ILNews

Teaming up for change

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Juvenile Justice

A unique conference addressing improvements to juvenile justice systems in various communities nationwide drew experts to Indianapolis recently to share information.

The daylong “Summit on Racial Disparities in the Juvenile Justice System: A Statewide Dialogue,” organized by the Indiana State Bar Association, Indiana Supreme Court Administration, and the Indiana Criminal Justice Institute, took place Aug. 27. The conference was a followup to a study by the Commission on Disproportionality in Youth Services, which was established by the Indiana General Assembly in 2007.

That study showed that in Indiana there is evidence of disproportionate minority confinement, or DMC, but the conference wasn’t just about the numbers - it was also about improving the circumstances behind the statistics. One of the conference’s main goals was to bring all stakeholders to the table to listen to what has worked for other communities and to discuss the issues that might discourage DMC when arresting, charging, and sentencing youth.

Local and national lawyers

The event did just that; politicians, lawyers, judges, social workers, educators, law enforcement officers, and even parents were in the audience to hear experts in the field share stories and suggestions about how similar programs can be implemented in Indiana.

In his opening remarks, ISBA president R. William Jonas Jr. said the state bar was proud to move forward on the issue as he emphasized the focus should be on each individual child in the system and what is best for them.

“This is a little bit of a touchy subject,” he said to a room full of nodding heads and muffled agreement. “It can be difficult to talk about. The speakers may challenge your ideas. From the ISBA’s perspective, we want those challenges. We want concrete steps to bring us to solutions.”

The working chairs were Marion Superior Judge Tanya Walton Pratt and Lake Circuit Judge Lorenzo Arredondo. The honorary chairs were Indiana Supreme Court Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard and Rep. William Crawford, D-Indianapolis.

Chief Justice Shepard thanked those who were participating because, he said, he knew they were there and doing the work they do not because they had to, but because they wanted to help those in the juvenile justice system.

Clayton“People show up again and show up again because it matters to them,” he said.

He added while the state has never been color blind, that hasn’t prevented Hoosiers from making progressive changes.

Speaker Michael Patchner, dean of the Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis School of Social Work, thanked the legislature for enacting laws that were a direct result of the commission’s recommendations. He said when he first started working with the commission, he noticed the automatic doors were there for people with disabilities, yet they were also helpful to everyone, including him. That experience, he said, made him realize that regulations that were meant to help one part of the community were also beneficial to the rest of the community, much like the programs discussed during the summit.

Role models

Among the speakers who highlighted successful programs were a judge in Georgia; an advocate who worked with police for the Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority in Boston; the Madison, Wis., chief of police; a district attorney for the juvenile unit in Portland, Ore.; a prominent civil rights attorney based in Washington, D.C.; the founder of the Juvenile Justice Initiative in Illinois; and the founder of a national organization based in San Francisco.

Judge Steven Teske of Clayton County, Ga., said he had met with several juvenile court judges in Indiana to look over the code and see what could be changed.

For the program in his county, Judge Teske said it was a matter of determining which types of offenses were being punished and how that was taking away from the officers’ real reason for being in the school: as a deterrent to unsafe behavior and drugs. Looking at the numbers, 90 percent of arrests were misdemeanors. Of those, most were for disrupting school, fights, and disorderly conduct. He said these were the kinds of things most high school students would do, only it would be more appropriate for them to be sent to the principal’s office and not to a police officer.

ShepardAfter working with teachers and officers to overhaul the system, Judge Teske’s caseload dropped from 165 to 30. Those 30, he said, are the ones who truly needed to be in the system.

School resource officers could then spend more time at schools where they could oversee those who needed to be supervised. Recidivism was reduced, and the community became a safer place as more crimes outside of the schools were being solved with help from students.

In one case, a school resource officer’s conversation with a student using profanity led to a drug dealer’s arrest, explained Sgt. Mark Richards, who oversees the school resource officers in Clayton County. Other crimes such as homicides and armed robberies have been solved with the help of students.

