Right to Counsel National Consortium – Part 2

Right to Counsel National Consortium – Part 2


>>I’M GOING TO ASK YOU TO TAKE YOUR SEATS. WE DO WANT TO CONTINUE WITH THE SECOND HALF OF OUR PANEL. I PROMISE THERE WILL BE TIME FOR YOU TO TALK,
LATER IN THE DAY. WE ARE GOING TO CONTINUE WITH OUR PANEL ABOUT
REFORM EFFORTS HAPPENING ACROSS THE COUNTRY. I WANT TO REMIND YOU TO TAKE OUT THOSE SIGNS. W RITE WHY YOU BELIEVE IN THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL
SO WE CAN TWEET THAT OUT. WITH THAT, I WILL TURN THINGS OVER TO DAVID AND
COLLECT — AND COLETTE. DAVID: IN PART B OF OUR PANEL, WE WILL FOCUS
ON TWO STATES, NEW YORK AND MISSOURI. NEW YORK IS MOVING FORWARD TOWARD MORE STATE
OVERSIGHT AND HAS A PENDING BILL THAT WILL MOVE TO STATE FUNDING
OF THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL. MISSOURI IS ONE OF THE MOST STRUCTURED STATES WHEN
YOU LOOK AT HOW THEY PROVIDE SERVICES AND HOW THEY HAVE, BUT EVEN THOSE
MORE STRUCTURED STATES HAVE DIFFICULTIES, SO ON OUR PANEL, FROM MISSOURI
IS MICHAEL BARRETT, THE STATE PUBLIC DEFENDER. I WILL TURN THINGS OVER TO COLETTE TO START
THE NEW YORK DISCUSSION. COLETTE: I WANT TO GIVE A SHOUT OUT TO DAVID
CARROLL AND THE SIXTH AMENDMENT CENTER AND THE WORK THEY DID ON STUDYING INDIANA. THEY DID A REPORT ON EIGHT COUNTIES AND THERE IS COPIES OF THE EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY AND IT WAS RELEASED, YESTERDAY AND IT KIND OF HIGHLIGHTS SOME OF
THE ISSUES WE ARE TALKING ABOUT, TODAY IN THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL. I AM HONORED TO INTRODUCE OUR FIRST SPEAKER, BILL LAHEY. HE WAS THE CHIEF DEPUTY OF THE COMMITTEE FOR
PUBLIC COUNSEL SERVICES, THE MASSACHUSETTS STATE PUBLIC DEFENDER
SERVICES FOR 30 YEARS. A REALLY LONG TIME. HE WAS MY BOSS WHO HIRED ME IN 1989. THE LEFT IN 2010 — HE LEFT IN 2010. WE HAD A BIG RETIREMENT PARTY FOR HIM, ONLY
TO FIND OUT THAT HE WAS GOING TO NEW YORK TO TRY TO REFORM THE
PUBLIC DEFENSE SYSTEM IN NEW YORK CITY, WHERE HE SERVES AS A DIRECTOR OF THE
OFFICES OF INDIGENT DEFENSE , AND HE IS TASKED WITH MAKING SURE THE SETTLEMENT
IS BEING MET IN THE COUNTIES IN WHICH IT WAS SERVED IN. I WOULD LIKE TO ADD ONE OTHER CAVEAT. ONE OF THE MOST PROFOUND MOMENTS OF MY CAREER AS A PUBLIC
DEFENDER WAS SITTING IN A COURTROOM IN 2004, A MASSACHUSETTS WHEN BILL LEAHY WAS
ARGUING A COMPLETE WORK STOPPAGE FOR BAR ADVOCATES WHO WERE BEING PAID TO THE
LOWEST WAGES IN THE COUNTRY FOR AN HOURLY WAGE, AND THERE WAS WORK STOPPAGE. HE ARGUED SO BEAUTIFULLY ON THE 40TH PLUS ANNIVERSARY TO ENSURE THAT EVERY
POOR PERSON WHO GOES THROUGH THE DOORS IN MASSACHUSETTS IS ADEQUATELY REPRESENTED
BY A FULLY FUNDED, FULLY RESOURCED PUBLIC DEFENDER OR PRIVATE ARE ADVOCATE
AND I WAS A RESULT OF THE LITIGATION , IT MADE HUGE HISTORIC CHANGES
IN THE STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS. I AM HONORED TO BE ABLE TO INTRODUCE YOU AND THE
WORK YOU ARE DOING IN NEW YORK. I WANTED TO ASK YOU — WE SHOULD START WITH
COREY , BECAUSE YOU WILL TALK ABOUT THE LITIGATION. MANY OF YOU MET COREY THIS MORNING WHEN SHE
TALKED ABOUT HER ROLE AT THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. SHE WILL NOW SPEAK TO YOU ABOUT THE WORK THAT SHE DID WITH THE NEW YORK CIVIL LIBERTIES
UNION AND THE WORK THAT THE ACLU HAS BEEN DOING . IT IS A FASCINATING
STORY. WE WILL START WITH COREY AND THEN GO TO BILL. COREY: LET ME REEMPHASIZE, I AM NOW SPEAKING
IN MY CAPACITY AS THE WARMER ATTORNEY FOR THE AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES
UNION, MY CAPACITY AS A DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE EMPLOYEE. — I WAS IN THE CASE THAT CHALLENGED NEW YORK
SYSTEM OF DELEGATING , ABDICATING ITS RESPONSIBILITY
FOR GIDEON. IN THAT CASE, WE SUED THE STATE OF NEW YORK OVER THE STATE OF PUBLIC
DEFENSE IN FIVE COUNTIES ACROSS THE STATE AND BROUGHT A CLASS ACTION IN STATE
COURT , ALLEGING THAT THE SYSTEM WAS BROKEN AND WAS FAILING TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE
COUNSEL UNDER THE SIXTH AMENDMENT. IN THAT CASE, WE BROUGHT THAT CASE ABOUT A
YEAR AFTER THE CHIEF JUDGE OF THE NEW YORK STATE COURT HAD ISSUED
A REPORT CALLING THE PUBLIC DEFENSE SYSTEM IN NEW YORK UNCONSTITUTIONAL
AND INCAPABLE OF DELIVERING CONSTITUTIONALLY ADEQUATE LEGAL DEFENSE TO
PEOPLE ARRESTED IN NEW YORK STATE. AS A ACLU LAWYER, WE INTERPRETED REPORTS LIKE
THAT AS KIND OF A INVITATION TO COME IN. AS RESPONSIBLE LITIGATORS, WE WAITED AND WE
HOPE THAT THERE WOULD BE A POLITICAL MOVEMENT AROUND THAT, AND THE
GOVERNOR WOULD TAKE THE STEPS THAT WE HEARD OTHER STATES LIKE UTAH AND IDAHO,
THE LEGISLATORS REALIZE THE IMPORTANCE OF REFORM AND TOOK UP THAT MANTLE
AND TOOK THE ACTION, BUT THAT DID NOT HAPPEN AT THAT TIME IN NEW YORK, SO WE
BROUGHT SUIT AND OVER THE COURSE OF A HARD-FOUGHT YEAR OF LITIGATION, THE CASE
MADE IT WAY — MADE ITS WAY TO THE HIGHEST COURT OF NEW YORK STATE AND IN 2010,
THERE WAS A DECISION BY THE CHIEF JUDGE WHO WROTE THE DECISION, AFFIRMING THE
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS TO COUNSEL AND THAT THE LITIGATION COULD PROCEED. THERE WERE THEN SEVERAL MORE YEARS OF LITIGATION AND ON THE EVE OF TRIAL, THE CASE
SETTLED AND THE GOVERNOR HAD ENTERED INTO A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT THAT REVOLUTIONIZED
THE REFORM OF THOSE FIVE-COUNTY SYSTEMS AND INCLUDED A GUARANTEE
OF COUNSEL AND THE RAIN — AT ARRAIGNMENT WHICH WAS CLEARLY ESTABLISHED
UNDER THE LAW BUT WAS NOT HONORED IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK AS A MATTER OF PRACTICE
, AND ESTABLISHED THE REQUIREMENT OF CASELOAD LIMIT AND RAISED THE
BAR QUALITY AND IN MANY WAYS, BROUGHT — THE OFFICE OF INDIGENT LEGAL SERVICES
INTO THE SETTLEMENT TO ENSURE THAT THE STANDARDS THAT WERE SET FOR ELIGIBILITY
FOR CASELOAD STANDARDS WERE HIGH QUALITY AND IT REALLY RAISED THE BAR
OF DEFENSE IN THOSE STATES. WHAT FOLLOWED AFTER THAT IS IT WAS A LEGISLATIVE
EFFORT TO MAKE SURE THOSE REFORMS WERE LIMITED TO THOSE FIVE COUNTIES WOULD
BE EXPANDED, STATEWIDE BECAUSE THERE IS NO LOGIC AND HAVING TWO DIFFERENT STANDARDS
IN COUNTIES. THAT STORY IS ONGOING AND I THINK BILL WILL PICK IT UP,
BUT THAT IN A NUTSHELL OF — WAS THE STORY. THE MOST IMPORTANT PART WHICH IS ON THE EVE
OF THAT TRIAL, THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE FILED A MOTION OF INTEREST
IN THE CASE, AND THAT WAS A CRITICAL MOMENT IN THE PROGRESSION OF THAT
CASE. HAVING SEEN THAT PROCESS ON BOTH ENDS, IT HAS BEEN AN EXTRAORDINARY OPPORTUNITY,
BECAUSE AS A LITIGATOR AT THE TIME, I WAS IN THAT KIND OF BLACKHOLE
TIME WHERE YOU KIND OF KNOW THAT MAYBE IT MIGHT HAPPEN, BUT YOU DON’T KNOW
ANYTHING ABOUT THAT YOU DON’T REALLY KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON AND WHAT THEY MIGHT
BE THINKING, AND THEN ONE DAY IT HAPPENS OUT OF THE BLUE AND IT WAS A REALLY
TRANSFORMATIVE MOMENT, AND WE WERE IN THE MIDDLE OF SETTLEMENT DISCUSSIONS WHEN
THAT HAPPENED. IT WAS A VERY DIFFERENT MORNING WHEN WE WALKED INTO THAT
ROOM IN THE MIDST OF THOSE SETTLEMENT DISCUSSIONS , THE DAY AFTER THAT
HAPPENED, SO THERE REALLY WAS NO QUESTION OF THE TANGIBLE FACT THAT THE FILING
OF A STATEMENT OF INTEREST HAD ON THE ADVANCING IN NEW YORK. THAT WAS A REALLY IMPORTANT MOMENTS, AND I
THINK WE WOULD NOT BE WHERE WE ARE TODAY IN NEW
YORK , WITHOUT THAT IS ONE OF MANY NECESSARY INGREDIENTS OF REFORM. COLETTE: I WANTED TO ASK YOU HOW YOU MADE
THE CHOICE TO SUE JUST FIVE COUNTIES VERSUS THE ENTIRE’S DATE AND HOW YOU CHOSE
THOSE COUNTIES. COREY: NEW YORK HAS 62 COUNTIES. THEY ARE VERY DIVERSE. YOU HAVE FIVE COUNTIES THAT MAKE UP NEW YORK CITY. THERE IS NOTHING LIKE THAT. THEN YOU HAVE OTHER KIND OF URBAN COUNTIES WITH BIG CITIES LIKE
SYRACUSE, BUFFALO, ROCHESTER, AND YOU ALSO HAVE REALLY RURAL AREAS. WE DON’T HAVE THE FRONTIER, BUT WE HAVE DAIRY FARMING AND SO WHAT WE AIM FOR, JUST
TO BE HONEST, THE REASON WE DID NOT SUE CITY TO — 62 COUNTIES — ANY LITIGATOR
KNOWS THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION. WE KNEW THAT WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO COAST
IN AND GET AWAY WITH IT. WE HAD TO ESTABLISH THE EVIDENCE AND TO DO THAT IN 62
COUNTIES WOULD HAVE BEEN IMPOSSIBLE, AND NOT FEASIBLE FOR ANY NONPROFIT
ORGANIZATION, EVEN WITH THE GENEROUS ASSISTANCE OF OUR PROPERTY COUNSELOR
WHO ALREADY SPENT MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OVER THE COURSE OF THAT LITIGATION
JUST SUING THOSE FIVE COUNTIES. WHAT WE AIMED TO DO WAS TO PICK FIVE COUNTIES
THAT WERE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE STATE. WE PICKED A COUNTY ON LONG ISLAND, A VERY
POPULOUS AND MUNICIPAL CENTERS, BUT NOT ONE BIG SENT — NOT ONE BIG
CITY. WE CHOSE ONONDAGA COUNTY , WHICH IS WHERE SYRACUSE, NEW YORK IS. WE CHOSE A VERA — VERY RURAL COUNTY WHERE IT WAS MOSTLY FARMING COMMUNITIES AND
WE CHOSE A KIND OF SUBURBAN CITY NEAR ROCHESTER BUT NOT THAT CLOSE , TO GIVE
THAT KIND OF DEMOGRAPHIC, GEOGRAPHIC FLAVOR OF THE STATE. ALSO, WITHIN NEW YORK, DELEGATES TO COUNTIES, THE OPTION TO CHOOSE HOW YOU WANT TO STRUCTURE
A PUBLIC DEFENSE SYSTEM. YOU CAN HAVE A PUBLIC DEFENDER, A NONPROFIT, OR
YOU CAN HAVE WHAT WE CALL AN ASSIGNED COUNSEL SYSTEM THAT CREATES — WHERE
IT IS JUST PRIVATE BAR WITH A ROTATING LIST. EACH OF THOSE COUNTIES DID THAT, DIFFERENTLY. OUR AIM WAS TO SHOW THIS WAS A NEW YORK STATE PROBLEM BY
TAKING FIVE COUNTIES THAT YOU COULD NOT SAY, OH THIS IS REALLY AMOUNT — REALLY
ABOUT COUNCILS — COUNTIES THAT ONLY HAVE ASSIGNED COUNSEL’S. YOU COULD NOT SAY THAT
THIS WAS A LONG ISLAND PROBLEM. WE HOPED TO GET A STATEWIDE SOLUTION OUT OF
THAT, WHICH IS NOT EXACTLY HOW IT WENT DOWN, BUT THE STORY IS
NOT CONCLUDED. COLETTE: IT LOOKS LIKE THE NEW YORK STATE
LEGISLATURE HAD UNANIMOUSLY PASSED A PUBLIC DEFENSE MANDATE RELIEF ACT. THEY PASSED UNANIMOUSLY, THE GOVERNMENT STILL — THE GOVERNOR STILL HAS IT ON HIS
DESK. I WANT TO TURN TO YOU, BILL. AFTER THE BRILLIANT WORK THAT YOU DID TO GET
THIS SETTLEMENT, THEN YOU HAD THE HAT OF ENSURING THAT THE SETTLEMENT IS ACTUALLY
PUT INTO PLACE. COULD YOU DESCRIBE ABOUT WHAT YOU WERE MANDATED TO DO
AND HOW THAT HAS WORKED? BILL: BEFORE I DO THAT, I WOULD LIKE TO SET
