ILNews

Marion County prosecutor discusses his first days in office

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

To lead any large law firm, a managing partner needs a diverse set of skills. He needs to understand budgets, crisis management, personnel issues, and how to interact with the media.

It’s essentially the same for the prosecutor of Indiana’s largest county.

During his first days in office, Marion County Prosecutor Terry Curry, who was sworn into office at midnight on Jan. 1, has faced some unique and sensitive issues.

On Jan. 2, a deputy prosecutor was arrested on charges of battery with injury and criminal trespass. She was later fired.

On Jan. 12, Curry re-filed charges in a high-profile case involving Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department Officer David Bisard. According to the re-filed charges, Bisard’s blood alcohol content was at least .15 percent when his police car hit a group of motorcyclists, killing one and injuring two others.

Former Marion County Prosecutor Carl Brizzi did not include the alcohol-related charges in his filing because he said the blood draw was not done according to IMPD procedures because the facility that did the blood draw was not certified.
 

curry-terryw-15col Marion County Prosecutor Terry Curry, a former deputy prosecutor and former defense attorney, took office at midnight Jan. 1. He started his transition to the prosecutor’s office immediately following his victory in the Nov. 2, 2010, election. (IL Photo/ Perry Reichanadter)

Curry told Indiana Lawyer the facility did have a written protocol prepared by a physician for blood draws, which is one requirement for them to be considered valid. He also conferred with deputy prosecutors to learn more about the circumstances of the blood draw, and found there was a valid argument to be made to include those results in the charges.

Curry and his opponent in the race for prosecutor, Mark Massa, each said if elected they would re-file the charges to include the alcohol-related charges.

On Jan. 27, Curry filed charges against a man accused of shooting IMPD Officer David Moore, 29, during a traffic stop Jan. 23. Moore died Jan. 26. Moore’s funeral has been one of the toughest things Curry has had to face in his term so far.

“It was exceedingly emotional,” he said. “I can’t say enough good things about Jo and Spencer Moore and the dignity they showed given the circumstances that, at least to me, are incomprehensible.”

Curry explained that the prosecutor’s office has been forthcoming with the media about these and other cases it is handling as part of his effort to make the office more transparent and restore confidence.

“The single biggest challenge for the new prosecutor of this office, whether I or my opponent Mark Massa would have won the election, is restoring trust and confidence in this office,” he said. “Part of that is to make sure the public knows what our office does, including our successes, on a daily basis.”

Curry began work with his transition team as soon as he was elected Nov. 2. He worked with attorneys and former members of the office to interview every employee in the office.

Curry’s previous professional experience includes time spent in the prosecutor’s office from 1982 to 1984 and again from 1989 to 1992. He worked for Sommer Barnard, now Taft Stettinius & Hollister from 1978 to 1982, 1984 to 1989, and from 2002 to 2005. He also worked for Butler Schembs Curry & Jones from 1992 to 2002. After he left private practice in 2005, he went to work as a mediator for Van Winkle Baten & Rimstidt Dispute Resolution.

Today, the Marion County Prosecutor’s Office employs 175 attorneys and 190 professional staff, according to Lara Beck, the office’s interim public information officer. If the prosecutor’s office was a private firm, it would rank as the fourth largest law firm in the city of Indianapolis.

The transition team also considered the best ways to budget for the office, what practice areas within the office could be beefed up or pared down, and Curry participated in an orientation by the Indiana Prosecuting Attorneys Council with about 30 other new county prosecutors from around the state.

Linda Pence of Pence Hensel, a former colleague of Curry’s, worked with him on his transition. Pence is also representing the Wells family, victims in the Bisard case.

“First of all, we all know for our community that it is a very significant position,” Pence said. “The prosecutor has enormous powers and authority, so we want someone who’s competent, thoughtful, and has good judgment. I was thrilled when he was elected because he has those characteristics.”

Pence said Curry didn’t waste any time getting started.

“He wanted to hit the ground running,” she said. “When he was sworn in, he already had a game plan, which was very impressive. In all the meetings, he knew where he would go, how to improve, how to reorganize. He wasn’t just meeting people, he had a game plan.”

Steve Johnson, IPAC executive director, said he was not surprised that Curry evaluated the staff who worked for his predecessor.

“For the larger counties, when there’s a shift in political parties and when a new prosecutor isn’t moving into the job directly from a chief deputy prosecutor position, the new prosecutor will have to evaluate all of their staff. This is especially true in a large office where you want to have confidence in your supervisors. In some counties where there are only two or three people in the prosecutor’s office, it’s different. But in Marion County, while Terry could oversee some cases, he can’t supervise everything that’s going on.”

Curry said he and the transition team spent time considering how to best use the human resources they have. Among his focuses are the major felony unit, white collar crimes, and political corruption. He also intends to beef up the Community Prosecution Division, providing more interaction with neighborhood associations, faith-based groups, and the police who regularly interact with residents.