There were many challenges in the collaborative process, he said, suggesting those who want to consider their own systems start by talking to stakeholders individually and to have a neutral mediator facilitate conversations.

Lisa Thurau of Strategies for Youth in Cambridge, Mass., had a similar experience. When she learned many minority students were being arrested on Boston’s public transit, she discovered all the students were being arrested at the same stop by the same handful of officers when school was released. After a struggle with the transit authority, including press involvement, she eventually got them to the table.

ArredondoSince 2004, the StopWatch Program she helped create has dramatically decreased arrests of students.

She has also worked to educate youths and their parents about how to interact with police, has worked with police departments in Cambridge and Everett, Mass., and is currently training police in Nantucket on how to interact with youth.

Optimistic for change

While it’s a daunting task to make the kinds of sweeping changes participants learned about through other national examples, this summit was meant to show the stakeholders in Indiana that it’s not impossible if others could do it, like lunch keynote speaker James Bell, founder of the W. Haywood Burns Institute in San Francisco, which considers DMC issues.

“You must know and believe in the depths of your soul that this is a solvable problem,” he said.

To do this, he suggested participants focus on specific goals by eliminating abstractions, reach a consensus regarding the purpose of detention, and build a collaborative model for all involved.

ThurauTo do that in Indiana, at the end of the summit an 18-member panel discussed what comes next to make sure these issues are addressed and remain a priority.

A summit report will be released in December, and after that a working group will continue for six to nine months, a way that planning committee member Dr. Daniel Lowry said will ensure “this isn’t the end of the story, but the beginning.”

For more information about the summit, including the Indiana Commission on Disproportionality in Youth Services 2008 Final Report, visit the ISBA’s Web site, www.inbar.org

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Applause, applause, applause ..... but, is this duty to serve the constitutional order not much more incumbent upon the State, whose only aim is to be pure and unadulterated justice, than defense counsel, who is also charged with gaining a result for a client? I agree both are responsible, but it seems to me that the government attorneys bear a burden much heavier than defense counsel .... "“I note, much as we did in Mechling v. State, 16 N.E.3d 1015 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014), trans. denied, that the attorneys representing the State and the defendant are both officers of the court and have a responsibility to correct any obvious errors at the time they are committed."

  2. Do I have to hire an attorney to get co-guardianship of my brother? My father has guardianship and my older sister was his co-guardian until this Dec 2014 when she passed and my father was me to go on as the co-guardian, but funds are limit and we need to get this process taken care of quickly as our fathers health isn't the greatest. So please advise me if there is anyway to do this our self or if it requires a lawyer? Thank you

  3. I have been on this program while on parole from 2011-2013. No person should be forced mentally to share private details of their personal life with total strangers. Also giving permission for a mental therapist to report to your parole agent that your not participating in group therapy because you don't have the financial mean to be in the group therapy. I was personally singled out and sent back three times for not having money and also sent back within the six month when you aren't to be sent according to state law. I will work to het this INSOMM's removed from this state. I also had twelve or thirteen parole agents with a fifteen month period. Thanks for your time.