A LITTLE BIT OF A DIFFERENT SCENE. THE PRE-2015 IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS. WE HAVE BEEN IN BUSINESS SINCE 2011, THE BRAND-NEW OFFICE THAT NEW YORK STATE CREATED. THE FIRST YEAR, THERE WERE TWO OR THREE OF US AND THEN THERE WERE 10. AS A RESULT OF THE LAWSUIT, WE ARE UP TO 19 EMPLOYEES. FOR THE FIRST FOUR YEARS OR SO OF OUR EXISTENCE,
WE HAD VERY LITTLE AUTHORITY. WE HAD A LOT OF RESEMBLANCE TO THE COMMISSIONS
AND PANELS YOU HEARD ABOUT ON THE FIRST PANEL DISCUSSION. IT IS KIND OF REMARKABLE PICKING BACK ABOUT WHAT WE WERE ABLE TO DO. WE CREATED STANDARDS FOR CRIMINAL AND PARENTAL REPRESENTATION , OR APPELLATE
REPRESENTATION. WE ARE AT WORK NOW ON ASSIGNED COUNSEL PROGRAM STANDARDS. WE WORKED WITH THE COUNTIES AND WITH THE COUNTY PROVIDERS. OUTSIDE OF NEW YORK CITY, 57 COUNTIES , RANGING
IN POPULATION FROM 1 MILLION AND A HALF IN SUFFOLK
TO 5000 IN HAMILTON. WE HAVE 15 OF THOSE COUNTIES LARGER THAN THE STATE
OF RHODE ISLAND. WE HAVE 20 OF THOSE COUNTIES HAVE UNDER 50,000 POPULATION. WE MAY NOT BE FRONTIER, A WE HAVE A LOT OF COUNTRY. — BUT WE HAVE A LOT OF COUNTRY. WE HAVE 80 INSTITUTIONAL PROVIDERS. SOME OF WHICH EXIST IN ONLY NAME. 138 PROGRAMS. WE DON’T HAVE A CLUB TO BEAT THEM OVER THE HEAD WITH TO CUT
OFF THEIR FUNDING. WHAT WE HAVE IS EXPERTISE, WE HAVE DEDICATION, AND WE HAVE
CLEAR — HERE IS THE IDEAL WITH THE 57 COUNTIES. THE DEAL IS IN TWO PARTS. THERE IS A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF STATE FUNDING YOU ARE ACCUSTOMED TO RECEIVING AND
YOU DON’T HAVE TO ANSWER TO ANYBODY AS TO HOW YOU SPEND IT. NOW YOU HAVE TO CONSULT WITH YOUR LOCAL INDIGENT DEFENSE PROVIDERS AS TO HOW THAT
MONEY SHOULD BE SPENT , AND THE CONVERSATION HAS TO BE ABOUT HOW QUALITY CAN
BE IMPROVED WITH THAT FUNDING. YOU HAVE TO SATISFY US. WE WILL WORK COOPERATIVELY WITH YOU. WE WILL ALWAYS GET TO YES. WITH THAT MODEL, AND ALSO WITH A COUPLE OF
COMPETITIVE GRANTS, WE HAVE BEEN ABLE OVER THESE LAST FOUR YEARS
, REALLY BEFORE THE SETTLEMENT, TO INCREASE PUBLIC DEFENDER STAFFING BY ABOUT
16%, UPSTATE. TO INCREASE SUPPORT STAFF INCLUDING INVESTIGATORS, SOCIAL WORKERS,
SENTENCING ADVOCATES, A 20%. TO REDUCE CASELOADS FROM EXCESSIVE — WILDLY
EXCESSIVE TO SIMPLY EXCESSIVE. WE’VE GOT A NETWORK OF SIX REGIONAL IMMIGRATION
ASSISTANCE CENTERS , WHICH PROVIDE A STATEWIDE APPROACH TO HELPING LAWYERS COMPLY
WITH THEIR OBLIGATIONS. WE HAVE HAD TWO MAJOR STATE CONFERENCES ON PARENTAL
REPRESENTATION. WE ARE ABOUT TO PUT OUT AN RFP FOR A MODEL, UPSTATE REPRESENTATIONAL
OFFICE WHICH IS MODELED AFTER THE SUCCESSFUL PROGRAMS THAT HAVE BEEN
OPERATING FOR ABOUT THE 10 YEARS — PAST 10 YEARS. THERE WAS A LOT GOING ON THAT IS POSITIVE
WITH VERY LITTLE MONEY BECAUSE THIS IS NOT ALL ABOUT MONEY. THERE IS MONEY, AND THAT IS IMPORTANT. THERE IS ALSO STRUCTURE, EXPERTISE AND BUY-IN. THE SETTLEMENT CAME DOWN AND ANOTHER REASON THAT AT LEAST THE
SETTLEMENT WITH FIVE COUNTIES WAS A BIG PLUS, IT ALLOWED THE SETTLEMENT BECAUSE
IT WAS LIMITED TO BE REALLY GOOD. IT IS A REALLY GOOD SETTLEMENT. THERE IS COUNSEL AT ARRAIGNMENT. I CAME IN FROM MASSACHUSETTS AND I HAD NO IDEA THAT
MY NEIGHBORING STATE DID NOT HAVE COUNSEL AT ARRAIGNMENT. NEW YORK CITY HAS IT, SO THAT MEANS EVERYBODY
MUST HAVE IT. NEW YORK UPSTATE DID NOT HAVE IT. FIVE YEARS IN AND WE ARE NOT FINISHED BUT WE ARE MAKING A GOOD START. IN THE SETTLEMENT, IT IS GUARANTEED AND STATE-FUNDED IN THE FIVE COUNTIES. NOT EASILY BECAUSE THE SYSTEM IS CUMBERSOME. I HAVE NOT TOLD YOU ABOUT THE 1300 TOWN AND
VILLAGE COURTS WHICH ARE PROVIDED — PRESIDED OVER BY 2200 JUDGES,
MOST OF WHOM ARE NOT ONLY NOT LAWYERS, BUT NO MINIMUM EDUCATIONAL REQUIREMENT. COUNSEL AT ARRAIGNMENT. EXCESSIVE CASELOADS. I APOLOGIZE A MEMBER OF THE CONSORTIUM COULD
NOT BE HERE. OUR DIRECTOR OF RESEARCH IS DEEP IN CASELOAD
STUDY THAT WE ARE ENGAGED WITH WITH OUR CONTRACTOR WITH A DECEMBER 1 DEADLINE
TO PRODUCE CASELOAD STANDARDS FOR THE PROVIDERS IN THE LAWSUIT COUNTIES. THAT IS EXCITING WORK AND THAT IS ONGOING. NUMBER THREE IS SOMETHING CALLED QUALITY IMPROVEMENT
INITIATIVES AND THIS IS COREY ‘S KEY CONTRIBUTION. THIS IS ABOUT THE LAWYERS HAVING THE TIME AND THE RESOURCES AND THE IMPETUS TO ACT LIKE
REAL LAWYERS FOR THE REAL PEOPLE THEY REPRESENT. THAT IS AN UPTIME TO HAVE A PRIVATE CONVERSATION
WITH YOUR CLIENT. WHAT A THING, WHAT A REVOLUTION. ACCESS TO INVESTIGATORS AND EXPERTS. TIME TO DO LEGAL RESEARCH AND FILE LEGAL MOTIONS. ACTING LIKE REAL LAWYERS. THAT IS THE THIRD KEY COMPONENT, WITH FUNDING
IN THE SETTLEMENT. THE FOURTH IS ELIGIBILITY. ALL THE THREE PREVIOUS ONES I TALKED ABOUT
ARE TRYING TO MOVE THE NEEDLE FROM HAVING INADEQUATE COUNSEL TO HAVING
ADEQUATE COUNSEL OR HIGH- QUALITY COUNSEL. THE FOURTH ONE IS INSIDIOUS. IT IS DENYING PEOPLE COUNSEL ON INELIGIBILITY DETERMINATIONS AND HAVING NO
STATE SYSTEM. HERE, THE SETTLEMENT WENT BEYOND THE FIVE COUNTIES AND IT TOOK
IN ALL OF THE REST OF NEW YORK STATE OUTSIDE OF NEW YORK CITY, WHERE INELIGIBILITY
IS NOT THOUGHT TO BE AN ISSUE. WE HAVE NOW PRODUCED ELIGIBILITY GUIDELINES
FOR THE ENTIRE STATE. ONE OF THE THINGS WE HAVE TRIED TO DO IS PUT PRESUMPTIONS
IN PLACE SO THAT YOU DON’T HAVE PUBLIC DEFENDER OFFICES AND COURTS UTILIZING
RESOURCES WHICH ARE SUPPOSED TO BE GOING TO PROVIDING COUNSEL AND JUSTICE
INTO DETERMINING ELIGIBILITY. IF THE — A HOST OF OTHER REFORMS IN PLACE. THERE IS NOW ONE CONSISTENT ELIGIBILITY STANDARD IN NEW YORK THAT IS ALSO UNDER THE
SETTLEMENT. THE SETTLEMENT IS IN FULL FORCE. IT IS MOVING AHEAD. THERE ARE OBSTACLES. WE HAVEN’T A PERSON UNIT THAT WAS NOT PART OF THE SETTLEMENT, BUT IT
WAS FUNDED BY THE STATE AS A RESULT. WE SOMETIMES SAY WE COULD USE THOSE EIGHT
PEOPLE IN JUST ONE OF THE FIVE COUNTIES , BUT WE ARE WORKING, MAKING
GOOD PROGRESS. THE OTHER RESULT OF THE FIVE-COUNTY DECISION IS THAT THERE HAS
BEEN THIS POLITICAL REACTION. WHAT ABOUT THE REST OF US? HAVE — HOW CAN THE STATE SAY IT HAS A RESPONSIBILITY FOR FIVE DIVERSE COUNTIES AND NOT THE OTHER
52 THAT LIE OUTSIDE OF THE CITY. THAT HAS LED TO THE PASSAGE OF THE BILL BY
THE LEGISLATURE IN JUNE. COLETTE: WHEN YOU HAVE DESCRIBED IN NEW YORK
IS SIMILAR TO WHAT WE HAVE HEARD IN IDAHO, UTAH, WASHINGTON STATE, THE CONSTRUCTIVE
DENIAL OF COUNSEL. IS IT HARD TO GET THE CULTURE SINCE — CULTURE SHIFT
AND ALL THE STAKEHOLDERS IN THE JUSTICE COMMUNITY. HAS IT BEEN DIFFICULT TO GET BY IN — BUY-IN? BILL: I LIKE TO USE EXPECTATIONS, RATHER THAN
CULTURE. THERE ARE NEGATIVE REACTIONS, WHEN PEOPLE PERCEIVE , FOR EXAMPLE,
ELIGIBILITY STANDARDS TO BE TOO EXPENSIVE OR INCLUSIVE. MONEY IS ALWAYS AN ISSUE IN PUBLIC DEFENSE. IT IS A DIRTY LITTLE SECRET THAT GOOD LAWYERING COSTS
MONEY. IF YOU GO TO HIRE A GOOD LAWYER, COST IS GOING TO BE AN ISSUE.>>SO FOR MOST OF THE PANEL, WE HAVE BEEN
TALKING ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY ABOUT LITIGATION AND LEGISLATIVE EFFORTS, BUT THEY
ARE NOT THE ONLY TWO STRATEGIES THAT CAN BE EMPLOYED WHEN LOOKING TO BRING
ATTENTION TO INDIGENT DEFENSE CRISES . WITH THAT, I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN IT
UP TO MICHAEL BARRETT, THE STATE PUBLIC DEFENDER OF MISSOURI. MICHAEL, WHAT WAS THE STRESSES YOUR SYSTEM
WAS FACING? WHAT WAS THE STRATEGY EMPLOYED , AND MOST
IMPORTANT, WHY DID YOU CHOOSE THAT STRATEGY? MR. BARRETT: FOR EVERYONE’S BENEFIT , A FEW MONTHS
AGO, WE WERE FACING FUNDING THAT WAS SECOND TO LAST IN THE UNITED STATES
. WE ARE 49 AND MISSISSIPPI IS 50TH IN FUNDING TO INDIGENT DEFENSE. OUR CASE WAS ACROSS THE STATE IN OUR 31 TRIAL OFFICES MADE UP OF 376 ATTORNEYS STATEWIDE
HAD RISEN FROM 74,000 CASES LAST YEAR TO 82,000 CASES. WE WERE NOT SEEING ANY NEW MONEY. WE HAVE A VERY CONSERVATIVE LEGISLATURE THAT GAVE US THE
LARGEST INCREASE WE HAVE RECEIVED IN MORE THAN TO GET HIS — TWO DECADES. IT WOULD HAVE ADVANCED US FROM 48 — THAT’S HOW FAR DOWN WE ARE, BUT IT WOULD’VE
BEEN’S ESSENTIAL RELIEF. THE GOVERNOR WITHHELD THAT FUNDING FROM US AND
CUT THE MONEY FROM OUR BUDGET. I PER USED OUR STATUTES AND NEVER BEFORE USED
STATUTES SAYS THE DIRECTOR OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER SYSTEM HAS THE AUTHORITY TO
APPOINT ANY LAWYER IN GOOD STANDING IN THE STATE TO REPRESENT AN INDIGENT
CLIENTS. . I SAID WE’RE GOING TO HAVE TO START USING THIS. SHOULDN’T WE START WITH THE ONE PERSON WHO
IS CAUSING THIS PROBLEM? I POINTED TO THE GOVERNOR AS MANY OF YOU KNOW. THAT’S ONLY BECAUSE WE NEEDED TO BRING ATTENTION
TO THIS PROBLEM. WE NEEDED TO BRING ATTENTION TO THE FACT THAT DURING HIS TENURE
FROM 2006 WHEN THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS BUDGET WAS $575 MILLION, NO SMALL
CHUNK OF CHANGE FOR MISSOURI, INCREASED TO $727 MILLION. THIS IS AN AVERAGE OF $30 MILLION PER YEAR
AND NO ONE BLINKED AND EYE. WE NEED SO CALL ATTENTION TO THIS. WHERE’S THE MONEY FOR PUBLIC DEFENDER SYSTEMS? IT PAYS FOR ITSELF. JUST FROM ONE YEAR OF 2006-2007, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS BUDGET INCREASE
WAS $45 MILLION. THAT IS $5 MILLION MORE THAN MY ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET. SO WE NEEDED TO PULL ATTENTION TO THIS WHERE THE RISING PRISON COSTS OF 150 MILLION
OVER 10 YEARS INCREASED AND NOT A SINGLE NEW DOLLAR FOR THE PUBLIC DEFENDER
SYSTEMS. YOU START LOOKING AT THE BOTTOM STATES IN TERMS OF THE BOTTOM 10 STATES
IN TERMS OF PUBLIC DEFENDER FUNDING AND BY AND LARGE THOSE OF THE SAME
STATES THAT ARE TOP 10 PER CAPITA IN PRISON FUNDING. THE CORRELATION IS OBVIOUS. WE NEED TO DRAW ATTENTION TO THIS. I THINK WE SUCCEEDED IN THAT. HE IS NOT RELEASED THE FUNDING, SO WE HAVE THAT TO DEAL WITH. WE HAD TO RESORT TO THAT — SOMETHING OF A
POLITICAL MANEUVER — BECAUSE NO ONE ELSE WAS PAYING
ATTENTION. I THINK IN MISSOURI WE GOT THE CONVERSATION STARTED.>>WHAT DO YOU SEE AS THE STRATEGY MOVING
FORWARD AT THIS POINT? MR. BARRETT: I THINK THE STRATEGY FOR US IS MUCH
LIKE TEXAS DEALT WITH IN 2008. IT BECAME A FISCAL DISCUSSION AND I THINK
THAT’S WHERE WE ARE IN MISSOURI. IT’S A VERY FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE STATE. THE ARGUMENT ON PROVIDING THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL, BECAUSE IT’S THE RIGHT