Because he had trial experience prior to taking office, Curry said he plans to actively work on some cases. But he also said as prosecutor it’s his job to be hands on with other cases, and he will be a sounding board for the deputy prosecutors who have questions concerning cases they are handling.

While fielding candidates for open positions, Curry said he noticed many applicants were highly qualified, likely due to the tough job market. He said he had a stack of resumes many inches high, and he got his first call asking for a job the morning after he was elected.

Early in the transition, Curry reached out to leaders at IMPD and in the sheriff’s office, as well as state police, the secretary of state’s office, the U.S. attorney, and federal investigative agencies to foster a better working relationship.

“In the first 30 days there were a lot of high-profile things going on, but that’s not unusual,” Pence said. “When you walk into a prosecutor’s office like this one, you shouldn’t be surprised. As you can tell, he has a very calm demeanor and sound judgment. In all of those situations, he went in and analyzed them, no emotion; he considered what does the law say, what are the facts. … When you have that training, you just know how to handle it.”•

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. A high ranking Indiana supreme Court operative caught red handed leading a group using the uber offensive N word! She must denounce or be denounced! (Or not since she is an insider ... rules do not apply to them). Evidence here: http://m.indianacompanies.us/friends-educational-fund-for-negroes.364110.company.v2#top_info

  2. A high ranking bureaucrat with Ind sup court is heading up an organization celebrating the formal N word!!! She must resign and denounce! http://m.indianacompanies.us/friends-educational-fund-for-negroes.364110.company.v2#top_info

  3. ND2019, don't try to confuse the Left with facts. Their ideologies trump facts, trump due process, trump court rules, even trump federal statutes. I hold the proof if interested. Facts matter only to those who are not on an agenda-first mission.

  4. OK so I'll make this as short as I can. I got a call that my daughter was smoking in the bathroom only her and one other girl was questioned mind you four others left before them anyways they proceeded to interrogate my daughter about smoking and all this time I nor my parents got a phone call,they proceeded to go through her belongings and also pretty much striped searched my daughter including from what my mother said they looked at her Brest without my consent. I am furious also a couple months ago my son hurt his foot and I was never called and it got worse during the day but the way some of the teachers have been treating my kids they are not comfortable going to them because they feel like they are mean or don't care. This is unacceptable in my mind i should be able to send my kids to school without worry but now I worry how the adults there are treating them. I have a lot more but I wanted to know do I have any attempt at a lawsuit because like I said there is more that's just some of what my kids are going through. Please respond. Sincerely concerned single parent

