ILNews

Shootings put safety on lawyers' radar

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

On the morning of March 27, someone allegedly ambushed attorney David Kuker in his garage, shooting him twice before fleeing. On May 1, Jeffrey Goeglein called police to say that someone fired shots through a window in his home. Both men work at Faegre Baker Daniels’ Fort Wayne office – Kuker is a partner, and Goeglein is an associate. And police say the two shootings do not appear to be random.

As of May 17, police had made no arrest in either case.

Law firms generally have security measures to protect employees in the office. Outside of work, the best strategy for staying safe is using common sense, identifying potentially dangerous people and learning to trust your instincts.

Clients under duress

On June 23, 1989, a man shot his estranged wife to death before driving 20 miles to Warsaw, Ind., where he shot and killed his wife’s attorney, Charles Ireland, inside Ireland’s law office. It’s a tragic tale that’s repeated over and over again when volatile family disputes erupt.

Indiana State Police Capt. Dave Bursten said attorneys who handle family and criminal law may run a higher risk of an attack, simply based on the disputes they’re trying to resolve. And trials can stir feelings of resentment or cause people to act out.

“You’ve probably met the spouse of your client, and if you have indications that lead you to believe this person could have violent tendencies, that’s something you should let the court know before the trial so the bailiff could have extra security there,” Bursten said.

Sometimes, though, an attorney is completely unaware of a potential danger.
 

deLaney-ed-mug.jpg DeLaney

In 2009, a man lured Rep. Ed DeLaney, D-Indianapolis, to the site of an alleged real estate transaction and attacked him. DeLaney, a real estate lawyer, had no reason to suspect anyone might be targeting him, and he didn’t recognize his attacker, Augustus Mendenhall. Mendenhall had been harboring a grudge against DeLaney for more than two decades, believing that the lawyer was responsible for his family’s financial problems after DeLaney represented a mall in a lawsuit against his father’s business.

“What bothered me then is that my dealings with his father were so remote – that’s the concern I have … you don’t know who is festering, who is angry, who is hurt and doesn’t know how to accept it,” DeLaney said. “In the course of litigation, you can detect that some people are handling it very badly. The problem is that there are those that don’t show it.”

The role of the firm

Law firms can and do take steps to protect employees from dangerous people.

Sabrina Presnell Rockoff, a lawyer with McGuire Wood & Bissette in North Carolina, has advised several corporations on internal human resource policies and employee relations. She said one of the most basic safety measures for a law firm is ensuring that all guests access the office through one central location.

“Our office, anyone can walk in at any time … any time you have a public place like that, having a centralized area where the public is received is important, and having the rest of the office protected from that centralized area – whether that be by key cards, doors, people having to have a security card or badge to get past – I think is a great way to protect employees,” she said.

The receptionist or person who greets guests should be trained on what to do if a threatening person enters the building, she said. And if the firm has recently fired a hostile employee or won a large jury verdict, managers can put the firm on alert and ask the receptionist to be on the lookout for particular people.


Weinzapfel Weinzapfel

“You need to make sure they have enough information to make sure they can take quick action to protect the rest of the workforce,” Rockoff said.

Law firms are concerned about protecting files, and Rockoff said that in securing access to files, firms can also protect workers. She cited as an example a firm where she worked that had all conference rooms on one floor. Guests could not access the lawyers’ offices or other parts of the building without a key card.

“That does two things – it protects the files and it protects the information, and it also has the effect of protecting employees,” Rockoff said.

Kerrie Weinzapfel, firm administrator for Bamberger Foreman Oswald & Hahn, in Evansville, said the firm advises attorneys to meet with clients in conference rooms instead of their office.

“For some practice areas, where emotions may run high, we encourage the use of conference rooms on the main floor of our office so that we can keep the client in a relatively public location and the location of the attorney’s office confidential,” she said.

Rockoff said she has handled some messy employment law cases that have caused her to move the location of a deposition.
safety factbox
“Something that I have done before where I had a really disgruntled plaintiff employee is hold the deposition at the courthouse so they have to go through the metal detector,” she said.

Asking for help

Weinzapfel said the firm does take threats seriously and has on occasion hired security guards when it believed additional precautions were necessary. If firm managers believe someone may be targeting them, Rockoff said, they can ask for increased police patrols in their area.

Boone County Sheriff Ken Campbell spoke to judges about courthouse security and courtroom safety at the Spring Judicial College in April.

“Certainly if you’re a judge or a lawyer, many of the people you come in contact with are of a group that may be more reactive, or they wouldn’t be involved in the legal system,” he said.

Campbell said judges should get to know their local sheriff and ask for help if they have any concerns about a person becoming violent.

“Establish that relationship with your sheriff, with your bailiff, with court security – and the same goes for lawyers,” he said.

Bursten said if someone does threaten an attorney, the attorney needs to point out that threatening an act of violence is illegal.

“If that doesn’t reset the person’s mainframe by – in a polite way – saying you’re committing a criminal act by what you just said, then maybe the best thing to do is to follow it through with legal action,” Bursten said.

Being alert

Campbell said that he often sees people walking down the street in what he calls “condition white” – completely unaware of what’s going on around them, staring at their smartphones.

“We’re bipeds – you need to walk with your head up and looking around,” he said.