THING AND A NEED TO HAVE A BALANCE SYSTEM OF JUSTICE WHERE THERE IS EQUAL
RIGHTS UNDER THE LAW, THAT TRAIN HAS LEFT THE STATION. IT IS NOT RESONATED WITH LEGISLATORS AND GOVERNORS IN MY STATE. WHAT DOES RESONATE IS THE FISCAL ARGUMENT
, THAT INCREASE IN THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS BUDGET I TALKED
ABOUT. ALSO, THE COST TO THE COUNTIES. WE TALKED ABOUT NEW YORK HAVING 62 COUNTIES
AND EVEN THERE FOR ESTATE OF 19 MILLION PEOPLE, THE GENERAL CONSENSUS
IS THAT THERE IS TOO MANY COUNTIES. BY CONTRAST, MISSOURI IS FEWER THAN 6 MILLION
PEOPLE AND WE HAVE 114 COUNTIES. A VERY SPARSE POPULATION. THERE’S LOTS OF COUNTIES. THE BIGGEST OPERATING EXPENSE FOR THE COUNTIES IS THERE
LOCAL JAIL, OK? THEY CANNOT AFFORD IT, BUT THEY WANT IT. BECAUSE THE JUDICIARY WHOLESALE IGNORES BONDS LIMITATIONS, MOST PEOPLE GET, IF YOU ARE POOR,
INCARCERATION PRETRIAL AND THAT’S JUST THE WAY IT IS. THE FIRST DAY THEY ARE IN JAIL PRETRIAL , THE COUNTY STARTS ACCUMULATING COSTS, SIGNIFICANT
COSTS , PARTICULARLY IF THERE IS A MENTAL HEALTH ISSUE OR A DRUG ADDITION. THESE ARE COSTS THAT THE COUNTY SIMPLY CANNOT SUSTAIN. I THINK HE’S MISSOURI IS UNIQUE IN THIS, BUT
I MAY BE WRONG AND THERE’S ONE THING AT THE HEART OF
THIS PROBLEM. THE WAY THAT I COUNTY IN MISSOURI GETS REIMBURSED FOR THEIR
GEL COST — JAIL COST IS IT THE PERSON ULTIMATELY GETS A STATE PRISON SENTENCE. THINK ABOUT THAT FOR A MOMENT. THERE IS A FINANCIAL INCENTIVE FOR COUNTIES
TO SENTENCE SOMEONE TO STATE PRISON. AND SO, THE COUNTY ELECTEDS — THE SHERIFF,
THE PROSECUTOR, AND THE JUDGE — ARE NO DOUBT AT THE ELKS LODGE HAVING
A BUD LIGHT FRIDAY NIGHT SAYING, WE NEED A BUDGET AND YOU GOT TO GIVE
THESE GUYS A STATE PRISON SENTENCE, AND THAT’S INVARIABLY WHAT HAPPENS. TWO OR THREE YEARS AGO DURING THE STATE OF THE UNION, THE PRESIDENT SAID
IT WAS THE FIRST TIME IN RECENT MEMORY WHERE THE NATIONAL PRESENT POPULATION
WENT DOWN CONTEMPORANEOUS WITH THE NATIONAL CRIME RATE. MISSOURI — THAT DIDN’T HAPPEN. IN FACT, OUR CRIME RATE WENT UP, PARTICULARLY VIOLENT CRIME,
AS DID PRISON POPULATION. WE ARE KNOCKING ON THE DOOR OF NEEDING A NEW PRISON
OF $140 MILLION PLUS FTES. OUR ARGUMENT IS NOW A FISCAL ONE. YOU WANT TO AVOID BUYING THAT NEW PRISON AT
$140 MILLION AND MISSOURI IS NOT LOOKING TO DO
MASSIVE CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM? FUND THE PUBLIC DEFENDER SYSTEM, WHICH IS
OFTENTIMES NOT PART OF THE CONVERSATION WHEN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT RIGHTING
THE SHIP ON MASS INCARCERATION. JUST TO BORROW A SIMPLE SORTS METAPHOR — SPORTS
METAPHOR, IF YOU ARE A HOCKEY OR SOCCER FAN, PULL YOUR
GOALIE AND THERE’S A LOT OF BALLS GOING INTO THE NET THAT SHOULDN’T GO INTO
THE NET. THE SAME IS TRUE OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDERS SYSTEM. IF YOU HAVE 82,000 CASES FOR A PUBLIC DEFENDER,
YOU CANNOT PROVIDE SUBSTANTIVE REPRESENTATION
FOR THEM AND YOU BY AND LARGE ARE PLEAING THEM AND THE PRISON POPULATION AS
A RESULT IS INCREASING.>>MOST PEOPLE WILL AGREE THAT THERE IS A
FOCUS ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM IN THIS COUNTRY. IN MANY WAYS, YOUR STATE WAS GROUND ZERO WITH
FERGUSON. CAN YOU TALK ABOUT HOW THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL PLAYS
INTO THIS LARGER NARRATIVE OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND OVER INCARCERATION AND THE FOCUS
ON WHERE THINGS ARE GOING COMING OUT OF FERGUSON? MR. BARRETT: AS MANY OF YOU KNOW, FERGUSON GAVE
RISE TO A PRETTY ROBUST DISCUSSION, NOT JUST ON THE USE OF FORCE WITH
RESPECT TO LAW ENFORCEMENT, BUT ALSO THE CHRONIC AND SYSTEMIC ABUSE OF FINES
AND FEES ON THE INDIGENT POPULATION. MISSOURI IS A LOW TAX STATE. THE DEATHKNELL FOR ANY POLITICIAN IS TO SUGGEST EVEN IN JEST TO RAISE TAXES FOR
NEEDED SERVICES. THE WAY THEY FUND GOVERNMENT, PARTICULARLY LOCAL GOVERNMENT
, IS THROUGH EXCESSIVE FINES AND FEES. AND IN FERGUSON, WHICH IS ONE OF 90 MUNICIPALITIES
THAT MAKE UP THE LARGER ST. LOUIS AREA, YOU HAVE THESE VERY SMALL GOVERNMENTS
THAT REPRESENT NOT A VERY LARGE TAX BASE THAT ARE ENTIRELY
FUNDED BASED ON FINDING AND FEEING SOMEONE. THEY DO NOT CUT THE LAWN — $50. THEY DO NOT PAY THEIR FEET — $75 SERVICE CHARGE AND SO ON AND SO FORTH. WHEN THEY ARE PULLED OVER, THEY ARE HOUSED IN THE LOCAL JAIL FOR HOWEVER LONG. WOULDN’T YOU KNOW IT , BUT WHEN THEY ARE TOO POOR TO GET OUT BY MAKING BOND,
THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR OWN JAIL STAY TO THE TUNE OF $40 PER DAY? IT’S A LITTLE BIT OF A HEAD SCRATCHER. IN ADDITION TO THE FISCAL ARGUMENT, WE NEED
TO TALK ABOUT HOW PUBLIC DEFENDERS PLAY A ROLE IN THE LARGER
PUBLIC SAFETY DISCUSSION. IN THE ADVERSARIAL SYSTEM, PUBLIC DEFENDERS , ONLY
IF WE ARE FUNDED ADEQUATELY, CAN HELP THE SYSTEM DISTINGUISH BETWEEN WHO THEY
NEED TO SPEND MONEY ON AND WHO THEY DO NOT NEED TO SPEND MONEY ON. PROBATION AND PAROLE AND CORRECTIONS, IT’S REALLY EXPENSIVE. THE LAST THING YOU WANT TO DO IS WASTE THOSE
FINITE CRITICAL RESOURCES ON INDIVIDUALS WHO DON’T NEED IT. A CUTIE FROM DOING THINGS ON THE FRONT END, LIKE ELIMINATING YOUR RATE KIT
BACKLOG OR SOLVING UNSOLVED VIOLENT CRIME. WHAT THE PUBLIC DEFENDER SYSTEM DOES FOR THE
LARGER PUBLIC SAFETY DISCUSSION IS WE ARE GOING TO HELP YOU FIGURE
OUT WHO YOU DO NOT NEED TO PAY ATTENTION TO AND WHO YOU DO NEED TO PAY ATTENTION
TO. OFTENTIMES THAT IS NOT DISCUSSED. IT’S NOT PART OF THE DISCUSSION AND I THINK
WE NEED TO MAKE IT PART OF THE DISCUSSION.>>WE ARE COMING TO A CLOSE OF THIS PANEL. AS WE DID IN THE FIRST SEGMENT, WE WANT TO OPEN UP TO ANYONE WHO HAS A QUESTION
OF THE PANELISTS HERE. YES?>>FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO CONGRATULATE MICHAEL
ON HIS KURDISH IN TAKING ON THE GOVERNOR AND I WILL NOTE THAT THE GOVERNOR
IN A BLATANT POLITICAL MOVE APPOINTED TWO SHERIFFS TO YOUR BOARD, WHICH
DIMINISHES SOMEWHAT YOUR INDEPENDENCE, AND I HOPE YOU SURVIVE AT ALL. MY QUESTION HAS TO DO WITH THE CASE WAITING STUDY THAT WAS DONE BY RUBEN
BROWN IN MISSOURI AND HOW THAT MIGHT PLAY INTO THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE NEED FOR FUNDING
, WHETHER OR NOT THAT STUDY HAS GAINED ANY POLITICAL ACCEPTANCE IN A LEGISLATURE
OR THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM AS TO THE IMPORTANCE OF KEEPING CASELOADS
AT A REASONABLE LEVEL AND WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS BY UY -IN. I KNOW THE PROSECUTORS HAVE BEEN OBJECTING TO YOU. WHAT IS THE LEVEL OF BUY-IN INTO THAT CASE
STUDY AS TO THE SYSTEM ITSELF? MR. BARRETT: THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION. JUST TO EVERYONE’S BENEFIT, THE ABA SPONSORED A CASELOADS STUDIED CALLED THE MISSOURI
PROJECT, WHERE THEY HIRED RUBEN BROWN TO LOOK AT OUR DATA. AS A PUBLIC DISTRUST DEFENDER SYSTEM, WE DO NOT DO BETTER THAN ANYONE ELSE. MISSOURI BECAME THE FIRST PUBLIC DEFENDER SYSTEM IN THE COUNTRY TO REQUIRE ITS LAWYERS
TO TIME LOG IN FIVE MINUTE INCREMENTS , WHICH SHOULD NOT GO OVER VERY
WELL AS YOU MIGHT IMAGINE WITH THE ATTORNEYS WHO ARE ALREADY OVERBURDENED. WE TOLD THEM THAT THIS IS THE PATH. IF YOU HAVE DATA, YOU GOT TO STUDY YOUR DATA. YOU HAVE TO COLLECT IT AND YOU HAVE TO STUDY. WE NEED TO MAKE AN EVIDENCE-BASED ARGUMENT
TO GET FUNDING. IT IS NOT ENOUGH TO GO TO LEGISLATIVE OFFICE SAYING
WE HAVE TOO MANY CASES AND NOT ENOUGH LAWYERS. RUBEN BROWN CONDUCTED A STUDY THAT LOOKED
AT 20 WEEKS OF OUR DATA. THEY JUXTAPOSED HOW MUCH TIME WE WERE SPENDING
ON EVERY TASK AND EVERY CASE TYPE , SO HOW MUCH TIME WE WERE SPENDING
RESEARCH, TENDING COURT, TRAVEL, MOTION PRACTICE, MEETING WITH CLIENTS, AND
THEN COMPARED IT TO HOW MUCH TIME PRIVATE LAWYERS WERE SPENDING FOR THE EXACT
SAME THING. THROUGH A BUSINESS MODEL PROCESS, THEY GOT RID OF THE OUTLIERS
AND HONED ON TASK THRESHOLDS , HOW MUCH TIME WE SHOULD BE SPENDING ON EACH TASK
FOR EACH CASE TYPE. WHEN YOU DO THE COPULATION BASED ON THE NUMBER OF CASES
WE HAVE, THE TYPES OF THOSE CASES WITH OUR CURRENT NUMBER OF ATTORNEYS YIELDED
WHAT WE NEEDED ACCORDING TO THIS ACCOUNTING FIRM. THE RESULT WAS BASED ON AN 2014 THE NUMBER
OF CASES WE HAD, IN ORDER TO BE CONSTITUTIONALLY EFFECTIVE,
WE NEEDED 290 ADDITIONAL ATTORNEYS. PICTURE US GOING TO THE LEGISLATURE WITH WE
NEED 290 NEW ATTORNEYS. IT DID NOT GET US VERY FAR WITH A MAJORITY OF THEM, BUT
TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, THE CHAIR OF THE JUDICIARY , WHO IS JUST RUNNING
FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL, A CARRIED A LOT OF WEIGHT WITH HIM. WHAT WAS MOTIVATING HIM IS THAT HE WAS FEARFUL
OF SOME SORT OF CLASS ACTION WHERE OFFENDERS WOULD
WALK OUT OF PRISON BECAUSE WE HAVE THIS DATA. I DO NOT CARE WHAT’S MOTIVATING HIM AS LONG
SEE COMES TO THE TABLE. HE PROVIDED $3.5 BILLION. DID THAT CASE LOAD STUDY RESULT IN NEW MONEY? YES, IT DID. THE GOVERNOR NEVER LET US HAVE IT. HE WITHHELD THE FUNDING. WE MADE A CONVINCING DATA DRIVEN ARGUMENT. THE GOVERNOR WITH HELD THE MONEY. TWO YEARS LATER, LESLIE THE LEGISLATURE GAVE US $4.5
MILLION WHICH THE GOVERNOR WITHHELD. FOR THOSE STATES INTERESTED IN DOING CASELOAD
STUDIES, ABSOLUTELY YOU NEED TO DO BETTER THAN EVERYONE ELSE. YOU NEED TO DO BETTER THAN THE PARKS DEPARTMENT, HEALTH APARTMENT, EDUCATION, BECAUSE
NO ONE EVER GOT ELECTED ON HELPING THE PUBLIC DEFENDER SYSTEM. YOU NEED TO WALK INTO THEIR OFFICES WITH A DATA DRIVEN STUDY. I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO DO THAT. I DO NOT THINK THE ATTORNEYS IN OUR SYSTEM REGRET HAVING TO TIME
LOG. THEY NEED TO SEE SOME RESULTS AND SOME RELIEF SOON.>>HELLO, MY NAME IS COLBERT — DOUG COLBERT. I’M A PROFESSOR AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND SCHOOL OF LAW. I, TOO, WANT TO EXPRESS MY THANKS TO YOU IN TAKING A TERRIFIC STAND AND BRING ATTENTION
TO A DISASTER SITUATION, NOT ONLY IN MISSOURI BUT REALLY IN MOST PARTS
OF THE COUNTRY. I JUST WANT FOR A MOMENT TO SHARE AND ASK YOU A QUESTION ABOUT
WHETHER THE MARYLAND APPROACH THAT I WAS A PART OF MIGHT WORK IN OTHER PLACES
AS WELL. THE MARYLAND DEFENDER AND PAUL’S LAWYER CERTAINLY DO A TERRIFIC
JOB, BUT ALSO A CHAIRMAN TO SLEE — ARE TREMENDOUSLY UNDERFUNDED AND WILL NOT
SIGNIFICANTLY GET MORE MONEY. WE ALL KNEW FOR MANY YEARS THAT PEOPLE DO NOT HAVE
