A former Los Angeles teacher was charged with committing lewd acts against 23 children ten years old or younger. His bail has been set at $23 million. Few former teachers who I know can make a $100,000 bail yet alone a $23 million bail. He is charged with horrendous crimes. It is alleged that he blindfolded the children and using his semen gave them a tasting test to determine whether the semen was sweet or salty. It is further alleged that he took pictures of children with their mouths gagged and other pictures with cockroaches walking on children’s faces.

A $500,000 bail would probably keep the man in jail prior to trial. The setting of bail has a two fold purpose. First to insure that a defendant shows up for trial and second to insure the safety of the community. Certainly this guy should not be released on his own recognizance. He is facing life in prison and he may try to leave the jurisdiction. If the allegations are true he is certainly a danger to society. But the setting of a $500,000 or a one million dollar bail will probably accomplish these goals as well at the setting of a $23 million bail. What a $23 million bail does is get publicity for the judge and the prosecutor and make them look like they are tough on crime.

To make this point let’s look at a time line:

1) Some time in 2010 Mark Berndt, a teacher at Los Angeles’ Miramonte Elementary School takes pictures of abused children into a photo shop to be developed. The employees at the photo shop turn the pictures over to the LA County Sheriff’s Department.

2) January 2011 Berndt is fired after teaching at the school for 31 years.

3) January 30. 2012 Berndt is arrested. Bail is set at $2.3 million.

4) February 1. 2012 Berndt is arraigned and a judge raised the bail to $23 million.

He was not arraigned until over a year after his crimes were reported to the police. He could have committed numerous crimes during that period yet when he is finally arraigned the judge sets a $23 million bail to keep him in jail and away from children. What about crimes he could have done while awaiting arrest.

While it is true that someone facing life in prison is a flight risk, Berndt knew about the pending arrest since at least January 2011 when he was fired. If he did not leave the city in the following year he is unlikely to leave the city pending trial.

If he was unable to put up the $2.3 million bail after he was arrested there is no reason to raise the bail ten fold except to get publicity.