PA: Philadephia’s New DA Wants Prosecutors To Talk Cost Of Incarceration While In Court


Every day, judges around the country are deciding the fate of criminal defendants by trying to strike the right balance between public safety and fairness.

In Philadelphia, the new progressive district attorney has launched an experiment. He’s asking his prosecutors to raise another factor with judges: the cost of incarceration.

The move has ignited a debate about whether the pricetag of punishment belongs in courtrooms.

Do a little math:

“Fiscal responsibility is a justice issue, and it is an urgent justice issue,” Larry Krasner said at a press conference recently.

Krasner is a former civil rights lawyer who rode into office on a platform of radically revamping the city’s district attorney’s office by opposing the death penalty, stepping away from cash bail and seeking shorter prison sentences for offenders.

He sees asking prosecutors and judges to grapple with the cost of locking up a defendant as a stride toward fulfilling his promise of trying to fight mass incarceration.

Read more


Related posts

Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...


  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address that are not personally identifiable.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  23. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Imagine if that was the case in California. I bet a few judges and others might do a double take before sending an RC away for a few years for non-criminal activity such as supporting their child in school, when the average cost of incarceration in California is now nearly $80k per year, per inmate.

“You’re honor, it’s important to spend $80k-$250k of the tax payers money to send away this scum for daring to attend their child’s baseball game. We have to send a message that no cost is too great for technicalities and poor principles.”

I think this is Soros’ guy from the last election. Interesting thinking. Money is talked about here regarding registry costs and whether it’s worthy, so the same ought to be discussed regarding incarceration in court.

Won’t happen for a long time, but if cost of incarceration was raised in federal court and all state courts that would be a tiny yet positive step.

The problem with bringing up monetary costs for incarceration is that it does not factor into costs for damage that a legitimate conviction would prevent in subsequent crimes for NON-RSO’s. Remember, recidivism is much higher for non-registrant related crimes, which in many cases result in far more damage and destruction to innocent people’s lives.

A better use of funds is to prevent such crime in the first place by promoting individual responsibility in the citizenry, which is the ultimate stay-out-of-jail method that mostly always work.

Beware the methods here. Remember, once the state controls the criminality outside of Constitutional bounds, they can control the population outside of Constitutional bounds as as well. As sex offender registration laws are the canary in the mine to such acts, it would behoove the citizenry to beware of such emotional arguments in court.