LAWYERS AT THE BEGINNING OF THE CASE, EXCEPT IN ONE OR TWO COUNTIES. WHAT WE REACHED OUT TO TO CHANGE THE DYNAMIC WAS THE BIGGEST LAW FIRM IN OUR STATE. WE WORKED, MY STUDENTS AND I WORKED WITH THESE TWO EXCELLENT PRO BONO LAWYERS
FROM THE VENERABLE LAW FIRM, BOTH PARTNERS. FOR SEVEN YEARS, WE FILED A CLASS-ACTION LAWSUIT
FOR THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL AT FIRST APPEARANCE. EVENTUALLY WE SUCCEEDED. OUR HIGHEST COURT RULED NOW THAT POOR PEOPLE DO HAVE A CONSTITUTIONAL
RIGHT TO A LAWYER AT FIRST APPEARANCE. THERE ARE STILL PROBLEMS OF COURSE, BUT THE
IDEA WAS THAT WHEN WE CORDON THE PRIVATE BAR AND WE BROUGHT IN LAWYERS
WHO HAVE BY REPUTATION SOMETHING VERY DIFFERENT THAN A LAW SCHOOL
CLAIMANT OR THE PUBLIC — CLINIC OR THE PUBLIC DEFENDERS, A REALLY ELEVATED THE
ISSUE AND GAVE ATTENTION TO LOTS OF PEOPLE WHO HAD NO IDEA, EVEN LAWYERS HAD
NO IDEA, THAT POOR PEOPLE WERE UNREPRESENTED FOR SUCH A LONG TIME IN THE
COURTROOM. AND SO I WONDERED WHETHER — IT’S ALMOST LIKE A FIVE-YEAR-OLD BOY WHO
FINALLY HAD THE KURDS TO SAY THAT THE EMPEROR IS NAKED — COURAGE TO SAY THAT
THE EMPEROR IS NAKED. EVERYONE ELSE REMAINS SILENT. I WONDER WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF WE LOOK TO PRIVATE
BAR LAWYERS TO JOIN WITH PUBLIC DEFENDERS TO CHALLENGE
THE SYSTEM BECAUSE WE CANNOT SAY WE HAVE A JUSTICE SYSTEM WHEN POOR
PEOPLE HAVE TO WAIT SOMETIMES WEEKS AND EVEN MONTHS BEFORE THEY ARE FINDING
A LAWYER STANDING NEXT TO THEM. MR. BARRETT: YES, I CANNOT AGREE WITH YOU MORE. YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT THINKING OUTSIDE THE BOX AND LOOKING AT NONTRADITIONAL
MEANS TO BRING ATTENTION TO THE MATTER. I CAN TELL YOU THAT THE BEGINNING OF THIS
STUDY WE ARE TALKING ABOUT WAS BROUGHT BY OUR CHAIR WHILE HE WAS PRESIDENT
OF THE STATE BAR. WE ALL KNOW THAT THE MEASURE OF ANY STATE BAR IS THE TYPE
OF JUSTICE THAT THE LEAST AMONG US RECEIVE. OUR STATE BAR FELT VERY CONVICTED AND THEY
CHAMPIONED THE STUDY . WHEN I NEEDED TO GET OVER THE HUMP WITH SOME
NEW FUNDING THIS YEAR IN THE LEGISLATURE I DID NOT JUST GO TO THE OFFICE
OF LEGISLATORS. I WENT TO VISIT PARTNERS IN ST. LOUIS AND KANSAS CITY AND IT PICKED UP THE
PHONE ON OUR BEHALF BECAUSE THEY KNEW THAT STATUTE THAT I HAVE
THAT SAID, LOOK, IF WE DON’T HAVE THE FUNDING , I’M GOING TO START APPOINTING
LAWYERS. AT $500 AN HOUR, THEY WOULD RATHER US GET THE FUNDING. WE NEED TO DO MORE THOSE TYPES OF THINGS,
BUT PROFESSOR, I CANNOT AGREE WITH YOU MORE. MR. LEAHY: COUNSEL AT FIRST AGREEMENT AND BAIL
HEARINGS, YOU CANNOT SAY IT ANY BETTER THAN DEATH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL GATES
SAID THIS MORNING — DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL YATES SAID THIS MORNING. THE SUPREME COURT HAS NOT MADE IT EXPLICIT, BUT NO ONE CAN DISPUTE THE UNFAIRNESS
OF AN INDIVIDUAL GOING AGAINST THE POWER OF THE STATE WITH HIS OR HER LIBERTY
ON THE LINE AND NOT HAVE COUNSEL. THAT IS UN-AMERICAN. IT’S UNACCEPTABLE. I WAS JUST SO PLEASED TO HEAR THAT THE KEYNOTE ADDRESSED THAT SQUARELY. IT IS SOMETHING WE ALL HAVE TO GET AFTER AND WE ALL HAVE TO UTILIZE OUR WHOLE
UNIVERSE OF SUPPORT, STATE BAR ASSOCIATIONS, CIVIL LIBERTIES, CHIEF DEFENDERS
ASSOCIATION’S, LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS WHO CARE ABOUT FUNDAMENTAL FAIRNESS. ALL OF THAT HAS TO COME INTO PLAY. MR. CARROLL: I’M GETTING A SIGNAL THAT WE HAVE
TIME FOR ONE LAST QUESTION.>>I AND BETTY MOORE AND I AM A JUDGE OUT
OF MEMPHIS, TENNESSEE. THANK YOU FOR THIS PANEL. IT IS MUCH NEEDED. MY QUESTION IS NOT ONLY WITH THE JURISDICTIONS THAT INSTITUTE OF THEIR RIGHT TO COUNSEL PROGRAMS,
THE PUBLIC DEFENDER PROGRAMS, BUT I’M REALLY CURIOUS AS TO WHAT
OTHER SPECIFIC REASONS HAVE BEEN INVOLVED WITH THOSE WHO GIVE SO MUCH PUSHBACK. UTAH, IDAHO, AND ESPECIALLY NEW YORK, THAT PUSHBACK SO TO SPEAK UNTIL THE
DAY OF TRIAL BEFORE THEY SAID WE WILL DO WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE. I KNOW THAT MONEY IS A HUGE ISSUE, BUT SURELY THERE ARE MORE ISSUES AND REASONS WHY JURISDICTIONS
SAY NO. MR. LEAHY: I THINK THAT’S AN EXCELLENT POINT. MONEY IS ALWAYS AT THE FOREFRONT OF THESE DISCUSSIONS. AND FUNDAMENTAL CHANGE IS HARD. THAT IS WHAT WE ARE ON THE CUSP OF A NEW YORK. I HOPE IN THE NEXT FEW MONTHS WE WILL SEE
US GETTING THERE. I DO LIKE TO REMIND PEOPLE THAT WHEN YOU GET
TO THE AREA OF FUNDAMENTAL CHANGE, IF YOU CAN GET THERE — WE GOT THERE
IN MASSACHUSETTS. THEN COMES THE ANNUAL, I ALWAYS CALL IT 24/ 7/365 STRUGGLE
FOR ADEQUATE FUNDING TO FUND THE GOOD STRUCTURE AND STANDARDS THAT YOU PUT
IN PLACE. I WANT TO BE MEASURED IN THIS BECAUSE FOR THE POLICYMAKERS , FOR THE
PUBLIC OFFICIALS WHO HAVE TO MAKE THESE DECISIONS , THEY ARE NOT AS SIMPLE OR
AS EASY AS THEY ARE TO US WHO ARE ADVOCATES. AND SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE CAN DO AS
ADVOCATES IS TO ASSURE BY OUR PERFORMANCE TO THOSE POLICYMAKERS THAT
THE PUBLIC FUNDS THAT THEY HAVE THE POLITICAL COURAGE TO ENTRUST TO THESE
REFORMS WILL BE SPENT WITH EXPERTISE, WITH EFFICIENCY , AND WITH RESPONSIBILITY. MS. STOUGHTON: I AGREE WITH THAT AND IT WAS REALLY
WELL SAID. THERE ARE ALSO TWO FACTORS THAT HISTORICALLY HAVE STOOD IN
THE WAY OF REFORM THAT ARE CHANGING. THEY MAKE ME VERY OPTIMISTIC ABOUT THE FUTURE. ONE IS THAT AS A LAWYER, IF SOMEONE , IF THE THREAT OF LITIGATION
WAS BROUGHT TO A STATE OR LOCALITY OF THE STATE OF THE PUBLIC DEFENSE
SYSTEM, UNTIL TH VERY RECENTLY, THERE WAS UNCERTAINTY IN THE LAW OVER WHAT
THEIR LEGAL LIABILITY WAS SO THE GOVERNOR COUNSEL COULD LOOK AT POLITICIANS
AND SAY I CAN DEFEND THIS LAWSUIT. I THINK THERE’S AN ARGUMENT THAT THE SIXTH
AMENDMENT DOESN’T MEAN WHAT THOSE PEOPLE ARE SAYING. WHETHER IT’S THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL AT ARRAIGNMENT
OR THE QUESTION OF PRE-CONVICTION ENFORCEMENT FOR
SYSTEMIC RELIEF UNDER THE SIXTH AMENDMENT, ONE OF THE THINGS THE DEPARTMENT
OF JUSTICE IS WORKING HARD ON AND MANY OF YOU ARE WORKING HARD ON HIS ESTABLISHING
THAT THE LAW IS CLEARLY ESTABLISHED IN THOSE AREAS. THAT IS HAPPENING EVERY DAY IN COURTS ACROSS AMERICA. I THINK THAT IS NOW A TREND THAT WILL CONTINUE. THE SECOND THING THAT IS CHANGING IS THAT THIS COMMUNITY OF PEOPLE
AND MANY OF THE PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM OUR RESPONSE WILL FOR THIS HAD BECOME
SO MUCH MORE SOPHISTICATED ABOUT DATA AND ABOUT USING DATA. WITH THE FUNDING OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT,
WITH THE FUNDING OF INSTITUTIONS REPRESENTED IN
THIS ROOM, WITH LEADERSHIP EXPERTISE LIKE DAVID CARROLL AND ALL THESE
GROUPS, WE ARE GETTING BETTER AT USING DATA TO SHOW WHAT BILL WAS SAYING THAT
WE CAN FIRST ASSESS SYSTEMS LIKE WAS SAID IN THE FIRST PANEL THIS MORNING AND
SHOW WHERE THE PROBLEMS ARE SO THAT THIS ISN’T A PHANTOM THING OR SOMEONE
COMPLAINING AND TRYING TO GET MORE MONEY FOR SOMETHING, BUT THIS IS A REAL PROBLEM. WE KNOW THAT THERE ARE REAL SOLUTIONS FOR THESE CASELOADS STUDIES THAT
HAVE BEEN DONE IN ALL THESE PLACES. I THINK THERE’S A LOT OF REASONS TO BE OPTIMISTIC
THAT THE OBSTACLES THAT STOOD IN THE WAY OF REAL REFORM IN THE PAST
ARE FALLING TO THE WAYSIDE AND THINGS WILL START TO GET BETTER AS WE COME
TOGETHER FOR SOLUTIONS . MR. CARROLL: THAT IS GOING TO HAVE TO BE THE LAST
WORD ON THAT, SO THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE] MS. TVEDT: I WANT TO THANK DAVID AND COLETTE FOR
ORGANIZING THE PANELS. REALLY INTERESTING COMMENTS ABOUT WHAT IS GOING ON
IN THEIR COMMUNITIES, SO THANK YOU ALL. [APPLAUSE]>>I’M GOING TO INVITE OUR OUR LIGHTNING ROUND
PANELIST TO JOIN US. WHILE THEY ARE WALKING UP HERE , LET ME TELL YOU ABOUT
OUR NEXT SESSION. THIS IS A LIGHTNING ROUND SESSION WHERE WE HAVE ASKED. LEADERS AND INNOVATORS TO PROVIDE IDEAS ON PERSPECTIVE WAYS THAT CONSORTIUM
MEMBERS CAN IMPROVE OUR PUBLIC DEFENSE DELIVERY SYSTEMS, INCLUDING WHO MIGHT
BE AND HOW TO ENGAGE UNLIKELY ALLIES AND HOW WE ALL CAN BE AGENTS FOR CHANGE. THIS IS REALLY THE FIRST PART OF OUR LOOK PROSPECTIVELY. AFTER LUNCH, WE WILL BE TURNING TO ALL OF
YOU TO REALLY GET TO WORK THROUGH THINK SOME SPECIFIC
PLANS. I AM GOING TO INTRODUCE ALL THE LIGHTNING ROUND PARTICIPANTS AND THEY
WILL THEN PROCEED TO SHARE WITH YOU SOME SHORT REMARKS . OUR FIRST SPEAKER
IS JOANN WALLACE , PRESIDENT AND CEO OF THE NATIONAL LEGAL AID AND DEFENDER
ASSOCIATION, THE OLDE ST ASSOCIATION DEVOTING ITS RESOURCES TO EQUAL
JUSTICE. AFTER JOANN, WE HAVE MARC LEVIN. HE IS THE DIRECTOR AT THE TEXAS PUBLIC POLICY
FOUNDATION , THE STATE’S PUBLIC FREE-MARKET THINK TANK. HE ALSO SERVES AS THE POLICY DIRECTOR OF THE FOUNDATION’S RIGHT ON CRIME INITIATIVE. AFTER MARC, JUDGE BERNICE DONALD , A JUDGE FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. SHE WAS NOMINATED BY PRESIDENT OBAMA AND CONFIRMED BY THE SENATE IN 2011. IT WOULD BE NICE IF THE PRESIDENT COULD CONFIRM AS WELL. [APPLAUSE] PRIOR TO THAT, JUDGE DONALD SAT
ON THE DISTRICT COURT IN TENNESSEE. JUDGE DONALD CURRENTLY SERVES AS A SECRETARY
OF THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION AND IS THE PAST PRESIDENT
OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF WOMEN JUDGES. NEXT WE WILL HAVE JOHN WETZEL, THE SECRETARY
OF THE PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS . WITH
OVER 26 YEARS OF EXPENSE, MR. WETZEL IS WIDELY RECOGNIZED AS ONE OF THE
THOUGHT LEADERS IN CORRECTIONS TODAY. FINALLY WE WILL HEAR FROM IVAN DOMINGU EZ,
THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS AND GIVING OCCASIONS FOR THE NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION OF CRIMINAL DEFENSE LAWYERS. HE BRINGS ATTENTION TO THE NEWS MEDIA AND
THE PUBLIC AND MAINTAINS ONGOING RELATIONSHIPS WITH KEY LEGAL AFFAIRS,
JUSTICE, CREME FRAICHE CONGRESSIONAL AND SUPREME COURT REPORTERS. GOOD HOST A PODCAST SERIES. J OANN. MS. WALLACE: THANK YOU, LISA. GOOD MORNING. I THINK IT IS STILL MOURNING COULD — STILL MORNING. IT IS GREAT TO STAND BEFORE YOU TODAY AND
THIS GREAT HALL OF JUSTICE. I CANNOT THINK OF A MORE SYMBOLIC ROOM OR
APPROPRIATE LOCATION THAN THE CEREMONIAL LOCATION TO WORK ON THE RIGHT
TO COUNSEL. I WANT TO BEGIN BY THANKING THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND PARTICULATE
