The Concurrent Grand Jury was sworn in on Jan. 9 and met between Jan. 16 and April 25 every other Monday and Tuesday, with a day off from hearings on Martin Luther King Day. The other Grand Jury met on the same days in the intervening weeks. Hamilton County has two grand juries; one is called the Grand Jury and one the Concurrent Grand Jury. Both have the same duties and responsibilities. This report represents only the Concurrent Grand Jury’s thoughts - the Grand Jury has its own report.
Case Presentations and Issues
These grand jurors were a heterogeneous group in life experiences, professions, beliefs, ideologies, as well as age differences that spanned several decades. There were 13 of us with five alternates. We were an active group of thinkers and listeners, who questioned the officers who testified, sought clarification from the district attorneys who helped us with legal issues, and aimed to have as much information as needed to make crucial and independent decisions. With every case, we considered the impact on the victims, the accused, the law enforcement personnel, and the public before rendering our decisions. Some decisions were vigorously discussed, but all were unanimous.
The jury heard 180 cases, most with 2-5 separate charges, and it returned 125 indictments (true bills), 41 charges by presentment, 16 no bills, and recommended additional charges in two cases. The facts of each case were presented by law enforcement officers from many jurisdictions, including Hamilton County, Chattanooga, Red Bank, Soddy-Daisy, East Ridge, Collegedale, Signal Mountain, Lookout Mountain and Sale Creek. Officers from the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency and the Tennessee Highway Patrol also presented.
We heard facts on many different crimes, including first-degree premeditated murder, second degree murder, attempted murder, reckless endangerment, rape, child abuse, aggravated assault, theft, breaking and entering, domestic assault, fraud, false reports to police, criminal simulation, identity theft, many variations of unlawful drug manufacture and sales (some resulting in death or serious injuries, and some with children present), driving under the influence, neighborhood and drive-by shootings, and serious traffic violations resulting in danger to others.
The cases were as old as two years or more, and as recent as five days before the CGJ heard the facts. The older cases are often the result of backlogs in the system, a problem that the current District Attorney General Coty Wamp and her assistant district attorneys are working hard to alleviate. This jury appreciates these efforts and understands there are a variety of reasons it might hear a case two or even more years old – victims and witnesses died or left the area (even the country), perpetrators fled after the crime and it took time to find them, and evidence sometimes was not available or was unearthed after considerable time had passed. We believe some of the backlog built up in previous years under a different administration, and the reasons are not known to us. But we are optimistic in the current efforts to clear cases and allow victims and those accused of crimes to move forward.
Either General Wamp, ADA Tom Landis, or ADA Mike Dowd (the chief homicide prosecutor for Hamilton County) was present for all cases presented to the CGJ. A member of the DA’s office is present for all testimony to assist in answering any legal or process questions the jurors have but is not present when we vote to either indict (True Bill) or not indict (No Bill) a case. Nobody other than the grand jurors and the foreman are present for consideration and voting on each case.
The staff that handles the order and presentation of witnesses to the CGJ does a good job of coordinating many schedules and contingencies. We are seldom aware of all the scheduling challenges that the officers and the staff face. Don Klasing, CGJ liaison on behalf of the Hamilton County Sheriff’s office, and Sgts. April Bolton and Mike Russ of the Chattanooga Police Department are indispensable in their continuing efforts to assure law enforcement officers are in front of the jury to explain their facts and cases. This is no easy task as officers have many duties, time constraints, and emergency situations that sometimes make it difficult to come before the grand jury at a time certain. The CGJ recommends that the staff and officers continue these efforts so there is no (or little) downtime during CGJ sessions.
Sgts. Bolton and Russ (as well as others in the various law enforcement departments) sometimes present case facts for officers who could not be in attendance, and the CGJ believes this arrangement is often helpful in preventing lag time, but it does present its own challenges. If an officer testifies for one who cannot attend, the presenter is limited to the facts that are on the face of the original written affidavits, warrants or case reports. If these written materials are thorough and coherent, the presenter can do a good job of outlining the facts and answering any questions we might have. However, if the written reports are lacking or not well-written, then the CGJ might have to ask to delay the charges and ask the original officers to come before it to clarify. Almost always, the original officers can answer the questions we have.
The CGJ is impressed with the thoroughness of testifying officers’ preparations and presentations of the facts of their cases. Although some could be a bit better prepared, the majority do a good job not only in presenting but answering follow-up questions raised by the CGJ. These answers provide both context for law enforcement procedures and clarification of specific case facts. We recommend that all officers remain diligent and trained in what facts the grand juries need to render decisions, and that those facts are presented in clear and understandable language, whether written or verbal.
Some of the cases that come before the jury are hard to hear. The CGJ understands that what is difficult for it to hear and consider, is even harder for the law enforcement women and men facing these situations. The CGJ hopes and recommends that informal and formal counseling is made available to anyone in the system who requests or needs it. It knows some such procedures are in place and recommends those be extended and braced up where needed to make access easy and helpful.
The CGI shares the very serious concern that the mental health issues of both perpetrators and victims of crimes permeate the day-to-day work of law enforcement and the criminal courts. It recommends ongoing training for officers and other necessary personnel facing the challenges that mental health problems create during responses, investigations, arrests, and victim assistance. It knows that Sheriff Garrett and his staff are working with inmates to assist them with their mental and emotional issues, and that Judge Alex McVeigh and his staff have a mental health court that assists certain defendants with mental health needs. But we recognize that these programs are not resourced or funded as much as everyone wishes they were. However, it appears that the steps for resources, grants, programs, and other assistance are moving in the right direction. We continue to recommend these efforts and their enhancement to the greatest extent possible.
