ILNews

New ISBA president to focus on outreach, continue diversity efforts

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

An ongoing concern among Indiana State Bar Association presidents has been how to be inclusive of all members, regardless of their backgrounds including geography, ethnicity, gender, even practice area and other issues that are of importance to attorneys for professional and personal reasons.

Jeffry A. Lind, an attorney with Fleschner Stark Tanoos & Newlin in Terre Haute, became the ISBA’s president Oct. 15 at the annual meeting in Indianapolis. Like his predecessors, he plans to continue to work with all members of the state’s largest legal organization, with a focus on county and specialty bars around the state.

While he couldn’t officially act on this initiative until Oct. 15, he hasn’t been able to do much in the first week, but he has been thinking about what he would like to do for a while.
 

Lind Jeffry Lind, President of Indiana State Bar Association (IL Photo/ Perry Reichanadter)

With help from the ISBA’s Local & Specialty Bar Liaison Catheryne Pully, who started at the organization in April, he will make every effort to reach out to every bar association to find out not only what they are doing, but what the ISBA can do for them.

As liaison, Pully has been reaching out to bar associations around the state to introduce herself so they know they can reach her, and she has been establishing liaisons at the various bar associations so she knows who to contact when she wants to reach out to them.

By doing this, Pully and Lind plan to work together in shedding more light on what local and specialty bars do in terms of projects, recruitment, and other issues many of them face, not only to publicize their efforts, but also to help other local and specialty bars replicate those efforts in their own communities – in their own ways.

For instance, Pully said, if there are two or more bars doing a similar project or initiative, the ISBA can help those two connect the dots to help them with resources or in other ways.

The ISBA has also, for the last few years, offered the option to local and specialty bars to host websites for their bar associations on the ISBA’s website. That is still the case for bars that want to take advantage of that option.

By reaching out to local and specialty bars, Lind said he will continue the work of immediate past-president Roderick Morgan of Bingham McHale in Indianapolis, who focused his term as president on diversity.

Lind said by reaching out more to specialty bars, such as the Hispanic Bar Association, Women’s Bar Association, and Kimbrough Bar Association in northwest Indiana, as well as the Marion County Bar Association in Indianapolis, he will learn not only about their programs, but also the issues that are important to them. Issues, he said, he may or may not have already thought about.

“Specialty bars serve segments of the legal community as identified by the members of those bars,” he said. “They’re all out there, doing very good things for their members and communities. I’d like to know if what they’re doing could be passed onto others. … Or if there’s something they or local bar associations need that I or the state bar association can do, I’d like to offer help where I can.”

“Reaching out to local and specialty bars is a matter of inclusion and as a follow-up to Rod’s diversity efforts, it is all about inclusion,” he added. “I think I would gain the most from the specialty bars because I think their experiences as a bar association are potentially much different than those I might have experienced.”

Also like his predecessors, by reaching out to local and specialty bars, he expects to spend a good amount of time on the road, which translates into less time in the office during normal business hours – and more time working evenings and weekends.

For instance, in his first week as president, he traveled to Madison County to meet with their bar association, which includes about 60 members or half of that county’s lawyers, for an annual event now in its 10th year that has always included a representative from the ISBA.

“I don’t think people have recognized how time consuming it is,” to be the president of the ISBA, said Madison County Bar Association President John N. Shanks II, who was appreciative of Lind for making the trip from one end of the state to the other for the event.

Shanks, a member of the ISBA House of Delegates, said he spoke with ISBA Executive Director Tom Pyrz and Lind at the conference about how well done it was this year.

He added he was pleased with the work Morgan had done as president, and was enthusiastic about the work Pully will be doing for the ISBA.

“I’ve invited her to one of our CLEs this year, and having her on board is going to be very significant in promoting the agenda of the ISBA. … We need a liaison for the local bars, and this will bring together more unity instead of local bars thinking they’re out there by themselves.”

Other than working with local and specialty bars, Lind plans to support other statewide efforts in the legal community.

He was at the conference for the American Bar Association’s Commission on Lawyer Assistance Programs in Indianapolis in early October as a volunteer for the Indiana Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program. Lind has on occasion represented lawyers in disciplinary actions.

He also plans to support the civics education efforts of the Indiana Bar Foundation, and encourages attorneys to give to the Hour for Civics initiative, which encourages attorneys to give the equivalent of one billable hour to fund the IBF’s civics education efforts.

“If everyone did it they could fund the civics programs. I’m really tight and I did it,” he said.

He will also work with the committees and sections of the ISBA, again with an eye on projects that may only be focused on one geographic area that could be expanded around the state.

“The Women in the Law Committee noted they’ve been working on and hope to bring to conclusion a Girl Scout civics merit badge,” he said. “That stands out to me because while it would be wonderful to implement it in Indianapolis, it’s the kind of thing that would be welcomed in all regions of the state. I would imagine lawyers across the state would get a warm feeling about working on a project like that. It makes you feel good inside – the whole concept of Girl Scouts learning civics. It’s those types of things I’d like to see more of.”•

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