Aisha Braveboy
Democrat
- In your opinion is there a difference between being “tough on crime” and being “smart on crime”? Please explain.
There is a big difference between being “tough” on crime and being “smart” on crime. I believe we need to be much smarter when it comes to using limited prosecutorial resources. To the extent being tough means locking people up for extended periods, I think the evidence shows that simply being “tough” is not the most effective way to reduce crime. Correctional facilities are breeding grounds for follow-up crime and they provide little in the way of rehabilitation and the skills necessary for re-entry into civil society. Criminal acts in all their variety — both big and small — must be addressed, but the best solution is often not incarceration. As State’s Attorney I will work to find a balance that addresses criminal behavior in ways that change that behavior and reintegrate offenders back into civil society in a productive way. Being smart on crime means using prosecutorial discretion wisely to produce long term reductions in criminal behavior.
- Should minor offenses be decriminalized, resulting in fines instead of jail time?
I believe that some minor offenses should be decriminalized, but we must also focus on the underlying causes of these types of crimes. Fines are often counterproductive. Folks with limited means end up in trouble — financial and legal — for failure to pay fines and costs. I think we need more and better programs that offer a diversion from incarceration and the problems caused by criminal records, but that also change behaviors to reduce anti-social actions. Fines, by themselves, have not proven to be an effective way to do that.
- Do you favor using pretrial risk assessment? Will you recommend pretrial supervision?
I oppose the use of money bail and favor a strong and effective system of pre-trial review, including the use of a risk assessment tool to determine whether accused offenders pose a danger to the community or a risk of flight. I have supported this idea in the Maryland General Assembly and will continue to work for its implementation. I think that limited use of pretrial supervision, depending on the nature of the crime and the risk that the defendant poses is the best approach.
- Would you work to expand criminal diversions in which willing victims and offenders are offered mediation?
Mediation can be an effective strategy when it comes to dealing with many crimes. I support it in individual cases and on a community basis and will work to put in place effective programs that offer this as an alternative. I will ensure that prosecutors who work for me are aware of this option and that a mechanism is in place to make it happen. This includes making arrangements for mediation to occur both before cases are scheduled and when they come up before the court. This is a significant problem now, but I believe it is one that can be addressed.
- Would you support reentry programs to improve employment opportunities for inmates returning from state prison sentences?
Re-entry program are essential if we are to reduce crime and end the cycle of criminal activity. They must offer realistic solutions and provide for necessary support and monitoring to get maximum effect. I will push to see that options are developed, drawing on both public, nonprofit and faith-based sources of support and staffing.
- Would you support mental health screening and treatment of pretrial detainees?
Mental health screening is essential. A large portion of those in the criminal justice system have issues with mental health. Traditional methods of punishment do little or nothing to help their problems. I support efforts like our Mental Health Court and other efforts to provide diversion and treatment alternatives. I am aware that there must be on-going support for those with mental health problems.
