INDIANAPOLIS — Indiana voters on Election Day will decide whether to allow judges to deny bail for crimes other than murder or treason.

The state constitution allows judges to deny bail for murder or treason if there is strong evidence that the crime occurred. Public Question 1 would amend the constitution to also allow judges to deny bail for other crimes if there is compelling evidence and if the state proves that no other pretrial release conditions would keep the victim or members of the public safe.

According to the Indiana Criminal Justice Institute, nearly 71% of people arrested for crimes in Indiana are released from jail before trial. Of those, about 64% are released on bail, usually some combination of cash or surety bonds. The rest are usually released on their own recognizance, typically for minor crimes. The ICJI’s annual report found just 7% of people on pretrial release last year were re-arrested while awaiting trial.

Rick Snyder, the president of Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 86, which represents nearly all law enforcement agencies in Marion County, said although the overall number of pretrial re-arrests is small, they can involve some of the most serious crimes.

“As many as 30% of our homicides (in Indianapolis) have involved either a victim and/or a suspect who, if one or both of the parties involved have been held responsible for prior bad acts, according to law, they could not or would not have been there for that latest act of violence,” he said. “What that tells us is, possibly as many as 30% of our homicides are preventable.”

Snyder said judges already have the authority to deny bail in crimes other than murder or treason. He said the amendment would clarify that. Snyder said the change does not violate the doctrine of innocent until proven guilty.

“You’re really drilling down through multiple layers to get to those crimes that actually involve accusations, allegations of violence, a clear history of violence and also the need to protect people involved,” he said. “So I think you’re dealing with a limited number of cases, but right now, that’s a limited number of cases that is very attributable to that 7 to 10 percent reoffense rate. And the outcomes of that have been pretty dire and deadly.”

Those who work with formerly justice-involved people trying to reintegrate into society said they find the proposal alarming. Lena Hackett, the president of Community Solutions and the coordinator for the Marion County Reentry Coalition, said remaining in jail before trial makes it far more likely a person will lose their job, their housing, and their family support network. She said most defendants wait six months before their case goes to trial. She said not only does pretrial release help prevent those problems, but it also improves a person’s access to defense counsel.

“(Judges) can release them on an electronic monitor. They can release them on an electronic monitor and restrict them to home detention. They can restrict what geographies they can move into. They can restrict contact with any victims,” she said. “There are a lot of tools that judges have in their toolboxes right now that are as restrictive as sitting in jail, but that person could still keep their job, keep their home, keep their family.”

Hackett said that, in her experience, people who are re-arrested while on pretrial release are arrested for minor crimes, often misdemeanors. She said the implementation of the bail policy will come down to individual judges.

“It is really a judge’s perception of whether this person will be a risk to society or not. We all have implicit biases, so to expect a judge to not have implicit biases would be fairly naive,” she said. “It’s going to be applied unevenly and unjustly, it’s based on the presumption that people are guilty, not innocent.”