By: Brendan Kearney
I don’t know if this is quite Freakonomics, but it turns out it’s a better idea to steal in Baltimore, then wait several years to turn yourself in, than to get caught swiping in Johannesburg — at least this month. Allow me to explain.
Both Baltimore and South Africa temporarily sped the wheels of justice recently, for different reasons and with different results.
Baltimore, with roughly 40,000 open warrants, put on its version last week of Fugitive Safe Surrender, a popular program run by the U.S. Marshals, offering “favorable consideration” and expedited disposition to non-violent fugitives who showed up at a Westside church. Almost 1,000 people turned themselves in during the four-day event, which seemed to be a good result for almost everyone involved. Many simply checked in, met with a public defender, prosecutor and maybe a judge, and were free and clear in a few hours. (A small number wanted for more serious offenses were carted off to jail.)
Several thousand miles to the southeast, South Africa, host of the closely-watched World Cup, set up so-called instant justice courts of its own this month. The National Prosecution Authority conceived of the courts to mete out swift and severe penalties for anyone behaving badly during the international event, and by extension, adding to the nation’s high-crime reputation. Steal a cell phone from a visiting soccer fan? Five years in prison.
So, what do you think of these quick fixes? Besides the fundamental question of fairness, are they just Band-Aids for good publicity or is there some broader virtue to such swift adjudication of criminal cases?
Update: The U.S. Marshals Service office in Baltimore reported Tuesday some results for the Safe Surrender effort. During the four days of the event, 979 individuals surrendered themselves on outstanding arrest warrants, 989 misdemeanor warrants were cleared, and 50 felony warrants were cleared.
Recent Comments