Bail foes: County’s lawyers misled judge

Attorneys challenging the constitutionality of Harris County’s rigid bail system say the county’s attorneys have misled a federal judge by claiming that 20 percent of those arrested for misdemeanors are released on so-called personal bonds when county statistics show the actual number is 8.5 percent.

Equal Justice Under Law, a nonprofit advocacy group based in Washington, D.C., filed the civil rights suit against Harris County in May, arguing that hundreds of offenders are not released on personal bonds and are unlawfully jailed for minor offenses like trespassing and shoplifting simply because they are poor and cannot afford even nominal bail payments.

The group’s attorneys have cited Harris County’s own pretrial annual reports, which show that in 2015 only 8.5 percent of the 50,947 people arrested for misdemeanors were released on so-called personal bonds, which do not require cash or a bail bondsman. The percentage has remained about the same from January through April 2016.

The 20 percent figure came from Katharine David, one of five outside attorneys representing the county, who said during an Aug. 18 hearing that a fifth of those charged with misdemeanors are actually released on personal bonds. But her figure excludes anyone who bonded out immediately, anyone who was not interviewed by the county’s pretrial services office and anyone who was already on probation or facing immigration holds and thus not eligible for personal bonds, Da-

vid later explained to the Chronicle.

“I mean, we would have to get the most recent stats, but I think right now about 20 percent of the misdemeanor arrestees are released on personal bond at that hearing officer’s stage,” David said, according to a transcript of the hearing.

‘Open and honest’

That higher estimate was immediately challenged as misleading or inaccurate by the plaintiffs during the hearing and later by State Sen. Rodney Ellis, D-Houston, who attended the hearing.

“I was shocked by the numbers the county put forth — as the data is different than any other study or data set experts have used to measure the significance of this problem,” Ellis said. “In a case as serious as this, when the life and liberty of so many Harris County citizens is involved, it’s important all parties are being open and honest — because these aren’t abstract statistics; these are people’s lives.”

David later said in an interview that the number of people who were arrested and later released on personal bonds remains small — 4,307 people out of 50,947 arrested for misdemeanors in 2015, or 8.5 percent.

But she said the county’s hearing officers should be judged based on the number of people they released on no-cost bond after interviews with pretrial services who were not already on probation or facing immigration holds. If those people were subtracted from the county’s 2015 annual report, the pool of misdemeanor offenders would be reduced from 50,947 to less than 30,000 arrestees, thereby increasing the percentage of those particular offenders who were granted pretrial release.

Jay Jenkins is a defense attorney who has studied the county’s bond policies and found it to be stricter than those used by other large Texas counties, based on standard calculations of pretrial release rates. By excluding so many people who were arrested from the calculation of who wins release without having to pay, Jenkins argues the county has now artificially inflated its performance.

“Making a claim before a federal court is a very serious matter. And making a claim based on convoluted math in a pretrial report that even they admit doesn’t capture all the defendants is troubling.”

Outdated methods

The county has not yet implemented reforms that it has promised to improve its pretrial review process. Public records show that the county’s pretrial service office still uses an outdated questionnaire and lacks staff to interview all misdemeanor offenders. That means hearing officers regularly set bond and deny personal bond for people who were never interviewed; they also have denied personal bond to people who never even appeared before them because of illness or mental illness, records show.