Tag: court watch

Categories
News News Blog News Feature

Memphis Crime Beat Seeks Data For Improving Justice System

Photo Credit : Tingey Injury Law Firm via Unsplash

The Memphis Crime Beat has asked elected officials for help in improving transparency in the city’s justice system.

“Without data we don’t know how our systems are performing, and it’s really important that we do,” Leslie Taylor, president of Memphis Crime Beat, said during today’s meeting of the Memphis City Council’s Public Safety and Homeland Security committee. “There are lots of opportunities to improve our systems, but if we’re not identifying them, then how do we know where to begin?”

Taylor, along with Memphis Police Chief C.J. Davis, discussed the work that Memphis Crime Beat is doing while also asking for help in procuring data.

The nonpartisan group was founded as a way to help citizens better understand crime in Memphis through data collection and informing citizens on crime-related policies and the judicial system.

The group analyzes data to make this information accessible for citizens. It was initially inspired by its Court Watch initiative where members observed and evaluated the application of justice in Shelby County.

“Through our Court Watch experience we started realizing how important the justice system is to reducing crime,” Taylor said. “What we didn’t realize when we started is the justice system is a huge piece of that and needs to work hand and glove with law enforcement … to reduce crime.” 

She said the way they analyze the life of a crime through what they call the “crime funnel” from the time a crime is committed to when the perpetrator is sentenced. These stages also include factors such as rearrests, reoffenses, and rehabilitation. 

The organization cited information from the University of Memphis that 12 percent of people who commit crimes are rearrested within 120 days, and 21 percent are arrested within 500 days. 

While they were able to present this data to the council, they noted that there is an absence of data from the justice system. Taylor said law enforcement does a “reasonably good” job on collecting transparent data, but they’re in a “black hole” when it comes to other statistics.

According to the Administrative Office of the Courts, 56 percent of cases were dismissed out of 111,000 offenses. However, Taylor noted they do not have any data as to why they were dismissed. Nor is there information on rehabilitation efforts.

A report from the Tennessee Comptroller of the Treasury on the Shelby Criminal Justice System further illustrated this need by recommending that the system “collect and publicly report data for key metrics on a regular basis.”

“There are numerous opportunities for enhancing the transparency, accessibility, and usability of aggregate data on the operations and outcomes of the Shelby County criminal justice system,” the report said.

Taylor said areas of opportunities include publishing how well judges manage their docket. She said this is a piece of information they would like to have immediately, and encouraged the council to help urge clerks to share this information.

“We know what data we need to track life of a crime through the crime funnel and we know who has it,” Taylor said. “We don’t have the authority to make people provide us with the data. We hope y’all can help us in that regard.”

Davis said they only have the information they can provide, which is available on the city’s dashboard. She called Taylor’s work invaluable since police “don’t have the manpower or time to do it.”

“We need that data to put on our dashboard about what happened in the court,” Davis said.

Councilwoman Janika White requested that Taylor provide the council with a list of missing data points needed.

“I’m an advocate for transparency and data as well, because we can’t figure out what’s working and what’s not, as well as figuring out where our gaps are,” White said.

Categories
News News Blog News Feature

New Just City Court Watch Report Urges Judges To Be More ‘Sensitive’ and ‘Neutral’

Photo by Tingey Injury Law Firm on Unsplash

The latest observations from Just City’s Court Watch report say that while most of Shelby County’s judges are accessible, many need to work on their ability to “treat both the accused and the victim with dignity,” as well as with sensitivity.

Just City is a Memphis-based nonprofit that works for criminal justice reform. Its Court Watch is a project that aims to bring “transparency and accountability to the county’s criminal legal system” and reduce barriers to justice.

“We do that by publishing these reports to provide a glimpse into what happens at 201 Poplar daily,” said the organization.

Just City’s “Court Watch” report is composed of observations from volunteers, who watch and evaluate the judges in the criminal courtrooms. Judges are scored on a scale from one to four, with one being the worst and four being the best.

“This report, which combines court watch and data analysis, provides an overview of the performance of judges in Criminal and General Session courts at 201 Poplar Avenue since September 2022,” said Just City.

Some of the group’s key findings concluded that most judges received lower scores in sensitivity and neutrality. Their findings also raised concern surrounding extended duration cases and the “frequency of dismissed cases.”

When evaluating judges, volunteers are asked to consider questions such as “Did the judge give the appearance of neutrality?” and “Did the judge handle each case with the sensitivity warranted?”