Previous grand juries have recommended and we concur that illegal drugs are an obstacle to a well-functioning society. Illegal drugs are killing our citizens, adults and children. And the criminals who sell and buy them are clogging the legal system and using precious law enforcement resources. Illegal drugs raise problems on every level of societal structure. The law enforcement personnel who deal with drug offenses are most aware of the breadth, width, and depth of the problems.
The CGJ highly recommends that continuing and additional resources (money and staff) are provided for drug enforcement training, including additional cooperation among municipal, state, and federal agencies. And that law enforcement representatives from all levels of the system continue to talk with citizens whenever possible – educating and warning the populous of the ongoing dangers and wasting of life and resources. They see the hard facts and the more they can relay those to the public, the better. It is one thing for us all to read and believe that illegal drugs are a serious problem, but the CGJ this term heard sad and horrific stories, including murder, rape, child abuse, and even child murder resulting from illegal drug crimes. Lives wasted and legal systems slowed down are goals to eliminate. We recognize that doesn’t happen all at once but the work should never stop and must be well funded.
Other Recommendations:
This CGJ (and most other grand juries) have recommended an increase in jury “pay” and expenses. We understand that daily rates for grand juries in Tennessee are controlled largely by state law, and that our county, at $13 per day, may provide more than most. Our grand jurors also receive free parking while in session. But they must bear the expense of their travel, meals, and other expenses (for instance, childcare). The CGJ recommends an increased daily stipend, and additional monies to cover meals. No grand juror of whom we are aware is looking to “make money” from this service, but also none want to lose money. Our service is indispensable to our system of law, yet our meeting facilities and electronic support are fairly meager, and at the least, we recommend more remuneration for the grand jurors (who serve for four months).
The CGJ highly recommends that the grand jury room be updated – the equipment for officers to present demonstrative materials is outdated and often hinders the use of materials that would better assist jurors in our decisions. We need current and better technology – larger screens and electronic updates that would allow, for instance, the DA to list the charges, names, places, etc. in a way that all jurors could clearly view. And that would allow the officers to better display pictures, maps, drawings, etc. that they need to best present the facts.
CONCLUSION
SPEAKERS, VISITS, AND THANKS
Unfortunately, we were not able to visit the Silverdale correctional facilities nor the Juvenile Court this term. That was largely the fault of our own scheduling problems. With future grand jury panels, our foreperson intends to make certain the tours of these facilities happen. But Sheriff Austin Garrett did come to us and provided valuable information about the facilities - past, current, and future. He explained how school resource officers and our children’s safety are of paramount interest in his administration, and how the goal is an officer in each school – it appears that plan is making good progress. He and his chief of staff Ron Bernard answered numerous questions about the facilities and his administration’s plans. We recommend he continue to move forward and that he continue whenever possible to educate the general public about the challenges of and improvements to the Silverdale facilities.
In addition to everyone mentioned above, we further thank our Criminal Court Judges Barry Steelman, Boyd Patterson and Amanda Dunn for overseeing the grand juries. They are always there to answer questions and guide us. Their concern for a grand jury that is responsible, capable, and independent is obvious. Judge Dunn was specifically responsible for our CGJ this term, and she provided meaningful information on our duties and responsibilities, as well as helped us understand the court’s part in the legal enforcement system. She also gave us needed information on the mental health court she oversees. Her assistance was a great help, particularly to our foreman.
We also had a most informative visit from Judge Tom Greenholtz of the Court of Criminal Appeals. Judge Greenholtz had served on the Hamilton County criminal bench for many years before the Governor placed him on the appeals court, so his perspectives were varied and pragmatic. His strong belief in the grand jury system made us even more proud of our responsibilities and enhanced our determination to serve well.
Sessions Court Judge Christie Sell is also appreciated and was most informative about her court and its part in how a case comes to the grand jury. She spent a lot of time answering our questions and was both very knowledgeable and down to earth – an excellent combination for assisting us in our understanding of the system, and our responsibilities within it.
We thank Sgt. April Bolton for arranging for various law enforcement members to talk with us and answer our questions about specific areas – drugs, mental health, evidentiary forensics, and alcohol problems and DUIs. Particularly, we thank Officer Ryan Lynn for imparting some of his DUI knowledge and giving a splendid example of how field sobriety tests work with the assistance of two ADAs – ADA Darren Gibson received the CGJ Oscar award for his portrayal of heel-to-toe and nystagmus field tests.
Chief Duane Schermerhorn of the Lookout Mountain jurisdiction took his time to come down and talk with us. He helped us understand how a municipal court handles criminal matters, and how it all meshes with the downtown courts and the grand jury. That was a new and excellent perspective.
All the DAs who worked with us were professional and helpful to our understanding of the law. None of them ever encouraged us to render any certain decision, but rather answered our questions patiently and fairly. We believe the leadership of the office is in solid hands. We would be remiss if we didn’t specifically thank ADA Tom Landis (who spent the most time with us) for his wisdom, patience, and knowledge. Every day we met he made our work easier and more pleasant.
Hamilton County Circuit Court Clerk Larry Henry and his staff – particularly Margo McConnell – are responsible for the grand jurors’ physical well-being and care. They are there from the first day when the jury is impaneled to the last day of service. They provide whatever the jury needs and are always quick responders when we make requests and suggestions. This system would fail without them.
If we’ve forgotten to thank others who assisted or spoke with us through these four months, it is our lack and not theirs and we apologize.
* * *
Presented by the CGJ Foreman Rosemarie L. Hill on behalf of and with the concurrence of the concurrent grand jurors serving the First Term of 2023 (January-April)