The Concurrent Grand Jury was sworn in on Jan. 6 and 7, and met between Jan. 13-April 22, every other Monday and Tuesday. It also took several facility tours and received training on specific law enforcement apprehension procedures– see below.
Hamilton County has two grand juries (Concurrent and Regular) that meet on alternate weeks and share the same duties and responsibilities; both hear evidence from law enforcement officers and determine if a person arrested or being investigated for a crime should be formally charged with that crime. This report is the Concurrent Grand Jury’s - the Regular Grand Jury has a separate report.
The CGJ was a mixed group in terms of life and professional experiences, education, specific technical expertise, ideologies, and ages ranging from 30-75. There were 13 regular grand jurors, with six alternates, guided by foreman Rosemarie Hill. We were a committed and absorbed jury who listened and questioned the testifying officers, seeking legal clarification from the district attorney when needed. We also spoke amongst ourselves - sometimes rather energetically – to gather as much information as needed to make crucial and independent decisions. With every case, we considered the facts presented to us as well as the victim impacts, the accused, law enforcement, and the public before rendering our decisions. All decisions to indict were unanimous.
We were presented with 360 cases which contained 1,138 separate charges, of which we returned 1,131 true bills and seven no bills. We considered 76 direct presentments of case facts that contained 332 separate charges, all of which were true billed.
Case Presentations and Issues; Information Provided by Law Enforcement: When a case is presented to the CGJ by an officer, he or she has already spent many hours on apprehensions, arrests, follow-up fact and evidence investigations, paperwork, and reports to the district attorneys as necessary. Thus, cases brought to the CGJ are generally well prepared and not frivolous. After the evidence is presented, we can question the presenting officer and get advice on laws from one of the DAs who always accompanies us at hearings. We then have everyone leave our hearing room, and we discuss the cases and vote on whether to indict (true bill) or not (no bill).
Presenting law enforcement officers this term came from both state and surrounding jurisdictions, including Hamilton County, Chattanooga, East Ridge, Collegedale, Red Bank, Signal Mountain, Soddy Daisy, Sale Creek, the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, Tennessee Highway Patrol, Tennessee Wildlife Resources Bureau, the Corrections Departments of the Hamilton County and Juvenile jails, and the Norfolk and Southern Railroad police.
We heard and reviewed details of many different crimes, including first-degree premeditated murder, second degree murder, voluntary manslaughter, and reckless endangerment; targeted and random shootings often resulting in serious injury or death; rape of adults and children; child abuse; human trafficking; assault including aggravated and domestic; theft of all sorts from businesses, homes and vehicles; breaking and entering; burglary of homes, businesses, cars and other vehicles; fraud of many types; false reports to police; identity thefts of frightening creativity; many variations of unlawful drug possession, manufacture and sale; and driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol often as a second or greater offense (with as many as five prior DUIs).
The CGJ is generally impressed with the thoroughness of the testifying officers, not only in presenting cases but in answering follow-up questions. These answers provide both context for a specific case and information on general law enforcement procedures. However, some officers were not organized or completely effective in helping us understand the facts surrounding the initial apprehension and factors leading to an arrest. This type of poor preparation is still very much the exception but is a definite problem when it happens.
Of great assistance to the CGJ are simple things such as speaking clearly, slowly and loudly enough for everyone to hear and comprehend, having reasonably organized facts, and if helpful, using videos, photos, or diagrams to help explain the facts. An officer may and should choose his or her own method of presentation of the arrest charges, but charges are not evidence, and the CGJ needs officers to bear witness to the facts if the narrative is not clear and complete.
The staff that manages the order and presentation of witnesses for CGJ does an outstanding job of coordinating the many officer schedules and contingencies. Don Klasing, CGJ liaison on behalf of the Hamilton County Sheriff’s office, and Sergeants April Bolton and Todd Clay of the Chattanooga Police Department remained indispensable in their continuing efforts to ensure officer availability for hearings. Sergeant Clay was promoted to another position and we wish him the best but will miss his assistance, experience and gentle humor. Sergeant Carly Thomas has moved over to the liaison office, and she also has been of excellent assistance. Scheduling grand jury hearings is no easy task as officers have many duties and time constraints that sometimes make it difficult to appear at a certain time. The CGJ recommends that the staff and officers continue coordinating efforts so there is minimal downtime for both the CGJ and the officers.
District Attorney General Coty Wamp explained much about our criminal legal system and the burden of proof the CGJ must consider at the beginning and end of our term. She remained available to us whenever we had other legal questions. She or one of her assistant DAs were present for every case presentation to answer our legal and process questions. The DAs do not present evidence, and they are not present when we vote to true bill or no bill a case or a charge. In fact, no persons other than the grand jurors and the foreman are present for consideration, discussions, and voting on each case.
Training and Tours this Term: In addition to case presentations, several law enforcement officers took the time to help us understand the structures, challenges and internal workings of law enforcement in processing crimes. We received a full session of training from law enforcement on the day after we were sworn in. We also received valuable information during the officers’ responses to questions we raised at individual testimony hearings.
Officers Rodney Proffitt and Mariah Dunlop of the Chattanooga Police Department provided us with solid information about drugs and drug crimes in our communities, including the havoc wreaked by Fentanyl, and showed us how their teams work drug cases. We appreciate the knowledge and work of these officers and their various team members.
Officers Marvin Perez and Todd Clay presented helpful information and demonstrations on DUI issues in the field including apprehensions, arrests, field sobriety tests and general handling of these dangerous situations involving impaired drivers on our roads.
