>> A sweeping criminal justice reform law in Illinois, known as the Safety Act is under renewed scrutiny following the killing of Chicago Police Officer John Bartholomew.

Critics are pointing to the laws changes to the pre-trial detention system as having led to the controversial decision by a Cook County judge to allow Bartholomew's alleged killer out on electronic monitoring.

Despite prior violent offenses, Illinois Republicans are pushing for changes to that law, they say would make it easier for judges to detain defendants awaiting trial.

Joining us, our state Senator Terry Bryant, a Republican whose district in southern Illinois, includes Mount Vernon and Wayne City and State Sen LG, Suns junior, a Democrat whose district includes Chicago's Chatham Neighborhood, Calumet City in South Holland.

He was the lead sponsor of the Safety Senators, thanks to both for joining us.

Thanks for having Thanks for Senator.

Brian, I want to start with you.

In what way do you think Officer Bar Shoney's definite highlight the problems with the safety Act?

>> Well, first of the sense that Republicans have filed a bill Senate bill, 4195, which would basically just say there's someone is out on pretrial release and they commit another felony that they would have to be locked up.

So we know that the safety 12 subject matter hearings, but never actually got a vote in the committee where you flush out a lot of problems in those bills.

And so I think there are changes that need to be made just like with any bill that is 800 to 1000 pages long.

>> And in what ways do you think the results of of a a fund tally the the alleged the accused shooter of Officer Bartholomew under what parts of the Safety Act.

Could he should?

He have been back in in jail.

>> Well, there multiple ways.

First of as I said, there are portions of the safety act that needs to be tweaked, if you will, not necessarily, you know pushback when you say change a tweaking, that law is what we do with loss.

And we find that there are gaps.

There is a gap when someone is on tree pretrial release, they're on a bracelet and they're still released where the commit a heinous felony.

Let's also keep in mind this particular offender was also on parole, should have his parole violated and also had absconded I would love to have left.

So he was only a parole violator, but he was on the run and the apprehension unit for Department of Corrections was never notified.

So there are a lot.

There are a lot of gaps in how that individuals are getting by with not being detained properly and keeping public safe.

Senator Simms.

Well, everything that Senator Bryant talked about the law.

The law contemplates.

>> In a situation where this individual to commit work in minutes, another crime they would be would be held.

The lock the law comes.

Blake said already and then already calls certainly warning.

That this is we we should make the sweeping changes when we have one or another.

Let me be very clear what office about Mark You should never have happened.

It is a tragedy of the most pain for he and his family and my thoughts and prayers are with he and his family.

All of the Chicago Police force who police department and all of law enforcement around the state of Illinois and around the country.

But the reality that the judge is the one who made the decision.

He was the closest to the facts before him.

He was the one who had the opportunity to see what was going on.

He he was the one M Chally certainly been before him before jumped.

The judge is the one which is what the system calls for to make the decision that we we've had.

we've had a situation where we've had mandatory minimums formulate decisions being made and decisions being made for judges as opposed to allowing judges to make decisions about the cases before them and the cape in this case before the given the set of facts before Senate, certainly as we all know them to be just a fender should have been held.

So what that deal again with discretion was with the judge to make that determination.

And I want to we're definitely come back to authority of the judges.

Senator.

Brian, do you believe the safety the impact that it has and police to believe that it makes it harder for police to do their jobs.

>> I think it makes much harder for them to do to do their job.

And I would say consider some said that we don't need to make sweeping changes to the safety act.

I don't think it's a sweeping change to make an adjustment where an individual who's on pretrial release, this change would just say that they have to be detained if they commit another felony.

I don't think that's a sweeping change.

I think that's a tweak that is not only needed but is is absolutely imperative that we make that change.

They say we're going to come back to the judge's discretion.

But I think one of the most important things that needs to be changed under the safety Act is we we probably need to take away some of the judge's discretion and make it a little bit more clear to the judges when they should keep that person detained and not.

But I also want to go back I know this.

This interview is about this particular this particular change.

But let's keep in mind again, we have an offender who was out.

It was on parole.

In addition to pre-trial told he was on parole, he had no business being out in the public all and should have been should have his pool violated should have been locked up.

