white.
Meanwhile in Texas, Justices of the Peace attended their school this week and received training on the use of these very same risk assessment tools. Why is Texas training justices of the peace to use a tool which science says should not be used?
To read the entire article- CLICK HERE.
To read the Press Release issued by PJI- CLICK HERE.
To read PBT Pamphlet summarizing studies that say Risk Assessments Should Not be Used- CLICK HERE.
