Our ongoing investigation into the covertly operated release program by the Miami-Dade Corrections department’s pretrial services bureau has unveiled a substantial number of questionable releases. Despite the apparent illegality or lack of authority surrounding the program, these releases raise serious concerns regarding public safety and the integrity of the criminal justice system.

Our inquiry has exposed a seemingly disorganized program in which defendants facing various charges are being released. Many of these defendants have extensive records of prior arrests and instances of failing to appear in court. Furthermore, some of these defendants are non-local residents, essentially visitors, which significantly increases the risk of them not showing up for their court appearances. Astonishingly, among the cases reviewed, at least one defendant was charged with defrauding an innkeeper, a common indicator of a transient individual lacking a permanent address. In another case we examined, a pretrial employee, rather than a judge, made the decision to release a person held at the TGK Jail without a verifiable address, deeming them suitable for release under this program. These are just a few random samples from the numerous on going releases we have uncovered dating back to 2021.

The disconcerting pattern that has come to light, coupled with questionable release determinations made by our elected first appearance judges, prompts us to question whether covertly enacted directives may be influencing these actions. It raises the suspicion that these hidden mandates may be mirroring the zero bail revolving door policies observed in other cities such as Los Angeles, San Francisco, and New York.

Defendant shows a Philadelphia, PA address on his arrest paperwork. Defendant failed to appear and was subsequently re-arrested and booked at additional cost to the taxpayers of Miami-Dade County.

Defendant was charged with defrauding an innkeeper. Even though this defendant has numerous prior arrests a pretrial services employee decided she was a good candidate for the legally questionable PTA program and released her. However, merely six days later, this defendant was re-arrested for the same charge of defrauding an innkeeper. Incredibly, even though she had a pending case from less than a week prior, the first appearance judge decided that she was not a flight risk and released her on her own recognizance (ROR). Not surprisingly to anyone but perhaps pretrial services and the first appearance Judge, the defendant promptly failed to appear on both cases and as of publication date is a fugitive with two bench warrants for $30,000.00.

Defendant was released by a pretrial services officer even though he has no address on his arrest paperwork. Charges against this defendant were eventually dismissed.

Charge related to weapons possession. The Miami-Dade Police officer who had the legal authority to release the defendant with a Promise to Appear (PTA) opted to process and book the defendant instead. However, a pretrial services employee overruled the decision made by the sworn law enforcement officer and issued the defendant a promise to appear.

Defendant is charged with multiple cases of unnatural and lascivious acts. The arresting officer determined that the charges were serious enough for this subject to be booked into the jail and processed accordingly. A pretrial services employee overrides this decision under questionable authority.

Defendant charged with two cases of Petit Theft. Released by pretrial services employee. Defendant failed to appear and as of publication date is a fugitive with two bench warrants.