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.”