We Love This News. Read More Below.
Read more here (including reader comments) or follow the news below:
Police seek to improve officers' court appearances
Prosecutors also act over C-J series
By R. G. Dunlop and Jason Riley
Louisville Metro Police Chief Robert White is working with prosecutors and others to hold officers more accountable for missed court appearances that have let hundreds of defendants charged with serious crimes go free.
Advertisement
And Mayor Jerry Abramson has promised to fund an electronic subpoena system to ensure officers receive timely notification of court hearings, replacing a ponderous paper system that often failed to promptly notify officers -- if at all -- of their appearances.
Those are two of the actions officials say they are taking in the wake of last month's Courier-Journal series showing that more than 600 felony defendants were set free in 2007 alone because Louisville officers failed to appear for district court hearings.
The newspaper found that at least 300 of the department's approximately 1,200 officers had at least one felony case dismissed because they failed to appear, even though police policy and Kentucky law require them to attend court after receiving subpoenas.
White and other officials say they have since taken these steps:
Police and court officials are working to implement an e-subpoena system, and are talking with companies that offer the service.
Prosecutors have agreed to notify police supervisors when cases are dismissed because officers miss court.
White has increased internal reporting and monitoring of missed appearances and is requiring more scrutiny of officers' reasons for absences.
White also is taking steps to eliminate "first call" subpoenas in traffic and misdemeanor cases. As a result, officers wouldn't have to come to court for the initial hearings in these cases, which police say would reduce the subpoena load by about 30 percent and save money by reducing court pay -- without affecting case outcomes.
In the past three weeks, the number of Louisville officers appearing in court has risen dramatically, resulting in faster case dispositions and fewer dismissals, judges and prosecutors said.
"Frankly, attendance by police officers in court has been excellent the past couple of weeks, better than before," said Bill Patteson, a spokesman for the Jefferson County attorney's office.
(2 of 4)
White made a rare, unannounced appearance in district court to survey the situation, and also issued a memo March 31 sternly reminding officers that they are obligated to appear when subpoenaed.
Advertisement
"Failure on the part of any employee to attend court, without an excused absence, is a very serious violation of our policy," White wrote. "We must ensure LMPD members are attending court when properly subpoenaed, so cases can be properly adjudicated."
Often undetected
The Courier-Journal's three-day report detailed a host of issues -- within the police department and the court system -- that contributed to officers failing to attend court hearings, resulting in dismissed cases.
While officers sometimes have valid reasons for missing court, such as work-related or personal emergencies, absences often went undetected because of a lack of oversight by the department and prosecutors' reluctance to share information routinely about dismissed cases with officers' supervisors.
And when police officials were aware of officers' absences, they rarely took action. Only one officer was disciplined in 2007 for missing court, and just three were sanctioned in 2008.
Also, police have not tracked cases that were dismissed because officers did not attend court -- despite being urged to do so in two reports since 2002, and periodic complaints from prosecutors, judges and others.
As a result, neither the department nor prosecutors have known the frequency of such cases, why the officers failed to appear and whether there were chronically absent officers.
Increased scrutiny
In an interview Friday, White said he has instructed department supervisors to better track officers who do not attend court, to more closely scrutinize the validity of reasons given by those who are absent and to monitor dismissed cases.
"I'm not one to make excuses, but a lot of what you uncovered never made it to this desk," he said.
Under the changes, Sgt. David Mutchler, the department's court liaison, will notify the supervisor of any officer who misses a hearing. Those superiors will assess whether the officer had a valid excuse, White said.
Each month, White said, he will receive a report of officers' absences and the reasons, allowing him to look for cases that he thinks merit investigation.
White also said he has eliminated some previously acceptable reasons for missing court, such as non-mandatory training.
White also said officers no longer will be permitted to cause or request the dismissal of cases in which they've made arrests, unless they first consult with supervisors.
In instances where prior discussion cannot occur, White said supervisors will review dismissed cases to determine if the reasons were valid, and to consider disciplining officers if they were not.
And Mutchler will send to Maj. David Ray, commander of the department's special investigations division, the results of random spot checks on officers' court attendance, said White and Assistant Chief Troy Riggs.
White said increased scrutiny of officers' court attendance will take additional time and "a lot of work on our part." But he said he is committed to providing the necessary resources, because doing so "will cut out a lot of negligence on our part."
Prosecutors to act
The county attorney's office has agreed to notify Mutchler when cases are dismissed because subpoenaed officers are not present for hearings. Prosecutors had resisted the idea, contending that it was the police department's job to track officers' attendance.
Patteson said the county's attorney's current stance reflects a desire "to cooperate with the police department and the other parties in district court as much as possible."
Prosecutors and others also agree with White that a system of virtually instantaneous electronic subpoenas is needed to replace the current, labor-intensive one, which can take days to trek thousands of pieces of paper from the courthouse into officers' hands.
