What can be a consequence of not using validated risk assessment tools?

Choosing not to use validated risk assessment tools can lead to potentially unjust detention of defendants. These tools are designed to evaluate the likelihood of a defendant reoffending or failing to appear in court. By not using such tools, decision-makers may rely on subjective judgments or biases, leading to inconsistent treatment of defendants. As a result, individuals may be detained longer than necessary or unfairly based on factors unrelated to their actual risk.

The other options, while positive in nature, do not accurately reflect the realities of omitting validated risk assessments. To increase accuracy in release decisions, validated tools are essential; they provide a systematic approach to risk evaluation, reducing the likelihood of errors in judgment. Similarly, without these tools, public trust in the system may suffer, as disparities in detention practices could lead to perceptions of unfairness. Lastly, the absence of validated assessments does not contribute to improved community policies; instead, it may hinder the development of fair practices based on reliable data.