Time: The Kalief Browder 6-part Series on Spike

[Anonymous]

Has anyone been watching? It's a documentary about the life of a teen who was thrown into jail on Rikers Island at the age of 16 for a crime he likely did not commit. He steadfastly proclaimed his innocence for the 3+ years he sat on Rikers, awaiting a trial that never happened. He was accused of stealing a book bag that held approx. $700, a phone and perhaps some other items. At some point, the accuser returned to his home country and the case was dropped. By then, Kalief had been physically and mentally abused on Rikers for 3+ years, spending much of that time in isolation. Sadly, once released, he could not shake the experience as much as he tried (even enrolling in a community college and earning close to a 4.0 average) and committed suicide in 2013, I believe. His mother died not too long after, of what is believed to be a broken heart. She'd had heart issues.

The story is chock-full of social and civil rights issues. The violence in the prison being one; subjecting teens to solitary confinement, the justice system and its bail which keeps people incarcerated simply because no one has the money to bail them out--even though they may be innocent..etc.

I have one question that's been sticking in my mind since watching the first episode three weeks ago:

Kalief's mother did not have the money to bail him out (approx. $900). It took her two weeks to get the money (she asked a former neighbor). Once she got it, she went to a bondsman only to be told that she could not. A hold had been placed on his bond. He had a prior (felony???) conviction for stealing and going joyriding in a bread truck with a friend. Because he was on probation (parole?) at the time of the 2nd arrest, he could not be released on bail.

Before this documentary--and even during it--the narrative had been that he'd been held at Rikers for 3 years, without a trial solely (or at least largely) because the family could not afford the bail. This opened another can or worms about the two justice systems: the one for the rich and the one for the poor.

So after this revelation was made about him having no bail, a huge part of the narrative continued to be about how the mother could not afford to bail him out, causing him to languish.

I thought he would've been denied release even if the mother had gone to bail him out the day he was arrested. Am I right?

Someone attempted to explain to me that there was a bond vs. a bail--???? when I thought they were the same thing. She argued that had she gotten the money in time he would've been set free. That confuses me. I think it's more likely that he couldn't have been bailed out to begin with. So why was a bail set? Was it done before the court realized he was on probation??? And even if that was the case, wouldn't he have just been picked up once they realized it a week or two later?

IS there a different between bail and bond?

Can somebody help me sort out that part?

Hopefully my rambling hasn't confused anyone.

[Anonymous]

Besides that one confusing part, I find the documentary to be repetitive. It could've been a one night 2-3 hour documentary. They keep making the same case and arguments over and over in each and every episode. I think it could've been better arranged/executed. 6 weeks is dragging out the story. Perhaps one week could've focused on this issue of bail--for a person who's only been accused, not found guilty. Then another could've focused on the violence and (his) poor treatment inside the prison and the need for prison reform, etc.

According to my TV guide, the episodes are meant to be set up in that way, but every week they've repeated the same things. Every single episode talks about how poor the people in the Bronx are and how not having money leads to less justice for him, how damaging solitary confinement is, and the violence (he endured) in Rikers. Last night I found myself getting up to do chores and prepare for work while it showed in the background because I'd heard all of the same arguments before.

I think the documentary reveals very serious issues that need to lead to serious public discourse and CHANGE in the way we do "justice" in this country. And it could've been much more powerful if the same arguments were not repeated in every episode.