Jefferson County Attorney Mike O'Connell told Kentucky Chief Justice John Minton in a March 19 letter that a system of e-subpoenas would "vastly improve both the speed with which subpoenas are received by police officers and the efficiency of case disposition."
(4 of 4)
Minton said this week that the court will cooperate with efforts to adopt an e-subpoena system in Jefferson County.
Advertisement
Supreme Court Justice Lisabeth Hughes Abramson, whose district consists of Jefferson County, said it might be possible to adopt an e-subpoena pilot project in Jefferson County which would require Supreme Court approval but not a change in the statewide rules of criminal procedure.
Local officials have solicited information from Orion Communications Inc. in Dallas, which has sold e-subpoena systems to such cities as Miami and Dallas. Other vendors also are under consideration, Patteson said.
Orion President Leslie DeLatte told the newspaper in February that a basic system for the Louisville Metro Police Department could cost about $120,000 -- less than the county attorney's office spends in a year on the paper-driven system.
Although the precise cost has not been determined, Abramson has promised to provide the necessary funds to make e-subpoenas a reality, spokeswoman Kerri Richardson said.
'Lead the charge'
Officials expressed optimism that progress will be made to correct the problems in the court system.
"There's definitely movement," said Ronnie Harris, spokesman for Jefferson Circuit Court Clerk David Nicholson. "Everyone is really intent on making this better."
White said he does not intend to let the opportunity to make improvements slip away.
"I'm willing to lead the charge," he said -- including on behalf of his plan to eliminate the need for officers to appear at initial hearings in misdemeanor and traffic cases.
White said officers rarely are needed at those hearings, and that not summoning them to court would eliminate about 30 percent of the more than 100,000 subpoenas issued annually to Louisville officers. The change also would reduce the department's costs for court pay to officers called to appear while off duty.
Patteson said the county attorney's office supports the change, though prosecutors will reserve the right to subpoena officers when they think it is necessary.
White said he is not seeking the police union's approval for the change -- which River City Fraternal Order of Police President John McGuire said is a mistake.
"If any changes are going to affect wages, hours and working conditions, they need to talk to us about it, and they haven't," he said. "Everybody has to be on board for this to work. There is a chance we could have serious issues with it."
McGuire said he planned to ask White this week to discuss the matter.
Reporter R.G. Dunlop can be reached at (502) 582-4227. Reporter Jason Riley can be reached at (502) 582-4727.
Police seek to improve officers' court appearances
Prosecutors also act over C-J series
By R. G. Dunlop and Jason Riley
Louisville Metro Police Chief Robert White is working with prosecutors and others to hold officers more accountable for missed court appearances that have let hundreds of defendants charged with serious crimes go free.
Advertisement
And Mayor Jerry Abramson has promised to fund an electronic subpoena system to ensure officers receive timely notification of court hearings, replacing a ponderous paper system that often failed to promptly notify officers -- if at all -- of their appearances.
Those are two of the actions officials say they are taking in the wake of last month's Courier-Journal series showing that more than 600 felony defendants were set free in 2007 alone because Louisville officers failed to appear for district court hearings.
The newspaper found that at least 300 of the department's approximately 1,200 officers had at least one felony case dismissed because they failed to appear, even though police policy and Kentucky law require them to attend court after receiving subpoenas.
White and other officials say they have since taken these steps:
Police and court officials are working to implement an e-subpoena system, and are talking with companies that offer the service.
Prosecutors have agreed to notify police supervisors when cases are dismissed because officers miss court.
White has increased internal reporting and monitoring of missed appearances and is requiring more scrutiny of officers' reasons for absences.
White also is taking steps to eliminate "first call" subpoenas in traffic and misdemeanor cases. As a result, officers wouldn't have to come to court for the initial hearings in these cases, which police say would reduce the subpoena load by about 30 percent and save money by reducing court pay -- without affecting case outcomes.
In the past three weeks, the number of Louisville officers appearing in court has risen dramatically, resulting in faster case dispositions and fewer dismissals, judges and prosecutors said.
"Frankly, attendance by police officers in court has been excellent the past couple of weeks, better than before," said Bill Patteson, a spokesman for the Jefferson County attorney's office.
(2 of 4)
White made a rare, unannounced appearance in district court to survey the situation, and also issued a memo March 31 sternly reminding officers that they are obligated to appear when subpoenaed.
Advertisement
"Failure on the part of any employee to attend court, without an excused absence, is a very serious violation of our policy," White wrote. "We must ensure LMPD members are attending court when properly subpoenaed, so cases can be properly adjudicated."
Often undetected
The Courier-Journal's three-day report detailed a host of issues -- within the police department and the court system -- that contributed to officers failing to attend court hearings, resulting in dismissed cases.