After receiving 10 rubrics from the judges that the group focuses on, they begin compiling that information into their latest report. In the current report, volunteers observed judges Paula L. Skahan, Carolyn Wade Blackett, Jennifer J. Mitchell, Bill Anderson Jr., and Louis J. Montesi Jr.

Skahan received high marks in accessibility and “ability to hear,” with her lowest scores being in timeliness and sensitivity. Volunteers noted that Skahan was “kind, but firm” and “demonstrated genuine concern for people in her courtroom.” However, volunteers also believed that Skahan can improve on her sensitivity, and that she should be “less condescending.”

Volunteers noted that Blackett “runs an efficient, fast paced courtroom,” and applauded her clear communication skills. They also remarked that Blackett was “responsive to defendants who had questions.” While Blackett received high scores in accessibility, and neutrality, her lowest score was regarding appointment of a public defender. Volunteers also believed that Blackett could improve on her interactions with defendants and her sensitivity.

Mitchell scored high in neutrality and accessibility, with comments noting her ability to be “conscientious of defendants needing to return to jobs” and her ability to provide “thorough explanations.” According to volunteer scoring, Mitchell scored lowest in timeliness with comments saying she “could be more efficient getting through her docket.” They also urged Mitchell to “take less phone and coffee breaks.”

Judge Anderson is recorded as having a “great handling of courtroom,” and volunteers took note of his decision to “take times to explain things.” However, a former client noted that he could be “less condescending” and should “allow for second chances.”

In terms of a lasting impression, however, volunteers also said “at times it felt like the prosecutors had more control of the courtroom than the judge,” and that he could “make better use of his time.”

A former client also noted that court under Montesi was “very efficient and organized,” while volunteers said he excelled in having “clear communication in layman’s terms.” However, Montesi was urged to “treat Black and white defendants equally.” The report also said they observed that Montesi seemed to have a “mean demeanor towards everybody.”


The full report can be viewed here.

Categories
News News Blog News Feature

Just City’s ‘Court Watch’ Grades County Judges

Photo by Tingey Injury Law Firm / Unsplash

Some of Shelby County’s criminal court judges “need to be more professional” and “less condescending,” according to Just City’s recent “Court Watch” report. 

Just City is a Memphis-based nonprofit that works for criminal justice reform. Its Court Watch is a project that aims to bring “transparency and accountability to the county’s criminal legal system” and reduce barriers to justice.

Though most of the judges were commended for their ability to “explain things well,” each of the four judges observed had attributes that volunteers believed they could improve on. Responses ranged from professionalism, tone, and overall courtroom energy.

Just City’s “Court Watch” report is composed of observations from volunteers, who watch and evaluate the judges in the criminal courtrooms. Judges are scored on a scale from one to four, with one being the worst and four being the best.

The rubric consists of questions such as “Did the judge give the appearance of neutrality,” “Were both the accused and victim treated fairly,” and “Did you have any issues getting in.”

While all four judges seemed to receive a four in “access,” this is the only place where all judges received a consistent high score.

Judge Lee V. Coffee scored relatively high in most areas, however his lowest score was in “ability to hear.” Coffee was commended on his ability to explain things thoroughly and his ability to control the courtroom. However, Just City volunteers believe that Coffee should “have more interaction with people,” and “give people more chances.” Coffee scored the highest out of the four judges in “timeliness.”

In terms of neutrality, Judge Chris Craft received the lowest score out of the judges being observed. While volunteers said that Craft was “friendly” and “efficient,” they also believe that Craft needs to “change his attitude.” A former client said that “he was repeatedly all over the place and disorganized.” Volunteers also observed that Craft was “blatantly disrespectful,” and that he “performs his job like he’s running a circus. Or a slaughterhouse.” 

The report also said that Craft “heavily factors race into his decisions and uses racially charged language.”

Judge Karen L. Massey received the highest score in “ability to hear,” with volunteers saying Massey “talks to you and not ‘at’ you,” and that “she’s a good listener.” Massey received lower scores when it came to her sensitivity and timeliness. A former client said “she can work on being on time, I never knew when I’d get out.” Another former client said that Massey can “work on her professionalism.” Volunteers said that Massey “has a very abrasive tone towards defendants,” and that she is “inconsistent in the way that she deals and judges individuals.”

Volunteers believe that Judge S. Ronald Lucchesi could be more consistent and can improve on expanding public defender appointments. On the report, Lucchesi is quoted as saying “ If you want a public defender, I can throw you in jail for a few days so you can qualify in this court.” While former clients believe that Lucchesi is fair and honest, others said that he needs to be more professional. Lucchesi is also noted as being inflexible and “either really kind, or really harsh.”