Reading yet another Hamilton County Regular Grand Jury Report lambasting (mainly) judges and prosecutors, I ask – do they actually want to make things better? As usual, the report is warmed over criticism about how the system should work — no plea bargaining, tougher sentencing, no more coddling of criminals, etc. – all nice ideas, but meaningless sound bytes in a complex reality.

It’s fine to spew platitudes, but before issuing another of these reports misrepresenting the problems and people who daily endeavor to keep citizens (and constitutional liberty) safe, let’s get the facts right.

Take but one example, the Grand Jury proclaims, “we… are disgusted to see so many defendants have serious charges constantly dismissed in Criminal Court – all in the name of a plea agreement.” The fact is our criminal justice system is a grounds-up operation. It generally starts with the police on the street, making arrests and bringing charges. They develop facts upon which the success or failure of the prosecution, in many ways, ultimately relies. Most police work hard under difficult conditions, but when the police overcharge, fail to thoroughly investigate, improperly collect and preserve evidence, or manipulate the truth, there is often little even the most ardent prosecutor can ethically do to salvage a prosecution.

Though this is certainly not the only reason for plea bargaining, it is a major one and a plea bargain, like it or not, is sometimes the only means to insure at least some penalty is imposed in a flawed case.

Though the report faults practically everyone except law enforcement, it is ironic that the Grand Jury does not appreciate that failures at the ground level in police training, staffing, recruitment and (yes) credibility, probably tank more good cases than anything else. This and prior reports’ depictions of invariably noble police, weak-kneed prosecutors, and the soft-on-crime judges are laughable hogwash. ADAs strive hard to keep serious prosecutions alive. Judges are bound to apply the law as written.

More often it is the officer who “tunes up a case” against a defendant; or doctors her testimony to avoid rules excluding illegally obtained evidence; or sticks a vital piece of evidence in his desk drawer and forgets about it; who (in my experience) undermine convictions and punishment. Whether individual grand jurors think it is alright for police to lie a little to nail a “bad guy” is between them and their consciences, but judges and lawyers sworn to uphold the law don’t have that luxury.

Given the Grand Jury’s evident and unquestioning infatuation with law enforcement, it would serve this body to remember their constitutional duty is not to editorialize – it is to test and challenge evidence. That is the job. Perhaps, for example, if before indicting for vehicular assault the grand jurors demands to see the videotape depicting the incident where an officer claims he was almost run over, they may better understand why that charge is later dismissed when the video proves the officer was lying, even to the Grand Jury. Perhaps if the Grand Jury asked to hear not second-hand accounts, not hearsay, but from the actual witness whose story morphs on retelling, they might hestitate to return that uncorroborated assault indictment later found by a seasoned prosecutor to be a false accusation. Maybe the problem is more systemic and rests with the people charged with overseeing the Grand Jury who seem to have become blinded by their own biases, opinions, and lost any semblance of the true Grand Jury function. Sometimes change begins at home.

To the grand jurors who care about real change, make it. Tennessee has a violent crime problem. Talk intelligently to the Legislature; urge them to abolish parole and, like the majority of states and the federal system, enact ‘truth in sentencing’; argue for passage of comprehensive sentencing and bail-bond reform legislation; promote early intervention programs proven to reduce crime; lobby for better wages, standards and training for the police and other public servants upon whom success or failure of the system necessarily relies.

Benjamin L. McGowan
Attorney at Law
Chattanooga

* * *

The grand jury's reports, which slam the local prosecutors and judiciary smacks of hypocrisy. Where was this same grand jury that 'refused' to issue an indictment against Kenneth Freeman when he abused my 72-year-old Walmart client? Where was the same grand jury when they refused to issue an indictment against the "gang expert" from Silverdale (Kristina Young) for her perjury before the very same judges the grand jury slams now?

My client (and a TBI agent) tried to obtain an indictment against Freeman, and I tried to obtain an indictment for Ms. Young's perjury in a murder case I defended.

Your message to the community in those cases was clear: A policeman can beat up an old man and get away with it, and a person can commit perjury and get away with that too.

Bill Cox and his crew and the judges from Bob Moon to Rebecca Stern follow the law of the land. I suggest you Grand Jury members do the same.

Robin Ruben Flores
Attorney at Law

* * *

From personal experience, I can vouch for the words of Attorney McGowan. During a recent encounter with a Chattanooga Housing Authority officer which led to my arrest, if I hadn't insisted on having my handbag brought in with me, even pleading with a deputy to make the officer bring my bag in with (she kept trying to separate me from my handbag), for sure I'd most likely have had more charges than an alleged simple stop sign violation and alleged refusal-to-sign charge against me. I've always said and I will continue to say, if you want to create a more law-abiding society, doesn't it only make sense to demand better law-abiding, honorable individuals with integrity and morals in charge of upholding those laws?

Who knows how many others have had similar experiences with this and other officers who got away with possibly planting evidence on their victims? From personal knowledge and experience, I've seen where a police report might suddenly materialize out of thin air where there was once only a "field interview." Especially when the officer(s) have stepped over the line and realize the citizen might complain.

If you want to know who the dishonorable, corrupt and crooked cops are, just ask the criminals or the average, especially average poor, citizen on the streets. They know the once who pad, fabricate reports and evidence and abuse citizens. They know the ones who will take drugs off a user and dealer and recirculate those drugs back into the community that they're suppose to be fighting the so-called "drug war" in. They know the ones who tarnish their badge, dishonor and shame their profession, abusing their power of authority on a regular basis. The thing is, citizens and the judicial system have themselves to blame. Simply because for so long they looked the other way, even it was obvious something had gone terribly wrong in LE. As long as arrest and ticket writing numbers were high, quotas were being met and the jails and prisons were being filled to the breaking point no one cared. Cop of year and other awards were being handed out like free candy, even as communities were being decimated by some of their illegal acts.

That in part, is how the revolving door came to be. That, good citizen, is where the corrections need to start. With the average street, patrol cop on the street. If they're expected to maintain honor and be above reproach or suffer the consequences, then society in general will start to look up to LE and strive to emulate them. The same goes for when LE is dishonorable, corrupt and abusive, society will come to reflect and emulate that too.

Brenda Manghane~Washington