While officers sometimes have valid reasons for missing court, such as work-related or personal emergencies, absences often went undetected because of a lack of oversight by the department and prosecutors' reluctance to share information routinely about dismissed cases with officers' supervisors.
And when police officials were aware of officers' absences, they rarely took action. Only one officer was disciplined in 2007 for missing court, and just three were sanctioned in 2008.
Also, police have not tracked cases that were dismissed because officers did not attend court -- despite being urged to do so in two reports since 2002, and periodic complaints from prosecutors, judges and others.
As a result, neither the department nor prosecutors have known the frequency of such cases, why the officers failed to appear and whether there were chronically absent officers.
Increased scrutiny
In an interview Friday, White said he has instructed department supervisors to better track officers who do not attend court, to more closely scrutinize the validity of reasons given by those who are absent and to monitor dismissed cases.
"I'm not one to make excuses, but a lot of what you uncovered never made it to this desk," he said.
Under the changes, Sgt. David Mutchler, the department's court liaison, will notify the supervisor of any officer who misses a hearing. Those superiors will assess whether the officer had a valid excuse, White said.
Each month, White said, he will receive a report of officers' absences and the reasons, allowing him to look for cases that he thinks merit investigation.
White also said he has eliminated some previously acceptable reasons for missing court, such as non-mandatory training.
White also said officers no longer will be permitted to cause or request the dismissal of cases in which they've made arrests, unless they first consult with supervisors.
In instances where prior discussion cannot occur, White said supervisors will review dismissed cases to determine if the reasons were valid, and to consider disciplining officers if they were not.
And Mutchler will send to Maj. David Ray, commander of the department's special investigations division, the results of random spot checks on officers' court attendance, said White and Assistant Chief Troy Riggs.
White said increased scrutiny of officers' court attendance will take additional time and "a lot of work on our part." But he said he is committed to providing the necessary resources, because doing so "will cut out a lot of negligence on our part."
Prosecutors to act
The county attorney's office has agreed to notify Mutchler when cases are dismissed because subpoenaed officers are not present for hearings. Prosecutors had resisted the idea, contending that it was the police department's job to track officers' attendance.
Patteson said the county's attorney's current stance reflects a desire "to cooperate with the police department and the other parties in district court as much as possible."
Prosecutors and others also agree with White that a system of virtually instantaneous electronic subpoenas is needed to replace the current, labor-intensive one, which can take days to trek thousands of pieces of paper from the courthouse into officers' hands.
Jefferson County Attorney Mike O'Connell told Kentucky Chief Justice John Minton in a March 19 letter that a system of e-subpoenas would "vastly improve both the speed with which subpoenas are received by police officers and the efficiency of case disposition."
(4 of 4)
Minton said this week that the court will cooperate with efforts to adopt an e-subpoena system in Jefferson County.
Advertisement
Supreme Court Justice Lisabeth Hughes Abramson, whose district consists of Jefferson County, said it might be possible to adopt an e-subpoena pilot project in Jefferson County which would require Supreme Court approval but not a change in the statewide rules of criminal procedure.
Local officials have solicited information from Orion Communications Inc. in Dallas, which has sold e-subpoena systems to such cities as Miami and Dallas. Other vendors also are under consideration, Patteson said.
Orion President Leslie DeLatte told the newspaper in February that a basic system for the Louisville Metro Police Department could cost about $120,000 -- less than the county attorney's office spends in a year on the paper-driven system.
Although the precise cost has not been determined, Abramson has promised to provide the necessary funds to make e-subpoenas a reality, spokeswoman Kerri Richardson said.
'Lead the charge'
Officials expressed optimism that progress will be made to correct the problems in the court system.
"There's definitely movement," said Ronnie Harris, spokesman for Jefferson Circuit Court Clerk David Nicholson. "Everyone is really intent on making this better."
White said he does not intend to let the opportunity to make improvements slip away.
"I'm willing to lead the charge," he said -- including on behalf of his plan to eliminate the need for officers to appear at initial hearings in misdemeanor and traffic cases.
White said officers rarely are needed at those hearings, and that not summoning them to court would eliminate about 30 percent of the more than 100,000 subpoenas issued annually to Louisville officers. The change also would reduce the department's costs for court pay to officers called to appear while off duty.
Patteson said the county attorney's office supports the change, though prosecutors will reserve the right to subpoena officers when they think it is necessary.
White said he is not seeking the police union's approval for the change -- which River City Fraternal Order of Police President John McGuire said is a mistake.
"If any changes are going to affect wages, hours and working conditions, they need to talk to us about it, and they haven't," he said. "Everybody has to be on board for this to work. There is a chance we could have serious issues with it."
McGuire said he planned to ask White this week to discuss the matter.
Reporter R.G. Dunlop can be reached at (502) 582-4227. Reporter Jason Riley can be reached at (502) 582-4727.
Labels: Crime, Keeping them honest, Punishment
posted by KYJurisDoctor at 8:56 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home