  5. California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) End of Year Report 2014. (page 13) Under the current system many local registering agencies are challenged just keeping up with registration paperwork. It takes an hour or more to process each registrant, the majority of whom are low risk offenders. As a result law enforcement cannot monitor higher risk offenders more intensively in the community due to the sheer numbers on the registry. Some of the consequences of lengthy and unnecessary registration requirements actually destabilize the life’s of registrants and those -such as families- whose lives are often substantially impacted. Such consequences are thought to raise levels of known risk factors while providing no discernible benefit in terms of community safety. The full report is available online at. http://www.casomb.org/index.cfm?pid=231 National Institute of Justice (NIJ) US Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs United States of America. The overall conclusion is that Megan’s law has had no demonstrated effect on sexual offenses in New Jersey, calling into question the justification for start-up and operational costs. Megan’s Law has had no effect on time to first rearrest for known sex offenders and has not reduced sexual reoffending. Neither has it had an impact on the type of sexual reoffense or first-time sexual offense. The study also found that the law had not reduced the number of victims of sexual offenses. The full report is available online at. https://www.ncjrs.gov/app/publications/abstract.aspx? ID=247350 The University of Chicago Press for The Booth School of Business of the University of Chicago and The University of Chicago Law School Article DOI: 10.1086/658483 Conclusion. The data in these three data sets do not strongly support the effectiveness of sex offender registries. The national panel data do not show a significant decrease in the rate of rape or the arrest rate for sexual abuse after implementation of a registry via the Internet. The BJS data that tracked individual sex offenders after their release in 1994 did not show that registration had a significantly negative effect on recidivism. And the D.C. crime data do not show that knowing the location of sex offenders by census block can help protect the locations of sexual abuse. This pattern of noneffectiveness across the data sets does not support the conclusion that sex offender registries are successful in meeting their objectives of increasing public safety and lowering recidivism rates. The full report is available online at. http://www.jstor.org/stable/full/10.1086/658483 These are not isolated conclusions but are the same outcomes in the majority of conclusions and reports on this subject from multiple government agencies and throughout the academic community. People, including the media and other organizations should not rely on and reiterate the statements and opinions of the legislators or other people as to the need for these laws because of the high recidivism rates and the high risk offenders pose to the public which simply is not true and is pure hyperbole and fiction. They should rely on facts and data collected and submitted in reports from the leading authorities and credible experts in the fields such as the following. California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) Sex offender recidivism rate for a new sex offense is 0.8% (page 30) The full report is available online at http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Adult_Research_Branch/Research_Documents/2014_Outcome_Evaluation_Report_7-6-2015.pdf California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) (page 38) Sex offender recidivism rate for a new sex offense is 1.8% The full report is available online at. http://www.google.com/url?sa= t&source=web&cd=1&ved= 0CCEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F% 2Fwww.cdcr.ca.gov%2FAdult_ Research_Branch%2FResearch_ documents%2FOutcome_ evaluation_Report_2013.pdf&ei= C9dSVePNF8HfoATX-IBo&usg=AFQjCNE9I6ueHz-o2mZUnuxLPTyiRdjDsQ Bureau of Justice Statistics 5 PERCENT OF SEX OFFENDERS REARRESTED FOR ANOTHER SEX CRIME WITHIN 3 YEARS OF PRISON RELEASE WASHINGTON, D.C. Within 3 years following their 1994 state prison release, 5.3 percent of sex offenders (men who had committed rape or sexual assault) were rearrested for another sex crime, the Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) announced today. The full report is available online at. http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/press/rsorp94pr.cfm Document title; A Model of Static and Dynamic Sex Offender Risk Assessment Author: Robert J. McGrath, Michael P. Lasher, Georgia F. Cumming Document No.: 236217 Date Received: October 2011 Award Number: 2008-DD-BX-0013 Findings: Study of 759 adult male offenders under community supervision Re-arrest rate: 4.6% after 3-year follow-up The sexual re-offense rates for the 746 released in 2005 are much lower than what many in the public have been led to expect or believe. These low re-offense rates appear to contradict a conventional wisdom that sex offenders have very high sexual re-offense rates. The full report is available online at. https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/236217.pdf Document Title: SEX OFFENDER SENTENCING IN WASHINGTON STATE: RECIDIVISM RATES BY: Washington State Institute For Public Policy. A study of 4,091 sex offenders either released from prison or community supervision form 1994 to 1998 and examined for 5 years Findings: Sex Crime Recidivism Rate: 2.7% Link to Report: http://www.oncefallen.com/files/Washington_SO_Recid_2005.pdf Document Title: Indiana’s Recidivism Rates Decline for Third Consecutive Year BY: Indiana Department of Correction 2009. The recidivism rate for sex offenders returning on a new sex offense was 1.05%, one of the lowest in the nation. In a time when sex offenders continue to face additional post-release requirements that often result in their return to prison for violating technical rules such as registration and residency restrictions, the instances of sex offenders returning to prison due to the commitment of a new sex crime is extremely low. Findings: sex offenders returning on a new sex offense was 1.05% Link to Report: http://www.in.gov/idoc/files/RecidivismRelease.pdf Once again, These are not isolated conclusions but are the same outcomes in the majority of reports on this subject from multiple government agencies and throughout the academic community. No one can doubt that child sexual abuse is traumatic and devastating. The question is not whether the state has an interest in preventing such harm, but whether current laws are effective in doing so. Megan’s law is a failure and is destroying families and their children’s lives and is costing tax payers millions upon millions of dollars. The following is just one example of the estimated cost just to implement SORNA which many states refused to do. From Justice Policy Institute. Estimated cost to implement SORNA Here are some of the estimates made in 2009 expressed in 2014 current dollars: California, $66M; Florida, $34M; Illinois, $24M; New York, $35M; Pennsylvania, $22M; Texas, $44M. In 2014 dollars, Virginia’s estimate for implementation was $14M, and the annual operating cost after that would be $10M. For the US, the total is $547M. That’s over half a billion dollars – every year – for something that doesn’t work. http://www.justicepolicy.org/images/upload/08-08_FAC_SORNACosts_JJ.pdf. Attempting to use under-reporting to justify the existence of the registry is another myth, or a lie. This is another form of misinformation perpetrated by those who either have a fiduciary interest in continuing the unconstitutional treatment of a disfavored group or are seeking to justify their need for punishment for people who have already paid for their crime by loss of their freedom through incarceration and are now attempting to reenter society as honest citizens. When this information is placed into the public’s attention by naive media then you have to wonder if the media also falls into one of these two groups that are not truly interested in reporting the truth. Both of these groups of people that have that type of mentality can be classified as vigilantes, bullies, or sociopaths, and are responsible for the destruction of our constitutional values and the erosion of personal freedoms in this country. I think the media or other organizations need to do a in depth investigation into the false assumptions and false data that has been used to further these laws and to research all the collateral damages being caused by these laws and the unconstitutional injustices that are occurring across the country. They should include these injustices in their report so the public can be better informed on what is truly happening in this country on this subject. Thank you for your time.

ADVERTISEMENT