GOP bill defines "violent crimes" for statewide bail amendment

 

MADISON Wis. (CBS 58) -- On April 4, voters will see a constitutional amendment on the ballot which seeks to make it more difficult for violent defendants to get out on bail, but what's considered a "violent crime" is still up for debate at the state Capitol.

Last month, lawmakers swiftly passed a GOP-authored proposal that would amend the state constitution to allow judges to consider the totality of the crime when setting bail. Under current law, bail is only set to ensure a person returns to court.

The proposal would allow court officials to consider whether the defendant has a violent criminal record, poses a threat to public safety, or if the individual is a flight risk.

However, the amendment did not include language that clarifies what's considered a "violent crime" or "serious harm."

Sen. Van Wanggaard (R-Racine) and Rep. Cindi Duchow (R-Town of Delafield), who led the effort to amending the constitution to allow judges to have more discretion when setting bail, also authored legislation that would identify over 100 crimes as "violent crime" including homicide, sexual assault, false imprisonment, human tracking, carjacking, stalking and disarming a police officer.

"We want to clarify for our judges, so they have concise information across the board," Duchow said. "And I think we can all agree what violent crime is. It's actually defined as a statue in three different places. We just took all those definitions and put them in one spot."

The bill would remove one crime from existing definitions in state statue: failure to stop child abuse. The bill authors intentionally excluded it because, "while unthinkable and terrible, in and of itself, failing to act is not itself a violent crime," according to Dan Hubert, a staffer for Duchow.

Some Democrats do worry adding another category of violent crimes could be interpreted differently since it's defined three times in state law.

"I think that opens it up to having any judge decide they are going to hold people for as long as they want," Sen. Chris Larson (D-Milwaukee) said.

The definition for "serious harm" includes, "personal physical pain or injury, illness, any impairment of physical condition, or death, including mental anguish or emotional harm attendant to the personal physical pain or injury, illness or death," according to the bill.

The Assembly is expected to vote on the proposal later this month, Duchow said. These changes would only go in effect if voters approve the constitutional amendment in April.

Overall, the concern from Democrats is the amendment's purpose which is designed to give judges more tools when determining how much bail to impose.

Democrats and some criminal justice advocates argue that by allowing judges to weigh more options, it could lead judges to set higher bail amounts some can afford, and others can't.

"This changes it now, and instead of innocent until proven guilty, it is guilty until proven rich," Larson said.

But Duchow disagrees.

"They already take into account your ties to the community and your financial situation so people who are very wealthy right now are getting a higher bail."