ATTORNEY GENERAL LORETTA LYNCH AND HER PREDECESSOR, ERIC HOLDER, FOR
RECOGNIZING THAT IT’S APPROPRIATE FOR OUR COUNTRY’S TOP LEADERS TO INCLUDE THE
IMPROVEMENT OF PUBLIC DEFENSE AS A SIGNIFICANT PART OF ACHIEVING THE DEPARTMENTS
MISSION FOR ENSURING IMPARTIAL JUDGMENT FOR ALL AMERICANS. THEIR COMMITMENT TO MAKING JUSTICE FOR ALL. WHILE IT IS THE CASE THAT EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP AT
THE VERY TOP IS ESSENTIAL, IT HAS ALSO BEEN THE COLLECTIVE EFFORTS OF A CADRE
OF PASSIONATE, STRATEGIC LEADERS IN THIS JUSTICE DEPARTMENT THAT HAS MADE THE
SIGNIFICANT EFFORTS OF A PROGRESS TOWARD ACHIEVING EQUAL JUSTICE THAT WE HAVE
SEEN AND HEARD. I JUST WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT TO DIRECT YOUR ATTENTION TO
THE TABLE UP FRONT , TO THE NAMES ON YOUR AGENDA, BOTH THIS MORNING AND THIS AFTERNOON,
AND TO JUST RECOGNIZE THE AMAZING LEADERSHIP IN THIS JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
AND WITH US HERE TODAY WHO HAVE BEEN COMMITTED AND WORKING TIRELESSLY ON THIS
ISSUE AND TO SAY THANK YOU WHILE WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY BEFORE THE ADMINISTRATIONS
CHANGE. SO THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE] WE ARE HERE, HOWEVER, BECAUSE THIS
PROMISE IS BROKEN TOO FREQUENTLY. AS WE HAVE HEARD AND WE ALL KNOW, THERE ARE
FAR TOO MANY PEOPLE WHO END UP WITH CONVICTIONS AND WHO SERVED
TIME FOR OFFENSES WITHOUT THE ADVICE OF COUNSEL AT ALL OR WITHOUT APPROPRIATE
LEGAL REPRESENTATION. AS YOU HAVE ALSO HEARD, WE HAVE MADE CONSIDERABLE
PROGRESS IN THIS CENTURY. I, FOR ONE, AM EXCITED ABOUT WHERE WE ARE GOING . IN
FACT, I COULDN’T HAVE BEEN SET UP MORE BEAUTIFULLY IN SAYING SHE IS OPTIMISTIC
IN TALKING ABOUT THE PROGRESS WE HAVE MADE IN TERMS OF USING RESEARCH AND
DATA. I’M EXCITED THAT WE ARE LAUNCHING THE SECOND YEAR OF THE RIGHT TO
COUNSEL CONSORTIUM IN THE GREAT HALL OF JUSTICE. I’M EXCITED THAT DEFENDERS AND THE ASSIGNMENT
OF COUNSEL ARE AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE MACARTHUR FOUNDATION
SAFETY AND JUSTICE CHALLENGE AS YOU WILL HEAR FROM LORI OVER LUNCH. I AM EXCITED THAT WE ARE IN A TECHNOLOGY DRIVEN INFORMATION AGE THAT IS PROPELLING
US TO RELY INCREASINGLY ON MORE AND BETTER DATA , RESEARCH, SCIENCE, AND EVIDENCE. FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE PUBLIC DEFENDERS, WERE OR A RE, EXPERIENTIALLY AND
ANECDOTALLY, WE KNOW THAT EFFECTIVE PUBLIC DEFENSE REDUCES UNNECESSARY
INCARCERATION, WHICH IN TURN LESSENS THE LOSS OF JOBS, HOMES, AND OTHER
LIFE ALTERING CONSEQUENCES . EFFECTIVE PUBLIC DEFENSE SERVICES ARE A CORE
COMPONENT OF PUBLIC CONFIDENCE IN THE FAIRNESS OF OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM’S. IT DECREASES RACIAL DISPARITIES AND SAVES TAXPAYER DOLLARS. IT CONTRIBUTES TO PUBLIC SAFETY WHILE PLAYING
A ROLE IN REDUCING CRIME. IT WAS ALLUDED TO EARLIER AND I WILL SAY IT
AGAIN — YES, PUBLIC DEFENSE , EFFECTIVE PUBLIC DEFENSE
REDUCES CRIME. BUT TODAY, EXPERIENCE AND STORIES ARE NOT ENOUGH TO MAKE THE CASE
FOR QUALITY REPRESENTATION. THE TECHNOLOGY AND DATA REVOLUTION ARE COMPELLING
US TO RELY ON EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE FOR PLANNING, MANAGING, COMMUNICATING, AND
ADVOCATING EFFECTIVELY TO FUNDERS AND OTHER POLICYMAKERS , THE PUBLIC, AND THE
PRESS. MORE THAN EVER, IT IS IMPERATIVE TO HAVE ACCURATE, VERIFIABLE, OBJECTIVE
DATA SO THAT DECISION- MAKERS ARE NOT LEFT TO FOREIGN POLICIES BASED
SOLELY ON ANECDOTES AND ATTITUDES ARE NOT BASED SOLELY ON SPECULATION,
INTUITION, PRESUMPTION, OR BIAS. ORGANIZATIONS HAVE TO BE ABLE TO MEASURE CLIENT
OUTCOMES AND SS SYSTEM PERFORMANCE TO THE FIND WHAT EFFECTIVE DEFENSE
IS AND TO MAKE CONVINCING ARGUMENTS ABOUT THE NEED AND ALLOCATION OF
RESOURCES. WE HAVE TO HAVE DATA TO UNCOVER AND CORRECT RACIAL DISPARITIES. WE ARE EXPECTED TO PRODUCE RESEARCH AND DATA TO QUALIFY THE SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC
BENEFITS THAT HAVING A QUALITY INDIGENT DEFENSE SYSTEM GENERATES FOR CLIENTS,
THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM, AND THE COMMUNITY. AND THIS IS OK. WHILE MUCH, MUCH MORE RESEARCH IS NEEDED IN THIS ARENA, THE MOUNTING EVIDENCE IS CONFIRMING
THE IMPORTANT ROLE THAT EFFECTIVE PUBLIC DEFENSE PLAYS IN THE SUCCESS
OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORMS AS WE WORK TO BUILD BETTER JUSTICE SYSTEMS. FOR INSTANCE, RESEARCH HAS DEMONSTRATED AN ALMOST THREEFOLD INCREASE
IN THE NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS RELEASED OUT OF COGNIZANCE WHEN INDIVIDUALS
ARE REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL AT INITIAL HEARINGS AS YOU HAVE HEARD. THE AUTHORS IN THE ROOM. WE ARE BEGINNING TO SEE THE EVIDENCE THAT IS QUALIFYING AS
COST SAVINGS AS WELL. RESEARCH ON ATTITUDES TOWARD PUBLIC DEFENSE DEMONSTRATES
THAT A MAJORITY OF AMERICANS VIEW THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL AS CRITICAL TO THE FAIRNESS
OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM. A STUDY BY THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR STATES
COURT — STATE COURTS REPORTED THAT ADDITIONAL SPENDING ON PUBLIC
DEFENSE WAS AMONG THE TOP THREE ITEMS IN WHICH INDIVIDUALS BELIEVE THAT THE
COURT SHOULD BE SPENDING TAXPAYER DOLLARS. MOREOVER AS YOU HEARD EARLIER, THE GROWING
BODY OF RESEARCH IN THE AREA OF PROCEDURAL JUSTICE TELLS US THE INESCAPABLE
CONCLUSION THAT EFFECTIVE PUBLIC DEFENSE IS CRUCIAL TO BUILDING PUBLIC
TRUST AND CONFIDENCE IN THE JUSTICE SYSTEM. THE BUREAU OF JUSTICE ASSISTANCE SMART APPROACH
TO IMPROVING THE JUSTICE SYSTEM USING DATA, EVIDENCE, AND
RESEARCH TO CREATE STRATEGIES AND INTERVENTIONS THAT WOULD BE EFFECTIVE AND
ECONOMICAL IN SEVERAL FILES INITIATIVES THAT ARE A STRING IN A NEW FEATURE. AS A PROVIDER FOR SMART DEFENSE, THE NEWEST ADDITION TO THE SMARTSUITE,
WE ARE ALREADY SEEING PROMISING RESULTS. IT IS FIELD BY THE FIRST SMART DEFENSE SUMMIT. THE KNOWLEDGE, THE CAPACITY, AND THE EXCITEMENT
ABOUT USING EVIDENCE-BASED APPROACHES TO DRIVE CHANGE AND INNOVATION
IS GROWING AS THE TEAMS SHARE INFORMATION AND LEARN TO WORK EFFECTIVELY
ACROSS PRACTITIONER RESEARCHER BOUNDARIES. YOU HAVE HEARD THE LIST OF SMART DEFENSE JURISDICTIONS
FROM DIRECTOR DENISE O DONNELL. I WILL NOT REPEAT THAT EXCEPT TO POINT OUT
THAT IN ADDITION TO THE WORK AND THE EFFORT THAT IS
HAPPENING ON THE GROUND IN THOSE JURISDICTIONS, EACH OF THE SITES ARE PRODUCING
RESEARCH, RESOURCES, AND RESULTS THAT CAN BE UTILIZED IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS
ACROSS THE COUNTRY. SO FOR EXAMPLE, THE ALAMEDA EXPERIENCE WILL CREATE
A PLAYBOOK FOR OTHER JURISDICTIONS TO FOLLOW, INCLUDING MAKING THE CASE FOR EARLY
ENTRY OF COUNSEL THROUGH CREDIBLE RESEARCH AND DATA , AS WELL AS DEMONSTRATING
THE IMPORTANCE OF COLLABORATION AMONG CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
PLAYERS IN ACHIEVING THE ULTIMATE GOAL OF SYSTEM REFORM. SOME NUMBERS WILL NEVER TELL THE WHOLE STORY. QUANTIFYING THE HARM SUFFERED BY A CHILD WHOSE
FATHER OR MOTHER IS DETAINED UNNECESSARILY IN JAIL WITHOUT COUNSEL WILL
NEVER BE THE SAME AS DETERMINING THE COST SAVINGS FROM AN EMPTY JAIL BED , BUT
INITIATIVES THROUGH INITIATIVES LIKE SMART DEFENSE OR THE RESEARCH CONSORTIUM
AND MANY OTHERS BEING INITIATED BY INDIVIDUALS IN THIS ROOM AND ACROSS THE
COUNTRY, WE ARE ABLE TO SEE THE SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE THAT CREDIBLE DATA
CAN MAKE WHEN THEY ARE COMMUNICATED EFFECTIVELY AS PART OF THE STORY AND RELIED
ON APPROPRIATELY TO GUIDE CHANGE. AS A STRATEGIC ALLY FOR THE MACARTHUR FOUNDATION
SAFETY AND JUSTICE CHALLENGE, ANIL ADA — NLADA IS WORKING TO DEFEND THE
VOICE OF LEADERS AND TO EDUCATE THE FIELD ON THE CRITICAL ROLE THAT PUBLIC DEFENSE
IS MAKING IN REDUCING INCARCERATION AND RACIAL DISPARITIES. AS WE HAVE ALSO SEEN, DEFENDERS ALONE CANNOT BE BUILDING ONE’S TELLING THAT STORY. OR LEADING THE CHARGE TO FULFILLING ITS PROMISE. THIS IS WHERE THIS CONSORTIUM COMES IN. WE NEED EACH OF YOU TO CARRY THE MESSAGE AND WORK ON THE
GROUND WHERE INNOVATION AND CHANGE TAKE HOLD. IN 2017, NLADA WILL HAVE THE PLEASURE OF WORKING
WITH THE NATIONAL CESSATION OF ACCOUNTANTS AND THE NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION OF COURT MANAGEMENT TO HOST ROUNDTABLES ON PUBLIC DEFENSE. WE LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH THE PARTNERS HERE AND THOSE WHO COULDN’T BE HERE
AND THOSE WHO WILL BE HERE NEXT YEAR LIKE MEMBERS OF THE PRIVATE BAR. WITH YOUR PARTNERSHIP AND YOUR CONTINUED LEADERSHIP FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
TO HELP US FEEL THOSE RESEARCH GAPS THAT EXIST, I’M CONFIDENT AND OPTIMISTIC THAT
WE WILL COMPLETE THE JOURNEY TO JUSTICE FOR ALL. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE] MR. LEVIN: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IT’S GREAT TO BE HERE. AS YOU KNOW, I’M WITH THE TEXAS PUBLIC POLICY FOUNDATION AND WE
STARTED RIGHT ON CRIME BACK IN 2010, OUR NATIONAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM PROJECT
. BEING FROM THE CONSERVATIVE FREE-MARKET SIDE OF THE SPECTRUM, WE WHOLEHEARTEDLY
ENDORSE THE IDEA THAT PEOPLE WHO HAVE MORE RESOURCES CAN AFFORD
TO BUY AND NICER CAR. THEY CAN HAVE A TESLA INSTEAD OF A TOYOTA. WHEN IT COMES TO INDIGENT DEFENSE AND LIBERTY
AND JUSTICE, IT SHOULD BE BLIND TO WHAT A PERSON
COULD AFFORD. EVERYONE SHOULD BE ENTITLED TO QUALITY REPRESENTATION. PERHAPS THE ONLY GOOD THING ABOUT THIS ELECTION IS THAT WE HAVE TWO CANDIDATES WHO
UNDERSTAND FIRSTHAND THE QUALITY OF REPRESENTATION. IT’S A VERY SERIOUS MATTER AND THAT IS WHY
I’M SO GLAD IN TEXAS THAT WE HAVE THE INDIGENT DEFENSE SYSTEM. WE HAVE HEARD FROM THE OTHER STATES THAT HAVE SEEN TEXAS AS A MODEL FOR
THE NEED FOR STATEWIDE RESOURCES AND CORONATION TO MAKE SURE THIS ISN’T RANDOM
BASED ON WHAT COUNTY YOU ARE IN. I THINK JUST TO HIGHLIGHT SOME OF THE CHALLENGES
WE FOUND IN TEXAS. FIRST OF ALL, IT HAS BEEN MENTIONED EARLIER THAT A
CLASS A MISDEMEANOR IS UP TO A YEAR IN JAIL AND A PERSON DOES NOT GET APPOINTED
COUNSEL. A VARIETY OF EXCUSES ARE MADE UP IN THE WAY JUDGES LOOK TO AVOID DOING
