On Friday, July 2, 2021, Superintendent David Brown appeared at Chicago’s City Council to answer questions regarding the Chicago Police Department’s strategy to address gun violence over the Fourth of July weekend. During his remarks, the Superintendent repeatedly fell back on the same false narratives about pretrial justice reforms that the police and City have been using for the last several years. Many of these lies were repeated again on Tuesday, July 5, 2021, at a press conference about holiday weekend gun violence. 

In 2017, Cook County Chief Judge Timothy Evans issued General Order 18.8A, a historic pretrial justice reform that dramatically reduced the number of people incarcerated pretrial in Cook County Jail while making our communities safer by ensuring tens of thousands of people have been able to keep their jobs and housing while awaiting trial. No fewer than three academic studies have concluded that these reforms have not negatively impacted community safety.

• STUDY 1 (April 2020): The JFA Institute independently evaluated the impact of General Order 18.8A and found an overall decrease in the percentage of people rearrested while on pretrial release compared to before reforms, including a decrease in percent of people rearrested on charges involving allegations of violence (page 5). Their analysis also noted a decrease in reported violent crime during the first year of the Order’s implementation (pages 9-10).

• STUDY 2 (November 2020): Loyola University’s “Dollar and Sense” report analyzed the impact of General Order 18.8A and found that there was no significant increase in crime, missed court dates, or in people being rearrested while awaiting trial.
  • The percentage of people released after General Order 18.8A who had a new criminal case of any kind filed while on pretrial release decreased from 17.5% to 17.1% (page 10).
  • “GO18.8A had no effect on the odds of new violent criminal activity of defendants released pretrial.” Only 3% of people released after General Order 18.8A had a new criminal case involving allegations of violence filed—the same percentage as before General Order 18.8A (page 11).

Throughout Friday’s hearing, the Superintendent repeatedly focused on people incarcerated in their homes on electronic monitoring. Each of these people was released on electronic monitoring only after a judge made an individualized determination that they were safe to return to the community while awaiting trial. Taking away a person’s freedom is the most significant punishment that can be doled out by our state’s criminal legal system, which is why the decision to do so is made by the courts in an appropriate hearing. Charges alone are an insufficient and unconstitutional basis for denying someone pretrial release.

• STUDY 3 (undated): The University of Chicago’s Crime Lab documented no correlation between people on house arrest with electronic monitoring and rising crime.
  • Of the 945 people placed on electronic monitoring for gun-related charges between July 2019 and August 2020, just 4.4% were rearrested while awaiting trial (page 8). Even more significantly, people rearrested for a felony gun charge while on EM made up less than 1% of Chicago felony gun arrests (page 9). 
  • The study also found that the vast majority of people with new gun related charges placed on electronic monitoring who are rearrested while awaiting trial are arrested for misdemeanors (page 7).

• The Chicago mayor’s office pushed this same narrative in 2019 and was asked for examples by Crain’s Chicago Business reporter Greg Hinz. Recently released emails document that the Mayor’s office knowingly pushed this narrative despite evidence that it was untrue.

During last Friday’s hearing, Superintendent Brown admitted to not having engaged the academic research done on the impacts of pretrial justice reforms in Cook County. We implore the Superintendent to review the immense amount of data that has been collected on these reforms. These reforms have positively impacted tens of thousands of people’s lives across Cook County, and it is irresponsible for anyone to continue to knowingly spread misinformation when the facts are readily available.