Officer Brandon Watson presented excellent information about the Crisis Co-Response Unit of the Chattanooga Police Department. We are grateful for the existence of this CCRU and its combination of law enforcement officers, social and case workers, first responders, and courts in assisting citizens in need of mental health care.
We learned about the National Integrated Ballistic Information Network and various gun issues from Sergeant Josh May. NIBIN automates ballistic evaluations and provides actionable investigative leads in a timely manner. The work on analyzing guns and gun usage gives officers critical information on past and sometimes future gun crimes.
We thank Sergeant Bolton for organizing this training and scheduling it before our first hearings were held.
The CGJ was able to tour the Hamilton County Jail and Detention Center as well as the Hamilton Juvenile Court this term. At the Jail, Sheriff Austin Garrett and members of his team accompanied us through portions of the new facilities and pointed out improvements to the older ones. They answered our questions and provided helpful and solid information.
Our tour of the juvenile detention facilities was also informative and all our questions were answered. That facility is woefully outdated and we strongly recommend resources to improve it. Nevertheless, we believe the directors and staff, beginning with Judge Rob Philyaw, have worked diligently and creatively with what they have to create a jail facility for adolescents that is as good as it can be. We applaud their efforts to make the juvenile detention center always better.
There is always a certain amount of misinformation about the operation and facilities of the Jail and the Juvenile Detention Center amongst the public; some of that comes from media reports, but sometimes misinformation comes from fundamental ignorance of the laws and ordinances under which jails must operate. Our jails, whether adult or juvenile, must follow numerous state and other laws, municipal ordinances and various regulations. The operations are continually scrutinized, and they should be.
We know that the allocation of resources for any project is not an easy task for those who budget and vote on allocations. Still, we strongly recommend that resources for improvements to safety, cleanliness and other living conditions at our jails be continually addressed and funded, When all is said and done, we do recognize that any jail remains just that - a jail.
Another tour that was particularly informative was that of the Real Time Intelligence Center. That facility uses cutting-edge technology to fight crime. It has live feeds from roughly 3,000 cameras in our area, including from the Chattanooga Housing Authority, and various schools and businesses that share their feeds to cooperate with the CPD as needed. RTIC also has approximately 87 public cameras throughout the city. RTIC can livestream officer body cams to receive information from officers on location as well as warn them of potential problems they are walking into.
The staff of RTIC monitor the electronic information continually and can quickly send officers where needed for emergencies or other potential problems. The CGJ was very impressed with this facility and how it is run. We thank Sergeant Billy Atwell for providing us with the tour and highly commend the officers and civil employees who operate RTIC.
SPECIALIZED RECOVERY COURTS: Our Criminal and Sessions courts have specialized courts for drug recovery, mental health and veterans’ assistance. Judges Amanda Dunn of Criminal Court and Christie Sell of General Sessions Court oversee the drug recovery courts; Criminal Court Judge Boyd Patterson and Sessions Court Judge Lila Statom oversee the mental health courts, and Judge Patterson and Sessions Court Judge Gary Starnes handle the veterans’ courts. These judges all described the processes, goals and results of these specialized court programs. The courts are not “an easy out” for defendants. The programs require a great deal of commitment from the judges, their staff and the defendant participants. Handling these specialized recovery courts is in addition to the regular court duties of each of these overseeing judges. We recommend that the public become more aware of these courts, how they operate, and their positive results.
We recommend that mental health care must be and remain a priority for our legislators and law enforcement. Much of the recidivism in our criminal system is due to abuse of alcohol and drugs, or an individual’s mental health degradation for other reasons. Veterans face drug and mental health issues that are often unique to their military service. Any resources necessary to continue these specialized programs and courts must be reviewed and granted by the allocating bodies – whether federal, state or local.
Recommendation for a Local Testing Lab: The previous CGJ recommended that our legislators take whatever steps are necessary to get full evidence testing lab in Hamilton County. Chattanooga is the only one of the “four main cities” (Nashville, Memphis, Knoxville and Chattanooga) that does not have its own lab. This lack of local lab facilities creates case backlogs, postponement of trials, inability to get all needed evidence analyzed, and is simply unacceptable.
Conclusion: All of the assistant DAs who came before the CGJ were professional and helpful to our understanding of the law that applied to the cases we heard. We believe the leadership and ongoing work of the DAs office is in solid and capable hands. We appreciated Ed Duke and Jackie Pinckney from the DAs office who handled and organized all the case files and charging documents for us. One of them was indispensably present each hearing day. We must also specifically thank ADA Tom Landis (who spent the most time with us) for his wisdom, patience, knowledge and a terrific sense of humor that often helped us through the toughest cases.
Hamilton County Circuit Court Clerk Larry Henry and his staff – particularly Margo McConnell – are responsible for the grand jurors’ well-being and care. They are there from the first day the jury is sworn in to the last day of our service. They are always quickly responsive and helpful to us.
We appreciate and thank our Hamilton County Criminal Court Judges Barry Steelman, Boyd Patterson, and Amanda Dunn (she was chief judge over the grand juries this term, and answered all our questions and requests), for overseeing the grand juries along with all their other duties. They all spoke with us this term and demonstrated continued support for a grand jury that is responsible, knowledgeable, capable, and independent.
Judge Tom Greenholtz from the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals spoke with us. He was inspiring, engaging, and helped us think about the criminal justice system in new ways – we truly enjoyed hearing from him.
If we’ve forgotten to thank anyone, it is our lack and not theirs and we apologize.
Formally submitted on April 23, 2025, by Rosemarie L. Hill, CGJ Foreman