THAT. IN AMARILLO, A STUDY WAS DONE. 50% OF MR. D MEARS DID NOT GET APPOINTED COUNSEL. 87% OF THOSE WHO DID NOT GET COUNSEL ENDED UP GOING TO JAIL. THESE WERE FOR MARIJUANA AS THE MOST COMMON, FIRST-TIME DWI. 59% HIGHER COUNSEL
DID NOT GO TO JAIL. A HUGE DIFFERENCE IN THE STUDY THAT THERE’S A DIFFERENCE
IN THE COST PRETRIAL AND ACTUAL TIME SERVED. THIS IS NOT JUST TEXAS. PENNSYLVANIA FOUND A STUDY THAT 30% OF JAIL OF ALL MISDEMEANORS DO NOT GET
COUNSEL. WE LOOK AT WHAT HAPPENS WHEN SOMEONE DOES GET COUNSEL AND IT IS WOEFULLY
INADEQUATE. HARRIS COUNTY PUT OUT AN AUDIT THIS MONTH ON WHAT IS GOING ON
IN HOUSTON. WE HAVE HEARD SOME ANECDOTES OF COUNSEL BE APPOINTED AT 9:00
AND BEING CLEANED OUT AT 11:00 WITHOUT ANY SORT OF INVESTIGATION. BY THE WAY, THIS IS REALLY ALONG WITH THE OVER INCARCERATION, PRETRIAL DEFENDANTS IN
HARRIS COUNTY, LED TO SEVERAL PEOPLE SERVING TIME IN JAIL. THEY PLED TO TIME SERVED JUST TO GET OUT. THEY WERE THERE FOR POSSESSION. THE TEST CAME BACK A YEAR TO LATER AND IT
WAS NOT EVEN ILLEGAL DRUGS. THESE PEOPLE PLEAD TO SOMETHING THEY DIDN’T
COMMIT BECAUSE THEY COULD AFFORD BAIL AND THEY DID NOT HAVE
QUALITY REPRESENTATION. THIS AUDIT THAT WAS JUST DONE IN OCTOBER AND HARRIS
COUNTY FOUND 40% OF JUVENILES DID NOT GET COUNSEL WITHIN THE TIME REQUIRED
UNDER STATE LAW. 59% GOT COUNSEL WITHIN FIVE DAYS OF THE FILING OF PETITION
AGAINST THOSE JUVENILES. EXCESSIVE CASELOADS ARE AN ENORMOUS PROBLEM. IT WAS FOUND IN HARRIS COUNTY FROM THIS AUDIT THAT HALF THE ATTORNEYS HAVE EXCESSIVE
CASELOADS. ONE ATTORNEY HAD A CASELOAD OF 969 CLIENTS. IT IS JUST ASTONISHING. THERE’S SOME REAL GOOD NEWS THOUGH. FIRST OF ALL, WE HAVE GOT TO LOOK AT POLICE
DIVERS ION, THE SEATTLE PROGRAM NOW BEING DONE IN NORTH CAROLINA,
AND CONVERTING CRIMINAL DEFENSES TO CIVIL INFRACTIONS. WE TAKE THE NUMBER OF CASES DOWN TO HER COUNSEL
IS REQUIRED. THAT WILL HELP US FOCUS LIMITED RESOURCES
MORE EFFECTIVELY. ALSO, THERE ARE EXAMPLES ACROSS THE COUNTRY LIKE
SEATTLE AND MIAMI WHERE THEY HAVE RAPID APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL TYPICALLY AT
FIRST APPEARANCE IN MOST CASES. EVEN IN TEXAS NOW, A COUNTY HAS LAMENTED COUNSEL
AT FIRST THE APPEARANCE FOR THOSE WITH MENTAL HEALTH PROBLEMS. THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS TO BE PLEASED ABOUT. ONE OF THE MOST INNOVATIVE EXAMPLES IS IN
TEXAS, A COUNTY OUTSIDE OF SAM SAN ANTONIO . DEFENDANTS CAN CHOOSE AMONG A LIST
OF 30 QUALIFIED ATTORNEYS, WHOSE CASELOADS ARE MONITORED BY THE COUNTY. THIS IS THROUGH THE COUNTY ITSELF. YOU HAVE MORE FIDELITY TO THE CLIENT AND INDEPENDENCE
FROM THE JUDICIARY. TOO OFTEN THE JUDGES WANT TO MOVE THEIR DOCKETS
. INSTITUTED BY THE TEXAS DEFENSE OF INDIGENT, WE WORKED ON A STUDY TO SEE IF
IT WAS WORKING. CLIENTS OPTED INTO THE SYSTEM TO CHOOSE THEIR ATTORNEY AND SO
HAVING ONE ASSIGNED BY THE JUDGE, SO THAT’S QUITE ENCOURAGING. AS YOU LOOK TOWARD THE FUTURE, YOU CAN SEE
THAT IT IS NOW MOSTLY WORD-OF-MOUTH, BUT YOU CAN
SEE SOMETHING LIKE ANGIE’S LIST OR EVEN THE UBER RATING OF YOUR DRIVER SO YOU
CAN SEE HOW OTHER TENANTS EVALUATING THAT COUNSEL . TO ME, THAT’S VERY
EXCITING. I THINK YOU CAN DO EITHER OF THEM WELL. IN EITHER CASE COME YOU CANNOT OBSCURE THE
FACT THAT YOU NEED SUFFICIENT RESOURCES. IN TEXAS, MOST OF THE TIME THESE APPOINTING
COUNSEL , OR THE CHOSEN COUNSEL, THEY ARE PAID A SET
FEE. YOU NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT ADEQUATE AND THE DEFENSE COUNSEL HAVE ACCESS
TO FORENSIC TESTING AND THINGS WE HEARD EARLIER. I WANTED TO JUST ALSO TOUCH ON A COUPLE OF
THE NEEDS GOING FORWARD, SOME OF THE KEY ISSUES IN ADDITION
TO THE CORE RESPONSIBILITIES OF INDIGENT COUNSEL AND THEN I WILL CONCLUDE. FIRST OF ALL, KIND OF WORKING WITH PROSECUTORS AND JUDGES ON RISK NEEDS ASSESSMENTS. I THINK IT’S A VERY DIFFICULT CHALLENGE. OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE
IS PROPER TRAINING SO JUST BECAUSE SOMEONE SCORES MEDIUM
OR EVEN ON THE HIGHER SIDE DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN THEY NEED TO BE INCARCERATED. THE NEEDS HALF OF IT IS EQUALLY IF NOT MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE RISK
PART. BY HAVING AN INTERVENTION THAT ADDRESSES THOSE NEEDS, MANY INDIVIDUALS
WHO ARE LOW RISK CAN BE SUPERVISED IN THE COMMUNITY. THESE ASSESSMENTS NEED TO EVALUATED . I RECOMMEND EXCLUDING THINGS LIKE DRUG POSSESSION, WHICH
WE KNOW HAVE A DISPARATE IMPACT. INDIVIDUALS FROM AREAS WHERE THERE IS MORE
POLICE ARE MORE LIKELY TO BE ARRESTED FOR MARIJUANA THAN SOMEONE WHO DOES
NOT LIVE IN THOSE AREAS. THAT ENDS UP HAVING A RACIAL IMPACT. ALSO NOT INCLUDING ARRESTS BUT ONLY CONVICTIONS. THE ARNOLD FOUNDATION HAS DONE A VERY GOOD
ASSESSMENT THAT IS ONE THAT CAN BE DONE EVEN WITHOUT AN INTERVIEW
FOR PRETRIAL. THERE ALSO ASSESSMENTS FOR AFTER THAT PROCESS. A NUMBER OF JURISDICTIONS ARE LOOKING AT HOW PROSECUTORS CAN LOOK AT THIS ASSESSMENT
EVEN BEFORE OFFERING A PLE A SO THE WHOLE SYSTEM IS INFORMED MUCH EARLIER
IN THE PROCESS. THE DEFENSE COUNSEL HAS TO BE VERY MUCH INVOLVED IN THIS. WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE IT IS NOT USED TO INCREASE SOMEBODY’S PENALTY . THE OTHER ISSUE
I THINK IS INVOLVING APPOINTED COUNSEL OR HOWEVER THE COUNCIL IS , WHETHER
IT’S APPOINTED OR A PUBLIC DEFENDER, AND COLLATERAL CONSEQUENCES AND
ALSO ISSUES OF ASSET FORFEITURE. WHAT YOU WILL FIND IS SOMEONE WHO MAY HAVE
PERFECTLY GOOD COUNSEL , AS PROVIDED BY THE GOVERNMENT, WHEN THE CASE
WILL ALSO INVOLVE FORFEITURE BECAUSE THAT’S A CIVIL ISSUE, THEY MAY BE ENTITLED
TO RECORD SEALING COULD THEY . THEY DON’T GET ANY HELP WHEN IT COMES TO THAT. THEY ARE NOT ABLE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE LIKE SOMEONE WITH RESOURCES WOULD BE ABLE
TO. THAT IS SOMETHING VERY IMPORTANT AS WE MOVE FORWARD. WE ARE REALLY OPTIMISTIC WITH THE PROGRESS
WE ARE SEEING ACROSS THE COUNTRY ON THIS. AS HAS BEEN SAID BEFORE, THERE’S A LONG WAY
TO GO. I THINK WE CERTAINLY SHOULD NOT REST UNTIL
EVERYONE HAS QUALITY REPRESENTATION. [APPLAUSE] JUDGE DONALD: GOOD MORNING. IF ANYONE IN THE BACK CANNOT HEAR ME, PLEASE
WAIVE TO ME AND I WILL SPEAK LOUDER. [LAUGHTER] [APPLAUSE] JUDGE DONALD: THANK YOU. I AM JUDGE BERNICE DONALD. I AM A SOUTHERNER. I DO NOT SPEAK AS RAPIDLY AS MY COLLEAGUE FROM
TEXAS. WE HAVE LIMITED TIME. IF I HAD MORE TIME, I WOULD THANK YOU PROPERLY
FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HERE AND PARTICIPATE IN THIS RIGHT TO COUNSEL FORUM
, BUT TIME IS VERY LIMITED. THE SITX SIXTH AMENDMENT
IS AN ORPHAN AMENDMENT. IT DOES NOT ENJOY IT IN THE PUBLIC PROVINCE THE SAME STATUS AS ITS SISTER
AND BROTHER AMENDMENTS. I BELIEVE THAT THE CONVERSATION TODAY ENLIGHTENS
US ON SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO DO TO MAKE CERTAIN THAT PEOPLE
WHO ARE POOR AND WHO CANNOT AFFORD COUNSEL HAVE THAT RIGHTS SAFEGUARDED. WHAT ARE SOME OF THINGS WE CAN DO AND WHAT ARE SOME OF THE PROBLEMS? I THINK THE PROBLEMS HAVE BEEN AMPLY LAID
OUT , BUT LET ME MENTION ONE WE HAVE NOT TALKED
ABOUT. AND THAT IS PUBLIC PERCEPTION. THE REALITY IS THAT THE PUBLIC PERCEPTION
OF PEOPLE WHO NEED COUNSEL AND CAN’T AFFORD IT IS THAT THEY ARE
NOT DESERVING. THEY ARE SIMPLY NOT DESERVING. THEY DID IT. THEY NEED TO FACE THE CONSEQUENCES. AND THERE’S REALLY NOT A LOT OF COMMITMENT TO PROVIDING
THOSE RESOURCES TO THOSE INDIVIDUALS. WHERE DID THEY GET THOSE IDEAS? I THINK THAT WE NO LONGER TALK ABOUT THE CONCEPT OF INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN
GUILTY. THAT HAS BEEN TURNED ON ITS HEAD LARGELY. IF WE LOOK AT POPULAR TV, FOR EXAMPLE, IT
HAS BEEN A LONG TIME SINCE ATTICUS FINCH , BUT WE HAVE HAD MANY
PROGRAMS DAY IN AND DAY OUT WHERE PEOPLE FORM THEIR OPINIONS ABOUT THE JUSTICE
SYSTEM. THEY KNOW THE ROLE OF THE POLICE. WE KNOW FOR A LONG TIME THEY WATCHED THE STREETS
OF SAN FRANCISCO. THEY WATCHED “NYPD BLUE.” THEY WATCH “BLUEBLOODS” AND THEY KNOW THE
ROLE OF THAT. THEY KNOW ABOUT LAW AND ORDER AND THEY KNOW
WHAT HAPPENS AND THEY KNOW HOW IT IS SUPPOSED TO GO. THEY KNOW ABOUT THE JUDGE SHOWS SO THEY KNOW
THE ROLE OF THE JUDGES. WHERE IS IT IN POPULAR MEDIA WHERE THEY SEE
THE ROLE , THE RESPONSIBILITY, THE MERITS OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER? IT IS NOT THERE. I’M NOT ADVOCATING FOR A TV SHOW ABOUT PUBLIC DEFENDERS,
BUT WE DO NEED TO RECOGNIZE THAT THERE IS A NECESSARY COMPONENT OF THE
JUSTICE SYSTEM. WHAT ARE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE NEED — AND I WANT TO STOP
AND DIGRESS A MOMENT AND TELL YOU THAT WHEN I WAS A TRIAL JUDGE IN THE FEDERAL
SYSTEM FOR 15.5 YEARS IN CRIMINAL TRIALS, I WOULD START OUT BY ASKING
THE PROSPECTIVE JURORS THAT DOES ANYBODY BELIEVE THAT JUST BECAUSE THIS PERSON
IS SITTING HERE THAT THEY MUST BE GUILTY? I CANNOT TELL YOU HOW MAY TIMES THE MAJORITY
OF THE HANDS WENT UP. THERE IS A LACK OF UNDERSTANDING RELIEF OF
— REALLY ABOUT THE ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS IN THE
JUSTICE SYSTEM. WE NEED TO DO A BETTER JOB OF EDUCATING EVERYONE ABOUT THOSE
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES . WE ARE ALL STAKEHOLDERS. WE HAVE HEARD A LOT ABOUT MONEY. I THINK IT IS A REAL ISSUE . BUT MONEY IS REALLY A SIGN ACCORDING
TO PRIORITIES — ASSIGNED ACCORDING TO PRIORITIES. AS WE’VE HEARD THIS MORNING, THE PUBLIC DEFENDER ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS HAVE A VERY LOW PRIORITY. BRIAN STEPHENSON OF EQUAL JUSTICE INSTITUTE SAYS REPEATEDLY , AND I
CONCUR IN THIS, THAT IN THESE UNITED STATES IT IS BETTER TO BE RICH AND GUILTY
THEN POUR AN INNOCENT — POO R AND INNOCENT. THAT’S AN INDICTMENT OF US AND OUR SYSTEM. WHAT ARE SOME OF THE THINGS WE CAN DO IN MY FIVE MINUTES REMAINING? SOME OF THESE SUGGESTIONS OR SOME OF THE MEASURES THAT COULD BE TAKEN AT
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT LEVEL, THE UNITED STATES SHOULD PROVIDE ONGOING SUPPORT
AND OVERSIGHT TO ENSURE THAT STATES FULLY APPRECIATE THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL
RIGHT TO COUNSEL FOR CRIMINALLY ACCUSED PERSONS WHO CANNOT AFFORD
TO HIRE COUNSEL. CONGRESS OUGHT GRANT THE DOJ THE AUTHORITY TO ENFORCE THE
SIXTH AMENDMENT RIGHT TO COUNSEL. WE HAVE WONDERFUL, STRONG LOSS, BUT WE NEED