He also said that people need to trust their instincts and recognize that when they feel something isn’t right, or the hair on the back of their neck stands up, that message should not be ignored.

“It’s your brain that’s basing this feeling on all your life experiences … your brain is telling you something; you’re just not always smart enough to recognize it,” he said.•

ADVERTISEMENT

  • rkba
    And some lawyers exercise their constitutional rights to keep and bear arms too. Something for miscreants to consider.

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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I like the concept. Seems like a good idea and really inexpensive to manage.

  2. I don't agree that this is an extreme case. There are more of these people than you realize - people that are vindictive and/or with psychological issues have clogged the system with baseless suits that are costly to the defendant and to taxpayers. Restricting repeat offenders from further abusing the system is not akin to restricting their freedon, but to protecting their victims, and the court system, from allowing them unfettered access. From the Supreme Court opinion "he has burdened the opposing party and the courts of this state at every level with massive, confusing, disorganized, defective, repetitive, and often meritless filings."

  3. So, if you cry wolf one too many times courts may "restrict" your ability to pursue legal action? Also, why is document production equated with wealth? Anyone can "produce probably tens of thousands of pages of filings" if they have a public library card. I understand this is an extreme case, but our Supreme Court really got this one wrong.

  4. He called our nation a nation of cowards because we didn't want to talk about race. That was a cheap shot coming from the top cop. The man who decides who gets the federal government indicts. Wow. Not a gentleman if that is the measure. More importantly, this insult delivered as we all understand, to white people-- without him or anybody needing to explain that is precisely what he meant-- but this is an insult to timid white persons who fear the government and don't want to say anything about race for fear of being accused a racist. With all the legal heat that can come down on somebody if they say something which can be construed by a prosecutor like Mr Holder as racist, is it any wonder white people-- that's who he meant obviously-- is there any surprise that white people don't want to talk about race? And as lawyers we have even less freedom lest our remarks be considered violations of the rules. Mr Holder also demonstrated his bias by publically visiting with the family of the young man who was killed by a police offering in the line of duty, which was a very strong indicator of bias agains the offer who is under investigation, and was a failure to lead properly by letting his investigators do their job without him predetermining the proper outcome. He also has potentially biased the jury pool. All in all this worsens race relations by feeding into the perception shared by whites as well as blacks that justice will not be impartial. I will say this much, I do not blame Obama for all of HOlder's missteps. Obama has done a lot of things to stay above the fray and try and be a leader for all Americans. Maybe he should have reigned Holder in some but Obama's got his hands full with other problelms. Oh did I mention HOlder is a bank crony who will probably get a job in a silkstocking law firm working for millions of bucks a year defending bankers whom he didn't have the integrity or courage to hold to account for their acts of fraud on the United States, other financial institutions, and the people. His tenure will be regarded by history as a failure of leadership at one of the most important jobs in our nation. Finally and most importantly besides him insulting the public and letting off the big financial cheats, he has been at the forefront of over-prosecuting the secrecy laws to punish whistleblowers and chill free speech. What has Holder done to vindicate the rights of privacy of the American public against the illegal snooping of the NSA? He could have charged NSA personnel with violations of law for their warrantless wiretapping which has been done millions of times and instead he did not persecute a single soul. That is a defalcation of historical proportions and it signals to the public that the government DOJ under him was not willing to do a damn thing to protect the public against the rapid growth of the illegal surveillance state. Who else could have done this? Nobody. And for that omission Obama deserves the blame too. Here were are sliding into a police state and Eric Holder made it go all the faster.

  5. JOE CLAYPOOL candidate for Superior Court in Harrison County - Indiana This candidate is misleading voters to think he is a Judge by putting Elect Judge Joe Claypool on his campaign literature. paragraphs 2 and 9 below clearly indicate this injustice to voting public to gain employment. What can we do? Indiana Code - Section 35-43-5-3: Deception (a) A person who: (1) being an officer, manager, or other person participating in the direction of a credit institution, knowingly or intentionally receives or permits the receipt of a deposit or other investment, knowing that the institution is insolvent; (2) knowingly or intentionally makes a false or misleading written statement with intent to obtain property, employment, or an educational opportunity; (3) misapplies entrusted property, property of a governmental entity, or property of a credit institution in a manner that the person knows is unlawful or that the person knows involves substantial risk of loss or detriment to either the owner of the property or to a person for whose benefit the property was entrusted; (4) knowingly or intentionally, in the regular course of business, either: (A) uses or possesses for use a false weight or measure or other device for falsely determining or recording the quality or quantity of any commodity; or (B) sells, offers, or displays for sale or delivers less than the represented quality or quantity of any commodity; (5) with intent to defraud another person furnishing electricity, gas, water, telecommunication, or any other utility service, avoids a lawful charge for that service by scheme or device or by tampering with facilities or equipment of the person furnishing the service; (6) with intent to defraud, misrepresents the identity of the person or another person or the identity or quality of property; (7) with intent to defraud an owner of a coin machine, deposits a slug in that machine; (8) with intent to enable the person or another person to deposit a slug in a coin machine, makes, possesses, or disposes of a slug; (9) disseminates to the public an advertisement that the person knows is false, misleading, or deceptive, with intent to promote the purchase or sale of property or the acceptance of employment;

ADVERTISEMENT