Why are people who are "presumed innocent" already in jail?

Question

If someone is considered innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, why do they go to jail before they're actually found guilty?

So far what I'm getting is that you are actually not presumed innocent. If they were, they would not be jailed. You don't put innocent people in jail. And unless you have money, you have to stay there. So money both talks and walks, while BS, like the presumption of innocence, subjects presumably innocent citizens to the degradation of our overcrowded jails. Life's a *****.

So many good answers. This is going to be tough.

Mikey, I see why you might think that, but it's not what I mean. A friend's boss was taken from his home and jailed for a warrant issued on a ticket that he'd already paid. Presuming him innocent would have prevented that.

Answer 1

Because the ONLY people that have to presume them innocent are the members of their jury. That's it. No one else has to presume their innocent. I don't have to. Neither do you. In court, no one in the audience has to presume them innocent. Neither does the judge. The judge just has to make sure the defendant gets a fair trial, that's all. The prosecuting attorneys sure don't have to presume the defendant is innocent. They're trying to convict him. In their eyes, he's GUILTY. The only one that's trying to say he's innocent is the defense attorney. And the ONLY people in the courtroom that he cares about convincing that his client is innocent, is the the jury. That's it. News media can't legally say that someone is guilty until that person is proven so. Because of this, they have to say allegedly, but they do not have to presume the person is innocent.

Answer 2

You need to separate the concepts of the arrest and the trial because they are two separate parts of the legal process. An arrest can occur when probable cause exists to believe that a
crime has been committed and that the arrestee committed it.
Not all such persons do go to jail. In some misdemeanor cases the accused is allowed to post bond, or can be cited and released with a promise to appear in court.
The decision of whether or not to allow release on bond is made during a bond hearing before a judge. Note: there is no
Constitutional right to bond, only a prohibition against excessive
bond. The factors: 1. seriousness of the crime 2. prior offenses, particularly for the same offense. 3. Danger to self or the public
4. Flight risk. Those persons who are held in lieu of bond are held because they dont meet one of the four criteria above. And, whatever time they spend in custody before going to trial is usually deducted from whatever sentence that the court imposes.
Only when a criminal jury returns a guilty verdict can an accused be sentenced to prison. Either the jury in a felony case will make a recommendation in the penalty phase or a judge in a
misdemeanor case will make the decision. In either case, the
decision is reached based on applicable guidelines.
The presumption of innocence that you speak of applies largely once a defendant is charged, and jeopardy has attached.
This is the point where procedural safeguards such as right to counsel and others kick in.

Answer 3

Its done bascially to ensure their appearance in court. When someone is arrested, they have a right to have a preliminary hearing at the next court date. At that time bail is set, and if they can afford it, they pay their bail and get out of jail. They wait a few weeks then appear in court for their trial. Generally, people who have no money and no permanent ties to the community cannot make bail so they must sit in jail until their trial. They say that they are presumed innocent because the prosecution must prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. If there is doubt, then they can be found innocent.
In reality, the accused must work just as hard to prove his innocence.

Answer 4

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
As with all constitutional rights, the right to freedom is not absolute.

It is subject to a balancing test - although a high bar in this case where the public good has to way outweigh the rights of the suspect.

You see, under the law, we weigh the rights of the defendant against the rights of the public:

A) to be safe; and B) to see that justice is done and so we ask, is the public concern truly compelling?

That is why not just every suspected crime and criminal is arrested - the investigatiors and the D.A.'s office have to stringently work up cases!

EXAMPLE FROM CALIFORNIA
Take for exanple some verbiage from the California Penal Code, it talks about being committed while awaitng trial:

"persons committed on criminal process and detained
for trial"

and that phrase is used legitimately in the legislation over nad over and over.


Most of all, try to read up on the whole concept of weighing rights on one side against rights on the other. And finding out how stringent of a test is it?

That is a strong underpinning of the "logic" of constitutional law.

Answer 5

To protect those of us who are definitely innocent. Arrests are not made unless there is a presumption of guilt due to evidence, the law requires that. While people are not always guilty, the public must be protected & the guilty held to keep them from escaping. Unfortunately, the guilty do not wear signs or admit their guilt usually. That means the guilty & innocent must make bail. Justice is not perfect & our legal system has worked for over 200 years the way it is.

Answer 6

Presumed innocent is a legal term. Jail is a police term. The police lock up people who do crimes. The legal system decides if the police were right to lock them up.
The lawyers try to get the guilty off as well as protect the innocent who were jailed falsely. Everyone else hopes the cops did their job right and that the judges do theirs right as well!

Answer 7

They are arrested and put in jail. Then they see a judge who sets bail. If they meet bail, they are let out. If not, they stay in jail until their trial. If they are found not guilty, they have just received some free room and board.

You have to pay a bail bondsman to post your bail. You can't do it yourself. This is so that someone has a stake in your appearing in court. If you no-show, the bondsman forfeits your bail money. Then he comes to find you, and he does not have the same constraints a police officer has.

Answer 8

Because if they are in fact guilty, they could be a threat to society and/or a threat to themselves. Most suspects are allowed to leave the courthouse until their next trial date.

Being in jail until your court date is much different than being held in jail with a sentence.

Answer 9

I think it is called being held over for trial. There was enough evidence against them for an arrest - if bond was allowed they did not have the money for release on bond - so they stay in jail until the trial is over. Or in some cases bond is denied and they stay in jail until the trial is over. It pays to have a good attorney!

Answer 10

Usually people are taken to jail to be photographed, booked, fingerprinted, etc. After that, they are usually eligible for bail.

If they can't afford bail, or if the judge rules they are likely to not show up for court, they have to stay in jail until their trial.