TO REMEMBER THAT LAWS ARE NOT SELF EXECUTING. THEY ARE NOT. WE NEED TO LIST PUBLIC DEFENSE AS A PERMANENT
LINE ITEM IN THE ANNUAL BUDGET. WE NEED TO PRIORITIZE IMPROVING STATE AND
LOCAL DEFENSE DELIVERY SYSTEMS. THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE CAN FILE AMICUS
BRIEFS SUPPORTING THE SAFEGUARDING OF THE RIGHT TO
COUNSEL AND THEY CAN CONTINUE TO FILE THOSE STATEMENTS OF INTEREST. THE DEPARTMENT CAN FUND AND CREATE A PUBLIC DEFENSE ADMINISTRATION PROJECT. THEY CAN FURTHER FIND TRAINING FOR STATE PUBLIC DEFENSE AND OTHER CRIMINAL JUSTICE
SYSTEMS AND OTHER KERNEL JUSTICE STAKEHOLDERS — CRIMINAL JUSTICE STAKEHOLDERS. THEY CAN CONDUCT INVESTIGATIONS TO INVESTIGATE THE EXTENT IN WHICH DEFENDANTS
ARE CONVICTED WITHOUT ACCESS TO COUNSEL AND THE MECHANISMS THAT ALLOW THIS
TO TAKE PLACE IN THE FIRST INSTANCE. I WAS A COUNTY COURT JUDGE FOR A PERIOD A
TIME IN MY LIFE. STATE POLICYMAKERS SHOULD ENSURE ADEQUATE FUNDING
AND OVERSIGHT FOR PUBLIC DEFENSE SERVICES . STATE SUPREME COURTS CAN TAKE THE
LEAD ON RIGHT TO COUNSEL REFORM BY ADOPTING COURT RULES . THEY CAN ADOPT MECHANISMS
FOR EVALUATING ATTORNEY PERFORMANCE. THEY CAN GET INVOLVED IN THE PROVISION AND
MANDATING OF MORE TRAINING, SUPERVISION , AND LOOK AT MAKING
CERTAIN THAT ELIGIBLE POPULATIONS RESERVE THE SERVICES THEY RIGHTLY DESERVE. WE CANNOT LET STATE LEGISLATORS OFF THE HOOK. THEY HAVE A CRITICAL ROLE TO PLAY IN THIS
PROCESS AND MUST PLAY THAT ROLE. STATE AND LOCAL BAR ASSOCIATIONS MUST BE INVOLVED
IN THE ADVOCACY TO ENSURE THAT STATE LEGISLATURES EMBRACE THE
RESPONSIBILITY TO THE TOTAL SYSTEM. FOR ALL OF US, WE HAVE A STAKE IN PROTECTING
AND MAINTAINING OUR RIGHT TO COUNSEL . WE MUST ENSURE THAT PUBLIC DEFENSE
IS RESENTED IN ALL CRIMINAL JUSTICE MEETINGS. WE GET INVOLVED IN SHAPING A NATIONAL STRATEGY
THAT ADVOCATES CAN EMBRACE AND MODIFY SOME OF THE
EFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE STANDARDS THAT ARE ENUNCIATED IN STRICKLAND OF THE WASHINGTON
— V . WASHINGTON. WE CAN GET CLINICS INVOLVED IN HELPING THIS. I HOPE THAT OUT OF THIS MEETING THAT WE WILL HAVE NOT ONLY MEANINGFUL RESOLUTIONS
AND MEANINGFUL IDEAS OF REFORM, BUT WE WILL COME UP WITH A COMMITMENT TO ALSO
EDUCATE THE PUBLIC IN THIS WHOLE PROCESS BECAUSE THEY SIMPLY DON’T UNDERSTAND
IF IT’S NOT BEFORE THEM. IF WE DO NOT PUT IT BEFORE THEM, BASICALLY DON’T KNOW. WE CANNOT LEAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY TO PEOPLE OUTPERFORMING PUBLIC
DEFENDER SERVICES. ALL OF US HAVE A STAKE IN THIS AND WE MUST EMBRACE OUR
OBLIGATION TO SAFEGUARD AND FULLY IMPLEMENT AND EXECUTE SIXTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE] SEC. WETZEL: GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYBODY AND THANK
YOU SO MUCH FOR INVITING HERE. IF YOU TOLD ME TWO YEARS AGO THAT I WOULD
BE SITTING AT THIS CONSORTIUM, I WOULD HAVE NOT BELIEVE YOU AT ALL. I AM JOHN WETZEL, THE SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS IN PENNSYLVANIA. I INHERITED A SYSTEM THAT WAS GROWING BY 1500 INMATES A YEAR. WE WERE LITERALLY ADDING A PRISON 18 MONTHS
AT $18 MILLION . I’M HAPPY TO SAY THAT SINCE
THAT TIME WE HAVE GONE THROUGH A SERIES OF REFORM LARGELY DRIVEN BY JUSTICE
REINVESTMENT WHERE WE HAVE REALLY TRIED TO MAKE BETTER DECISIONS IN OUR SYSTEM. I’VE BEEN FORTUNATE TO BE THE BENEFICIARY OF A LOT OF REFORMS. I SAY THAT TO YOU BECAUSE IT’S ACTUALLY AN EMBARRASSMENT THAT UP UNTIL RECENTLY I DID
SEE A CONNECTION TO INDIGENT DEFENSE AND WHAT I DO AT THE BACK END OF THE
SYSTEM. IF YOU WANT TO LOOK FOR THE STRONGEST ARGUMENT FOR MAKING SIGNIFICANT
IMPROVEMENTS IN THE FRONT END OF OUR SYSTEM, JUST LOOK AT THE BACK END OF OUR
SYSTEM. THE BACK END OF OUR SYSTEM TELLS A STORY THAT NONE OF US SHOULD
BE PROUD OF. IT DISPROPORTIONALLY INCARCERATES POOR PEOPLE, PEOPLE OF COLOR,
AND PEOPLE WITH BEHAVIOR HEALTH ISSUES, ESPECIALLY MENTAL ILLNESS. THAT IS NOT OK AND WE SHOULD NOT BE OK WITH THAT. IN MANY WAYS, THE GUARDIAN TO THAT IS INDIGENT
DEFENSE. YET IN PENNSYLVANIA, AND YOU HEARD EARLIER THAT PENNSYLVANIA
IS NOW ONE OF TWO STATES THAT HAS ZERO STATE FUNDING FOR INDIGENT DEFENSE
IN SPITE OF THE FACT THAT BEYOND ALL DOUBT WE HAVE A VESTED INTEREST
IN DECISIONS MADE ON THE FRONT END OF THE SYSTEM. WE FROM A POLICY STANDPOINT HAVEN’T ENABLED
TO MAKE THE NEXUS FOR MAKING REAL INVESTMENTS AND VESTED INTEREST
WHICH REALLY HAVE. I KNOW ENOUGH LOCAL ENVIRONMENT, THE REALITY IS THAT
LONG-TERM THINKING IS THE NEXT ELECTION. FOR MORE THAN HALF THE PEOPLE IN HARRISBURG,
IT IS EVERY TWO YEARS. THAT IS NOT THE RUBRIC UNDER WHICH WE ARE
MAKING GREAT DECISIONS. THE REALITY IS WE NEED TO BECAUSE IT’S NOT JUST A FINANCIAL
COST HIM ABOUT THE COST GOES WELL BEYOND IT. THE 50,000 INMATES I HAVE IN MY SYSTEM HAVE
81,000 CHILDREN WHO ARE IMPACTED BY OUR TERRIBLE DECISIONS
WE MAKE AT THE FRONT END OF THE SYSTEM. AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE TWO KEY COMPONENTS
AT THE FRONT OF THE SYSTEM — AND THAT IS HOW WE MAKE BAIL DECISIONS
AND PROPER DEFENSE — IT’S AN EMBARRASSMENT. I WILL TALK ABOUT PENNSYLVANIA, BUT I DO NOT
THINK HENSEL VIGNETTE IS A SUPER OUTLIER IN MOST OF THIS. — PENNSYLVANIA IS A SUPER OUTLIER IN MOST OF THIS. TO SEE THE IMPORTANCE OF IT IS A SIGNIFICANT CHALLENGE AND I AM EXCITED TO HEAR SOME OF
THE WORK MISSOURI IS DOING IN MAKING A RETURN ON INVESTMENT ARGUMENT. THERE WAS A SUPREME COURT CASE IN PENNSYLVANIA THAT GAVE DEFENDANTS STANDING
TO SUE COUNTIES FOR INADEQUATE DEFENSE. I’VE HEARD A LOT OF PEOPLE TRUMPETING THAT
AS THIS GREAT THING AND YOU WOULD THINK THAT HAD A POLITICAL IMPLICATION
IN PENNSYLVANIA. IT DID NOT. IT MOVED THE NEEDLE NOT AT ALL FROM A POLITICAL
STANDPOINT. NOT ONE BILL HAS BEEN INTRODUCED TO ADDRESS IT. NOTHING. IN SOME WAYS, MAYBE THAT IS A VALUE STATEMENT AND ANOTHER WAYS, IT’S INCUMBENT
UPON US TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO MAKE VALUE STATEMENT TO MOVE THE NEEDLE ON THIS. THE SECOND AND RELATED THING IS THAT WHEN WE GET THESE DISPARATE OUTCOMES
ON THE BACK OF OUR SYSTEM , IT’S INCUMBENT UPON US TO LOOK AT THE FRONT END
OF THE SYSTEM. WE CAN AGREE ON WHAT WE WANT OUT OF OUR CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM. WHEN SOMEONE BECOMES CRIMINALLY INVOLVED COME AT THE BACK END, WE WANT THEM
LESS LIKELY TO COMMIT A CRIME. THE PATH TO DO THAT REQUIRES US TO FIRST OF ALL
MAKE A GOOD DECISION AT THE FRONT END. WHEN LOWER RISK INDIVIDUALS COMMIT TO JAIL,
THEY COME OUT MORE LIKELY TO COMMIT A CRIME. THAT’S INCONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE ARE TRYING
TO ACHIEVE. IF WE DON’T PUT MECHANISMS IN THE FRONT OF THE SYSTEM
WHERE WE CAN TRULY ASSESS THE RISK AND TRULY UNDERSTAND WHAT THE ROOT CAUSE
OF THE CRIME AND FIND AN INDIVIDUAL TO PUT THEM ON THE PATH — WHY
ARE WE WASTING THE MONEY WE ARE WASTING? WE USE THE SYSTEM WITH PRECISION TO MAKE BETTER
DECISIONS. IT COSTS US LESS. IT CONTINUES TO BAFFLE ME WHY WE DON’T FIND
MECHANISMS TO MAKE BETTER DECISIONS. ALL WE HAVE TO DO IS LOOK AT THE MEDICAL FIELD. LOOK AT THE MEDICAL FIELD, IF I’M GOING TO BLOW MY KNEE OUT 20
YEARS AGO, I WOULD HAVE A BIG SCAR TODAY, I HAVE THREE LITTLE HOLES. SAME HEALING, BUT LESS DAMAGE. CAN’T WE USE THAT SAME PICTURE? HOW CAN WE PUT AN INDIVIDUAL ON A PATH TO
BE LESS LIKELY TO COMMIT A CRIME BUT DO IT WITH LESS DAMAGE? WE HAVE TO MAKE THAT FIRST DECISION WITH PRECISION AND WITH DATA AND THE DATA
THAT IS AVAILABLE. IN PENNSYLVANIA , LIKE MANY SYSTEMS, WE HAVE OVER 400 MAGISTERIAL
DISTRICT JUDGES WHO HAVE TO GET ELECTED, SIMILAR TO SOME OTHER STATES,
WHO MAKE THIS DECISION. I DON’T EVEN CALL IT A BAIL SYSTEM BECAUSE IT IS NOT
SYSTEMIC. WE MAKE BAD DECISIONS AND THOSE HAVE IMPLICATIONS. INCREASED CRIME AND MORE PEOPLE IN HUMAN SERVICES AND MORE KIDS IN FOSTER CARE. AND MORE EXPENDITURE THAT WE NEED LESS. THE PATH TO THIS IS UNLIKELY PARTNERS WHEN YOU ARE
TRYING TO MOVE CRIMINAL JUSTICE POLICY, IT’S VERY EASY FOR US TO GO TO ANECDOTES. THAT MAY NOT HAVE ANY REAL PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS IN ADDRESSING THE PROBLEM. FOR US TO GET TO A PLACE, WE HAVE TO CALL TOGETHER ENOUGH VOTES TO CHANGE
THINGS. THAT REQUIRES UNIQUE PARTNERSHIP. I’M REALLY EXCITED TO HAVE BEEN ABLE TO SPEND
SOME TIME HERE AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO CONNECT WITH YOUR
CORRECTIONS DIRECTOR. WE HAVE AN ASSOCIATION WHO REALLY SPEND A LOT OF TIME
IN BOTTLE CONVERSATIONS VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU’RE HAVING. — VERY THOUGHTFUL CONVERSATIONS. WE CANNOT DO THAT WITHOUT A STRONG FRONT END COUPLED WITH
A STRONG BACK END AND THAT PARTNERSHIP IS JUST A NATURAL PARTNERSHIP. I WOULD STRONGLY ENCOURAGE YOU TO LOOK FOR UNUSUAL PARTNERS LIKE CORRECTIONS
DIRECTOR’S AND UNDERSTAND THAT THE CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUE IS COMPELLING BUT HAS
NOT MOVED THE NEEDLE TO THIS POINT. THAT IS THE REALITY OF THE H ALLS I TRAVEL
IN. IT’S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE FOCUS ON RETURN ON INVESTMENT
AND OUTCOMES. MAKE THE ARGUMENT THAT WE CAN MAKE BETTER DECISIONS, HAVE BETTER OUTCOMES AND
INVEST THAT MONEY BACK WHERE IT SHOULD BECOME IN THE COMMUNITIES AND SCHOOLS
AND ALL THAT STUFF. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. [APPLAUSE]>>HELLO. MY NAME IS IVAN DOMINGUEZ , AND I’M THE DIRECTOR
OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS. TODAY, I GET TO BE THAT SPEAKER BETWEEN YOU
AND LUNCH. I WILL TRY TO MAKE THIS AS INTERESTING AS POSSIBLE. NEARLY NINE YEARS AGO, I LEFT THE CORPORATE
WORLD AND MOVED DOWN TO WASHINGTON, D.C. EACH DAY,
I GET TO LEAD A DIRECTIVE I WAS TAUGHT AS A KID — IF YOU SAVE A SINGLE LEAD,
IT’S AS IF YOU SAVED THE WORLD. YOU HEAR PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT SAVING THE COMMUNITIES. PART OF THAT IS LEGISLATION, LITIGATION, LOBBYING, INDIVIDUAL
REPRESENTATION, IMPACT THAT IT’S ALSO ABOUT EDUCATING THE PUBLIC. ALL OF THESE THINGS INVOLVE EFFECTIVE MESSAGING AND EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION. ONE VERY IMPORTANT PART OF THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL CAMPAIGN IS THE COMMUNICATIONS PATH. WE LEFT THAT SLIDE UP HOPING THAT YOU MAKE A NOTE OF IT. I WILL TELL YOU THE ONE THING YOU NEED TO
