Thread by @JRaphling

This is a good piece, but needs to push harder against risk assessment tools. You explain well that the tools have embedded racial bias- reason enough to reject them.
pbtx.com/files/2019/12/…

But you could also explain that risk assessment tools are completely adjustable, which means who ever controls the tools (judges, court administration, law enforcement) can use them to increase incarceration at will. propublica.org/article/bill-b…

And, risk assessment tools function by creating dehumanizing profiles, reducing individuals and their circumstances to data points, predicting based on what others with similar profiles have done in the past.
hrw.org/news/2019/06/2…

The parasitical bail bond industry deserves blame, but prosecutors reflexively ask for bail and judges reflexively set bail that people can't pay-- because people in custody plead guilty quickly regardless of actual guilt. hrw.org/report/2017/04…

Any successful reform of the pretrial incarceration system will have to limit the power of judges to order incarceration. This is why California's SB10, despite ending money bail, will increase incarceration and should be rejected. hrw.org/news/2020/07/2….

The video rightly calls for reductions in arrests and the use of cite and release. Decriminalization and reduction in policing to address societal problems will begin to unwind the mass incarceration system that pretrial incarceration feeds.

There are models for pretrial reform that reject money bail and reject risk assessment tools. @LACANetwork, @hrw @JusticeLANow and other grassroots and human rights organizations have a model called "Preserving the Presumption of Innocence." justicelanow.org/wp-content/upl…

This model makes all lower level felony and misdemeanor charges ineligible for pretrial incarceration, requires a hearing with strong procedural rules and proof of imminent danger to an identifiable person before allowing any incarceration, and forbids risk assessment tools.