Surety supervision is one of the most onerous bail conditions imposed on legally innocent people pretrial. Sureties are generally family or friends who promise a sum of money and agree to supervise the accused, enforcing conditions and reporting non-compliance. Drawing on data from 32 in-depth interviews with individuals who have acted as sureties, this paper examines the complex, contradictory, and damaging implications of exploiting personal relationships for the state’s surveillance and monitoring interests. We argue that by placing sureties in such a role, the court stresses the accused’s social relationships by transforming the accused’s support network into an apparatus of state control. Sureties describe exploited relational bonds and ruptured relationships, insisting they will never act as a surety again. We conclude by outlining directions for reform, including changing the nature of surety supervision, decriminalization and developing bail supervision programs.
