For more legislative coverage and a list of bills introduced or passed Friday, see Page B6.It seemed like a good idea at the time: A computer system that would allow police to identify individuals charged with any variety of felonies or misdemeanors, regardless of where they are charged.In theory, if John Doe was charged with theft in Logan, did not show up for trial and was later pulled over for speeding in St. George, the computer would tell St. George officers that he was wanted in Logan. Doe would be arrested and jailed until Logan officers could pick him up.
"It's a great system, but it isn't working," said Rich Townsend, chief of the Bureau of Criminal Identification, which operates the Statewide Warrants System, initiated two years ago.
The reason is simple: For many agencies, it costs too much to drive several counties away to pick up a prisoner and take him back to stand trial. Several times every day, defendants in criminal cases are arrested and then released because no one shows up to transport them to stand trial.
"One guy was arrested five times on the same warrant before someone bothered to transport him," said Sen. Rex Black, D-Salt Lake, the sponsor of a bill that would allow courts to order the criminals to pay restitution on the costs of transportation.
Under the provisions of SB21, which has already passed the Senate, defendants who are convicted would pay $75 for transportation up to 100 miles, $125 up to 200 miles and $250 for anything over 200 miles.
Department of Corrections officials say there are 45,000 outstanding warrants with a bail value of $37.5 million.
SB21 is one of five bills aimed at forcing inmates to pay more for their life of crime. Another bill would allow courts to impose restitution orders for the costs of investigating cases, another would allow interest to accrue against inmates who haven't paid court-ordered restitution, and yet another bill would allow victims of crimes to pursue criminals in civil court once they are released from prison.
That could lead to garnishment of paychecks and liens against cars and homes acquired once the inmate leaves prison.
Another bill will be introduced that would allow the victims of crimes to recover any profits that criminals might derive from publishing or selling the rights to their crime stories.
But will any of these bills really squeeze more money from criminals?
"It's a good question," says Dave Walsh, administrative officer for the Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice. "There are only so many ways to slice a piece of pie. Do they really have the capacity to pay any more?"
In the fiscal year ending June 30, 1992, the state paid out $3.2 million to crime victims while collecting only about $1.8 million in restitution from offenders. In some cases, criminals are dodging efforts to collect; in most cases they simply have no resources with which to pay.
"The principle is sacrificed for the reality of the situation," said Rich Oldroyd, a research analyst with the CCJJ. The amount of unpaid restitution runs into the tens of millions of dollars.
Weber County Attorney Reed Richards, a member of the Governor's Council on Victims, calls the bills a two-edged sword. Before victims can be paid any restitution, criminals must be arrested, convicted and sentenced.
If police agencies are being reimbursed for transportation costs of getting an inmate to trial, it could result in more restitution money available to victims because more criminals are being processed by the courts.
On the other hand, "people who commit crimes are generally not the cream of society. They are deadbeats, and trying to collect restitution from these people is nigh impossible. It is impossible if they're in prison."
Some victims rights advocates worry that the state, ever anxious to cover more of its own costs, will dip deeper and deeper into restitution moneys that might otherwise go to victims of crimes. In the case of both transportation costs and investigation costs, that restitution would be extracted before the victims are paid.
The legislation, if passed, could create a situation where so much restitution and interest has accrued that criminals could never realistically hope to pay it off, at least not without resorting to a life of crime. Interest charges alone could double or triple the amount of restitution an inmate is ordered to pay.
Rep. Kevin Garn, R-Layton, the sponsor of a bill that allows interest to accrue on restitution orders, admits there are problems. "If it turns out to be a big judgment, they (inmates) always have the option of taking out bankruptcy when they get out of prison," he said.
"But the issue here is fair compensation to the victim. I'm more concerned about the victim than the criminal. If he has to work the rest of his life to pay the victim back, I don't have a problem with that."
Graphic: Provisions Legislation would: - Require
Provisions Legislation would: - Require county sheriffs to transport prisoners arrested on outstanding warrants. - Require defendants to pay up to $250 for transportation costs if convicted. - Require defendants to pay costs of investigating the cases if convicted. - Allow interest to accrue on all unpaid restitution. - Allow victims greater authority to pursue restitution in civil court once inmates are released.