During the colonial
period, Americans
relied upon the
existing bail
structure that had
evolved in England
over several
hundreds of years.
However in 1776,
when the colonists
declared their
independence, they
no longer depended
on English law,
rather they set down
policies which
closely corresponded
to English
tradition.
In medieval England,
processes to ensure
that the accused
would appear for
trial began as early
as the trials
themselves. It
wasn't until the
13th century that
the Sheriffs were
allowed to determine
when a defendant
could be detained
for trial and when
he could be released
with a guarantee or
a promise that he
would return to
stand trial.
Unfortunately, the
sovereign authority
held by Sheriffs was
not always equitably
disseminated
throughout each
region. As a result,
the Statute of
Westminister was
established in 1275,
and eliminated the
discretion of
sheriffs with
respect to which
crimes were and were
not
During the colonial
period, Americans
relied upon the
existing bail
structure that had
evolved in England
over several
hundreds of years.
However in 1776,
when the colonists
declared their
independence, they
no longer depended
on English law,
rather they set down
policies which
closely corresponded
to English
tradition.
In medieval England,
processes to ensure
that the accused
would appear for
trial began as early
as the trials
themselves. It
wasn't until the
13th century that
the Sheriffs were
allowed to determine
when a defendant
could be detained
for trial and when
he could be released
with a guarantee or
a promise that he
would return to
stand trial.
Unfortunately, the
sovereign authority
held by Sheriffs was
not always equitably
disseminated
throughout each
region. As a result,
the Statute of
Westminister was
established in 1275,
and eliminated the
discretion of
sheriffs with
respect to which
crimes were and were
not bail-able.
It wasn't until several
centuries later that bail law
underwent its next major change.
Early in the 17th century when
King Charles I did not receive
funds from the Parliament, he
required several noblemen to
issue him loans. Those who
refused were imprisoned without
bail. Five knights previously
incarcerated for this offense
filed a habeas corpus petition
arguing that they could not be
held indefinitely without bail
or trial. In court, Attorney
General Heath contended that the
King could best balance the
interest of the state security
along with the interest of
individual liberty if he was
allowed to continue to exercise
his sovereign authority to
imprison. The court upheld
Attorney General Heath's
argument.
In response to the
King's action and
the court's ruling,
Parliament issued
the Petition of
Right of 1628
arguing that
contrary to the
Magna Carta and
other laws guaranteeing that no
man could be imprisoned without
due process of law, the King had
recently imprisoned people
before trial when no just cause
had been shown. Unfortunately,
the King, the courts and the
sheriffs were able to defeat the
intent of the Petition of Right
of 1628 by creating various
procedural delays in granting
the writs of habeas corpus. It
wasn't until these procedural
delays were critically excessive
that Parliament passed the
Habeas Corpus Act of 1677. The
Act stated:
A magistrate shall discharge the
said prisoner from Imprisonment
taking his or their
Recognizance, with one or more
Surety or Sureties, in any Sum
according to their discretion,
having regard to the Quality of
the prisoner and the Nature of
the offense, for his or their
Appearance in the court of the
Kings bench&ldots;unless it
shall appear&ldots;that the
Party (is)&ldots;committed&ldots;for
such Matter or offenses for
which by law the Prisoner is not
bail-able.
Although the Habeas Corpus Act
of 1677 improved administration
of bail laws, it didn't provide
any protection against excessive
bail requirements. As a result,
even if a suspect was accused of
a bail-able offense, he may
still be detained if the bail
amount was inordinately high. As
substantiation of this abuse
reached Parliament, it responded
with the English Bill of Rights
of 1689. The Bill of Rights
proposed to resolve this issue
by proclaiming "that excessive
bail ought not to be required."
Thus, the concept of the Eighth
Amendment in the U.S
Constitution was drafted to
prevent the accused of bail-able
offenses from exorbitantly high
bail requirements. It is
important to note that while the
amount of bail was addressed, it
did not alter the categories of
bail-able crimes as referenced
in the Statute of Westminister
and clearly did not guaranty the
right to bail.
In 1789 James Madison was
commissioned to prepare an
initial draft for the Bill of
Rights and essentially used
verbatim Section 9 of the
Virginia Constitution which
provided that "Excessive bail
shall not be required&ldots;."
During the congressional debates
Mr. Livermore voiced his concern
that this amendment only
required that bail not be
excessive, but didn't provide a
definition of what constituted
an excessive bail requirement.
The bail clause in the Eighth
Amendment was only the first
part of the structure. The final
part of the American bail
structure and the basis upon
which the Constitution
provisions are based is the
statutory classification of
justice officials' power
concerning bail and the
categorization of crimes into
bail-able and non-bail-able
offenses.
The Eighth Amendment
forbiddance of
excessive bail
resolved that bail
might not be
exorbitant in those
cases where Congress
has deemed it
suitable to permit
bail. The Congress
then enacted the
Judiciary Act
defining what
offenses would be
bail-able. Habeas
corpus protection
was provided by
Article 1 of the
Constitution.
In 1966, Congress
enacted the first
major substantive change
in federal bail law since 1789.
The Bail Reform Act of 1966
created a principle for
releasing a suspect with as
little burden as necessary in
order to insure his appearance
at trial. In 1969 the Judicial
Council Committee studied Bail
Reform Act of 1966, and was
particularly bothered by the
release of potential dangerous
non-capital suspects permitted
by the 1966 law and recommended
that even in non-capital cases,
a persons dangerousness be
considered in determining
conditions for release. Congress
upheld the ideals put forth in
the committee's proposal and
changed the 1966 Bail Reform Act
as it applied to persons charged
with crimes in the District of
Columbia. With that decision by
Congress came the bail system,
as we know it today.
For More Information
On The History of
Bail Click Here!!!
|
