News / The Fair And Just Journal

By Oren Gur

The framing of failure to appear (FTA) in court often centers on criminal defendants as the problem. In the U.S., many people are detained pre-trial – i.e., before a determination of guilt – because they are unable to pay monetary bail that may be instituted because “defendants pose a substantial risk of flight.” However, according to researchers at the University of Pennsylvania and the University of Virginia, ten years of data from Philadelphia paint a more complex picture: it is not defendants who most frequently fail to appear in court, but other key players—police officers, civilian witnesses, victims, and even lawyers. While the broader FTA problem is likely well known to anyone who regularly appears in court, this was the first research to quantify it, helping corroborate the experiences of criminal legal practitioners.

The Research

Between 2010 and 2020, data from Philadelphia courts showed that an essential party to the case—whether a police officer, civilian witness, or lawyer—missed at least one hearing in 53% of cases. Police officers failed to appear in 31% of cases where they were subpoenaed. Defendants, meanwhile, failed to appear in 19% of cases. The research also found that when police officers or civilian witnesses fail to appear, cases are twice as likely to be dismissed, accounting for an estimated 32,000 dropped cases during the study period. The inability to get the right people in the same room at the same time leaves survivors without closure and defendants without resolution. Failure to appear by these key actors delays justice, requires additional time commitments and resources from all parties, and is suggestive of a broader problem requiring systemic solutions.

Yet the false narrative around FTA has historically focused on defendants and has been used to further legitimize invasive and harmful policies, such as excessive cash bail, unnecessary pretrial detention, and intensive supervision. These measures disproportionately impact marginalized communities without addressing the broader, systemic nature of FTA.

At the District Attorney’s Transparency Analytics (DATA) Lab in the Philadelphia District Attorney Office’s (DAO), we aim to help shift conversations. The DATA Lab is dedicated to leveraging data, research, and collaboration to uncover root causes and explore innovative solutions to systemic challenges like FTA. By engaging directly with a range of stakeholders, including colleagues in the office and other agencies, community-based organizations and leaders, and researchers, we work to make the criminal legal system and data more accessible, equitable, and responsive to all participants. We provide data to inform decision-makers.

The Need for More Data and Collaboration

In spite of this being the first study to quantify this issue, there is a need for more and better data and continued collaboration with many stakeholders. The research required writing detailed code to systematically extract the information of interest from docket notes not designed for purposes of tracking court appearances. Data entry was not uniform or standardized. Key details were sometimes missing that make the information less actionable for decision-makers, such as which specific witness(es) did not show up. Or the data is fragmented, with different agencies holding important pieces of information in compartmentalized databases, with some key details only written on paper. More attention is therefore needed to systematically collect data on court appearances to inform conversations around policy and practice, as well as further research.

We also need to do more to engage community-based partners and stakeholders around this issue. While we and our research partners have made great effort to disseminate the findings of this research in academic settings, in our office, with prosecutorial offices across the country, and in forums such as this, direct conversations about the research with community members would help identify solutions. Conversations with community members could include a range of topics, such as what people think of the findings, whether people have heard about or experienced this issue, barriers to appearing in court for all actors and participation in the legal process more generally, and ideas about solutions. For example, witnesses and civilian participants may fail to appear in court due to logistical challenges, such as lack of transportation, inflexible work schedules, and issues as serious as mistrust of the system or as pragmatic as unclear written notifications.

System actors also face logistical issues that this research has helped underscore, leading to discussions and the development of collaborative solutions. Police officers may be called to testify at the same time in multiple courtrooms on different floors, or be nearby, but not at the precise time a judge calls a case for a preliminary hearing. Prosecutors may subpoena numerous officers in the hopes one shows, so the case is not dismissed. Private defense attorneys may take more cases than they can handle. Perhaps the defendant was not transported from the local jail. And more officers in court testifying may mean fewer officers on the beat protecting public safety. By collaborating with local community-based and criminal justice organizations, prosecutors’ offices that use research and data can help identify and address these complex barriers.

The consequences of systemic FTA are too significant to ignore. Cases delayed or derailed by lack of engagement or systemic coordination weaken trust in the criminal legal system and perpetuate inefficiency and inequity. By collecting better data, fostering collaboration to identify solutions, and taking action, we can reframe the conversation around FTA and improve this part of the system to better utilize resources and deliver justice.

Oren Gur, Ph.D. is a policy advisor, research director, and director of the District Attorney’s Transparency Analytics (DATA) Lab in the Philadelphia District Attorney Office’s (DAO).