So there's good reasons why this offender should not have been on the streets.

Senator Bryan, you and House Republicans, you filed legislation, as you mentioned, and going to come back to in a minute Senator sent I promise you mentioned Senate Bill 4195.

>> Which would make you said tweaks.

Tell us about some of those week.

Senator Bryan.

Well, this in this particular case with Senate Bill, 4195.

Again, it would just the legislation.

>> Simply just says that an individual who's on pretrial release and commits another felony, whether on that release have would have to be detained.

So it does take judicial discretion away and just basically says this person is committing another felony.

They don't get to go out to use it.

It's too much to say that the person gets the 5th chance.

The tense chance, the 25th chance.

And there are multiple other offenders, not just this one but multiple other offenders who gone back out and committed heinous crimes because they were allowed out on with print pretrial detention instead of being locked up so they commit another felony.

They should be locked Well, so both cases are adjudicated.

>> So after the shooting, Governor JB Pritzker said you know, to the point of the judges again said that the safety it wasn't a safety act that played a role.

But it was a bad decision by the judge.

John, like?

>> And in this case, I mean, it's a tragedy.

What happened, awful and it as you've seen in most of the cases where Republicans have complained about the safety.

actually been bad decision an elected judge in Illinois or up or no hearing at all.

Because the prosecutor didn't bring it to the judge.

And that has been a reason why somebody gets let out a judge can make this decision.

A judge should have made the decision to keep that person in jail.

>> Senator Simms, what about that and what about what we've heard from your colleague, Senator Bryant, about whether or not the Safety Act gives judges too much of 40 or are some erring towards release of someone of an individual in cases like this one and others were someone who was on electronic monitoring, then then did commit another violent crime.

>> Shore and then again, that's that's where you here.

What what is being called a tweak is really a sweeping change.

If you are taking discretion away from the judge to make the determination that is a significant change.

That absolutely not a tweak.

It is not a tweak to say that we're going to stop the judge from being able to make the determination again.

The judge is the person was sitting I have set in detention courts in in Cook County and others where you see the judges who are presented with a set of facts, they have the opportunity to hear the individual's record.

They have opportunity here about here.

The risk assessment, which is what we have, what what we tried to do to make sure that we understand what threat the person presents too, to the to the community, to themselves or to others and the judge is the one who's making that decision.

They have the ability to make that determination based on the information presented to them.

But on top of that, we are.

We're in a situation now where this judge may to determine I was not there.

I disagree with it.

I disagree with the decision, but but we all have right now we all have been it's been benefit of hindsight in hindsight is certainly it's a it's certainly a benefit when you when you can look at the decision and and and make the determination after the decision been made.

But the judge, the person, again, an individual, elected judge as separately elected individual judge was part of a coequal branch of government made a determination is it was a decision I disagree with, but it is the school's decision that we have as a legislature.

And when signed passing this long beings and pass this bill and having be signed into law have made a determination then as a coequal branch of government, that is their decision to make.

>> Senator Brian, could judges or should they be doing something differently to assess the defendant before making a decision on whether or not to detain them?

>> think they have to.

Obviously they have to take all of the information, not just small amounts of this certainly this offender had a long history of fences over and over again, including felonies.

I hope that I because I hear both colleague and I heard the governor place a lot of blame on the judge and I'm not taking anything away from the judge, but there is also fault here to be had, as I said, the older Department of Corrections.

I hope that while they're trying to point blame at a particular they also point blame at the director of the Department of Corrections for not making sure that this person wasn't even out on the streets, but under the safety act.

Yes, I think that the judges there are times when we need to look at it and say maybe there's too much discretion given to the judges and we should take some of that back.

These are this is a very simple easy to wrap your mind around request that says that if outcome pretrial drug attention and then commit another crime, they have to be locked up a separate the Safety Act already already allows for that.

If there isn't, if there's a crime that's committed, the judge can always revoked the pretrial release.

>> And detained.

It allows for doesn't that doesn't a lot cases.

Saturday ended.

>> I'm gonna jump in here.

I appreciate you both.

That's where we're going to have to