  4. Our nation produces very few jurists of the caliber of Justice DOUGLAS and his peers these days. Here is that great civil libertarian, who recognized government as both a blessing and, when corrupted by ideological interests, a curse: "Once the investigator has only the conscience of government as a guide, the conscience can become ‘ravenous,’ as Cromwell, bent on destroying Thomas More, said in Bolt, A Man For All Seasons (1960), p. 120. The First Amendment mirrors many episodes where men, harried and harassed by government, sought refuge in their conscience, as these lines of Thomas More show: ‘MORE: And when we stand before God, and you are sent to Paradise for doing according to your conscience, *575 and I am damned for not doing according to mine, will you come with me, for fellowship? ‘CRANMER: So those of us whose names are there are damned, Sir Thomas? ‘MORE: I don't know, Your Grace. I have no window to look into another man's conscience. I condemn no one. ‘CRANMER: Then the matter is capable of question? ‘MORE: Certainly. ‘CRANMER: But that you owe obedience to your King is not capable of question. So weigh a doubt against a certainty—and sign. ‘MORE: Some men think the Earth is round, others think it flat; it is a matter capable of question. But if it is flat, will the King's command make it round? And if it is round, will the King's command flatten it? No, I will not sign.’ Id., pp. 132—133. DOUGLAS THEN WROTE: Where government is the Big Brother,11 privacy gives way to surveillance. **909 But our commitment is otherwise. *576 By the First Amendment we have staked our security on freedom to promote a multiplicity of ideas, to associate at will with kindred spirits, and to defy governmental intrusion into these precincts" Gibson v. Florida Legislative Investigation Comm., 372 U.S. 539, 574-76, 83 S. Ct. 889, 908-09, 9 L. Ed. 2d 929 (1963) Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, concurring. I write: Happy Memorial Day to all -- God please bless our fallen who lived and died to preserve constitutional governance in our wonderful series of Republics. And God open the eyes of those government officials who denounce the constitutions of these Republics by arbitrary actions arising out capricious motives.

  5. From back in the day before secularism got a stranglehold on Hoosier jurists comes this great excerpt via Indiana federal court judge Allan Sharp, dedicated to those many Indiana government attorneys (with whom I have dealt) who count the law as a mere tool, an optional tool that is not to be used when political correctness compels a more acceptable result than merely following the path that the law directs: ALLEN SHARP, District Judge. I. In a scene following a visit by Henry VIII to the home of Sir Thomas More, playwriter Robert Bolt puts the following words into the mouths of his characters: Margaret: Father, that man's bad. MORE: There is no law against that. ROPER: There is! God's law! MORE: Then God can arrest him. ROPER: Sophistication upon sophistication! MORE: No, sheer simplicity. The law, Roper, the law. I know what's legal not what's right. And I'll stick to what's legal. ROPER: Then you set man's law above God's! MORE: No, far below; but let me draw your attention to a fact I'm not God. The currents and eddies of right and wrong, which you find such plain sailing, I can't navigate. I'm no voyager. But in the thickets of law, oh, there I'm a forester. I doubt if there's a man alive who could follow me there, thank God... ALICE: (Exasperated, pointing after Rich) While you talk, he's gone! MORE: And go he should, if he was the Devil himself, until he broke the law! ROPER: So now you'd give the Devil benefit of law! MORE: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil? ROPER: I'd cut down every law in England to do that! MORE: (Roused and excited) Oh? (Advances on Roper) And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you where would you hide, Roper, the laws being flat? (He leaves *1257 him) This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast man's laws, not God's and if you cut them down and you're just the man to do it d'you really think you would stand upright in the winds that would blow then? (Quietly) Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake. ROPER: I have long suspected this; this is the golden calf; the law's your god. MORE: (Wearily) Oh, Roper, you're a fool, God's my god... (Rather bitterly) But I find him rather too (Very bitterly) subtle... I don't know where he is nor what he wants. ROPER: My God wants service, to the end and unremitting; nothing else! MORE: (Dryly) Are you sure that's God! He sounds like Moloch. But indeed it may be God And whoever hunts for me, Roper, God or Devil, will find me hiding in the thickets of the law! And I'll hide my daughter with me! Not hoist her up the mainmast of your seagoing principles! They put about too nimbly! (Exit More. They all look after him). Pgs. 65-67, A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS A Play in Two Acts, Robert Bolt, Random House, New York, 1960. Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen. of Indiana, Indianapolis, for defendants. Childs v. Duckworth, 509 F. Supp. 1254, 1256 (N.D. Ind. 1981) aff'd, 705 F.2d 915 (7th Cir. 1983)

ADVERTISEMENT