TAKE AWAY FROM ANYTHING I’VE SAID HERE RIGHT NOW. LOOK AROUND THE ROOM AND HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE HERE , THERE IS ALSO A CAMERA IN
THE BACK — ALL OF THIS IS BEING LIVESTREAM TO THE INTERNET. WE WILL BE SENDING OUT VIDEO OF THIS ON TWITTER AND FACEBOOK. POSTING IT ON THE WEBSITE FOR RIGHT TO COUNSEL. IT’S A TREMENDOUS HONOR, MYSELF AND MY INCREDIBLE
COLLEAGUE , HAVE THE HONOR OF CURATING THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL WEBSITE COMANAGING
THE — WEBSITE, MANAGING THE FACEBOOK PAGE. IN THAT REGARD, WE NEED YOUR HELP. WHEN YOU SEE AN INTERESTING STORY, WHEN YOU WRITE AN INTERESTING STORY
, WHEN AN IMPORTANT REPORT COMES OUT, SEND THAT TO US. OUR E-MAIL ADDRESSES ARE IN YOUR MONTHLY NEWSLETTER. POST THEM ON YOUR OWN SOCIAL MEDIA ACCOUNTS. USE #RIGHT2CO UNSEL FOR EVERYTHING YOU POST. WHAT WE ARE DOING ON THE WEBSITE IS SOMETHING
ELSE THAT IS IMPORTANT THAT IS A TREMENDOUS RESOURCE
THAT I COMMEND YOU TO EXPLOIT TO ITS FULLEST AND TO PARTICIPATE IN BUILDING. WE ARE BUILDING A LIBRARY OF RESOURCES THAT POINTS TO MANY OF THE ORGANIZATIONS
THAT ARE IN THIS ROOM , REPORTS, WHITE PAPERS FROM ARTICLES , DATABASES
— RTCNATIONALCAMPAIGN.ORG. THE JUDGE QUOTED NORMAN REAMER. ONE OF THE THINGS NORMAN SAID TO ME REPEATEDLY AND ONE OF THE THINGS WE NEED TO ACCOMPLISH
IN THIS CAMPAIGN IS TO GET THE PUBLIC , TO GET PEOPLE TO BE AS INVESTED IN
THE SIXTH AMENDMENT AND THEIR RIGHTS IN THE SIXTH AMENDMENT AS THEY ARE
IN THEIR RIGHTS IN THE FIRST AMENDMENT OR AS THEY UNDERSTAND THEM IN THE
SECOND AMENDMENT. WE NEED PEOPLE TO GET THAT CONNECTION. REGULAR PEOPLE, PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT LAWYERS,
LAYPEOPLE , PEOPLE WHO WATCH TELEVISION, WATCH FILMS
, JUST LEAVE THEIR LIVES — LEAD THEIR LIVES COMMIT YOU TO UNDERSTAND THAT
— NEED TO UNDERSTAND THEIR RIGHTS. WE WANT YOU TO SEND IN RESOURCES , WE WANT
YOU TO SUBMIT BLOGS FOR US TO DISSEMINATE. WE WANT US TO BE FACILITATORS FOR YOU TO GET
YOUR VOICE HEARD IN THE LARGER CONTEXT THE COMMUNITY IS VERY MUCH
ONLINE. IT’S IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE OUR VOICES OUT THERE AND WE CAN MAGNIFY
AND MULTIPLY THE EFFECT OF WHAT WE ARE DOING WITH YOUR HELP. FOR THOSE OLD ENOUGH TO REMEMBER THAT COMMERCIAL FROM THE 1970’S , IF ALL OF YOU TELL TWO FRIENDS
AND THEY TELL TWO FRIENDS, WE WILL GET THERE. WE NEED TO GET THERE IN THE WAY THAT PEOPLE
UNDERSTAND THAT PEOPLE TO EMBRACE WHAT IS THEIRS , THEIR SIXTH
AMENDMENT RIGHT TO COUNSEL. THERE YOU HAVE THE WEBSITE AND SOCIAL MEDIA
INFORMATION. PLEASE USE #RIGHT2 COUNSEL. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE]>>I WANT TO THANK ALL OF OUR LIGHTNING ROUND
PANELISTS FOR REALLY SHORT , INSTRUCTIVE, INSPIRING AN IMPORTANT COMMENTS. [APPLAUSE]>>JUDGE DONALD TALKED ABOUT THE NEED FOR
IMMEDIATE PRESENCE FOR DEFENDERS. WE HAVE WITH US TODAY SOMEONE WHO BECAME AN ACCIDENTAL
BUT NONETHELESS IMPACTFUL MEDIA HERO. TUCSON ROMAINE IS A PUBLIC DEFENDER IN CHARLOTTE
. MANY OF YOU MAY HAVE SEEN HIM ON CNN .
THERE WERE PROTESTS IN CHARLOTTE, HE DID WHAT MANY PUBLIC DEFENDERS DO, HE TOOK TO THE STREETS
AND WALKED WITH PEOPLE AND TRY TO MAINTAIN THE PEACE BETWEEN LAW ENFORCEMENT
AND THE PROTESTERS AND DID IT SUCCESSFULLY. WHAT HE DID FROM A MEDIA PERSPECTIVE IS NOT
JUST THE A PUBLIC DEFENDER, BUT HE REMINDED PEOPLE OF THE IMPORTANT
ROLE PUBLIC DEFENDERS PLAY EVERY DAY IN COMMUNITY SAFETY. FOR THAT, WE ARE PLEASED TO HAVE HIM WITH
US TODAY. [APPLAUSE]>>AND COME IT IS LUNCH TIME. LUNCH IS BROUGHT TO YOU TODAY NOT BY THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE BUT BY THE NL AVA — NLAD
A AND THE AU. THANK YOU. [INDISCERNIBLE]>>WE ARE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED
IN ANOTHER MINUTE OR SO. IF YOU COULD GRAB YOUR SEATS. WE WILL GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED. I APPRECIATE IT.>>WE ARE BACK. WE ARE GOING TO START OUR LUNCHTIME PROGRAM
. SINCE HE WAS OUT OF THE ROOM WHEN I TALKED ABOUT HIM EARLIER,
IF YOU’LL STAND THAT SO EVERYONE CAN SEE YOU AND IT KNOWLEDGE TO GOOD WORK
YOU DID IN CHARLOTTE. [APPLAUSE] IT IS MY DISTINCT PLEASURE TO INTRODUCE THREE
EXTRAORDINARY WOMEN AND IT WILL, I ASSURE YOU, BEER DISTINCT PLEASURE TO LISTEN
TO THEM TALK TODAY. TWO ARE AMONG MY CLOSEST COLLEAGUES, KAROL MASON AND VANITA
GUPTA , AND LAURIE R. GARDUQUE HAS MADE AN ENORMOUS IMPACT ON THE WORK WE
DO. IF YOU WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT TO TALK ABOUT VANITA AND CA ROL, BOTH RUN A LARGE
PROGRAM WITH A LARGE MANDATE. UNLIKE ME, WHO RUNS A SMALLER MANDATE WOULD
A SINGULAR FOCUS ON ACCESS TO JUSTICE, BUT THEY HAVE BEEN EXTRA ORDINARY
PARTNERS CAN BECAUSE THEY CARE SO MUCH ABOUT THE ISSUES, HAVE WORKED ACROSS
WHAT CAN OFTEN BE THE SILOS OF THE BIG BUREAUCRACY LIKE THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. WE CAN ALL DO THE WORK THAT WE HAVE DONE AND WE ARE JUSTIFIABLY I THINK PROUD
OF. WITHOUT THE TWO OF THEM, NONE OF THE WORK THAT MY OFFICE DOES OR THE
WORK THAT THE DEPARTMENT DOES WOULD EVER BE POSSIBLE. WE ARE GOING TO START TODAY WITH KAROL MASON
, THE ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL SINCE 2013 AND
OVERSEAS A BUDGET OF OVER $2 MILLION, DEDICATING TO SUPPORTING STATE, LOCAL
AND TRIBAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE AGENCIES. AN ARRAY OF JUVENILE JUSTICE PROGRAMS, A WIDE
RANGE OF STATISTICAL EFFORTS, AND COMPREHENSIVE SERVICES FOR CRIME
THE DEMS. — CRIME VICTIMS. PRIOR TO TAKING THE HELM, SHE WAS AN ASSOCIATE
ATTORNEY GENERAL AND PRIOR TO GOVERNMENT SERVICE, SHE PRACTICED LAW AT THE
ATLANTA LAW FIRM OF AUSTIN MEMBER, OR SHE CONCENTRATED ON PUBLIC AND
PROJECT FINANCE. AS THE HEAD OF OJP, SHE PLAYS UNIQUE ROLE IN THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT,
SHE GETS TO PUT MONEY WHERE HER MOUTH IS. FORTUNATELY FOR US, KAROL CARES DEEPLY ABOUT
CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM AND ABOUT THE NEED TO ENSURE THAT STATE
AND LOCAL COURTS RESPECT THE SIXTH AMENDMENT. KAROL? [APPLAUSE] MS. MASON: THANK YOU FOR THE INTRODUCTION, LISA,
BUT I HAVE TO GIVE HEADED TO THE PEOPLE TO GIVE UP THE MONEY AND THAT IS
DENISE AND BETSY GRIFFITH AND JONES IS HERE SOMEWHERE, THE PEOPLE WHO REALLY
DESERVE THE CREDIT. I JUST GET TO REPRESENT THEM. IT IS A PLEASURE TO BE HERE WITH LA URIE AN
D VANITA, AND AS SHE MADE CLEAR, EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER THE
LAW IS NOT SIMPLY THE CONVENIENT LEGAL PRINCIPLE. IT IS THE BEDROCK OF AMERICAN JURISPRUDENCE. I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT FOR EVERYONE WHO WORKS IN THIS ADVERSARIAL
SYSTEM TO UNDERSTAND THAT , AND WE ARE HERE NOT JUST TO WIN CASES BUT
PURSUE JUSTICE. I WAS FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO MODERATE A PANEL YESTERDAY OR PROSECUTORS
IN A PROGRAM THAT IS GOING TO HELP PROSECUTORS ACROSS THE COUNTRY , AND
THERE WOULD BE MUSIC TO YOUR EARS YESTERDAY TO HEAR PROSECUTORS TALKING ABOUT
IT IS NOT ABOUT CONVICTIONS BUT JUSTICE, KEEPING PEOPLE OUT OF THE SYSTEM
WHO DO NOT BELONG IN THE SYSTEM. IF I WERE YOU, GET A LIST OF EVERYONE AT THE
PROGRAM YESTERDAY AND EVERYBODY ON THE ADVISORY BOARD FOR THE INSTITUTE FOR INNOVATION
AND PROSECUTION THAT THE MANHATTAN DA IS FUNDING WITH ITS OVERTURE
MONEY AND MAKE SURE THAT YOU DEVELOP PARTNERSHIPS AND LOOK AT THE MATERIALS THEY
ARE PUTTING OUT BECAUSE THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT DIFFERENT KINDS OF PARTNERSHIPS
AND DIFFERENT WAYS FOR PROSECUTORS TO DO THEIR BUSINESS . YOU OUGHT
TO BE IN DEEP CONVERSATION WITH THESE ISSUES. I’M PROUD TO BE PART OF A JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
THAT EMBODIES THIS PHILOSOPHY AND HAS TWO ATTORNEY GENERALS DURING
THE ADMINISTRATION THAT HAVE MADE INACTIVE PUSH FOR BETTER QUALITY LEGAL
— AN ACTIVE PUSH FOR BETTER QUALITY LEGAL REPRESENTATION. I THINK THIS SENDS A PART OF THE MESSAGE. IN HIS BOOK ” GIDEON’S TRUMPET,” ANTHONY LEWIS REFERRED
TO CLARENCE EARL GIDEON AS ONE TOSSED ASIDE BY LIFE . SADLY, MANY OF
THOSE WHO COME INTO CONTACT WITH OUR JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEMS ARE THAT. POOR PEOPLE LIVING LIVES OF STRUGGLE, AND WHEN THEY REACH THE SYSTEM, THEY COUNTER MORE
OF THE SAME. I WILL SAY THAT THANKS TO THE LEADERSHIP OF LISA AND VANITA,
AS A DEPARTMENT, WE ARE WORKING ON THESE ISSUES. WE KNOW THAT THIS POINT WAS MADE IN STARK
TERMS BY THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT’S INVESTIGATION OF THE
MUSICAL COURT AND POLICE DEPARTMENT. THE INVESTIGATION FOUND THAT THE CITY RELIED
ON THE JUSTICE SYSTEM TO CLOSE BUDGET SHORTFALLS AND MOSTLY POOR, AFRICAN
AMERICAN CITIZENS WERE PAYING THE PRICE, AND FERGUSON IS NOT AN ISOLATED CASE. I DO NOT THINK THESE JURISDICTIONS WERE DOING IT WITH MELON 10. — MAL INTENSE. THERE ARE LOOKING AT A CREATIVE WAY TO FINANCE THE SYSTEM, BUT
THANKS TO THE WORK THAT CIVIL RIGHTS DIVISION DID IN HIGHLIGHTING THIS IN
FERGUSON AND THANKS TO LISA’S PASSIONATE ADVOCACY ON THE ISSUE, HOPEFULLY,
YOU ARE AWARE OF THE WORK WE HAVE BEEN DOING ON BAIL REFORM IN FEES AND FINES
AND WE COUNT ON YOU TO KEEP THAT GOING. TO PAY THE LEGAL OBLIGATIONS AND COLLATERAL
PENALTIES THAT GO WITH THEM DRIVE PEOPLE DEEPER INTO THE JUSTICE SYSTEM. IN MANY CASES, IT LEADS THEM NO WAY OUT. THIS IS WHAT IS HAPPENING TO DEFENDANTS, BOTH
ADULTS AND YOUTH , WHEN THEY ARE DENIED EFFECTIVE COUNSEL. THEIR POVERTY ALL BUT ASSURES THEM OF THE REMAINING ENTANGLED SYSTEM FOR THE YEARS TO
COME. ANOTHER DIGRESSION, THE YOUNG MAN IN FLORIDA , HE PRESENTED AT A PANEL
AT THE INTERNATIONAL CHIEFS OF POLICE LAST WEEK, AND THEY’RE WHAT YOU TO
KNOW THAT THESE ISSUES ARE RESONATING ACROSS THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM. PEOPLE ARE HEARING AND UNDERSTANDING THE ISSUES , AND I THINK THAT
YOU HAVE SOME UNUSUAL PARTNERS THAT YOU NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU FOLLOW
UP WITH IN THIS WORK TO REALLY SEE THE CHANGES WE WANT TO SEE MADE . DUE TO UNDER
RESOURCED PUBLIC DEFENSE SYSTEMS AND AVOID DEFENDERS, YOU HAVE EFFECTIVELY
TO JUSTICE SYSTEMS, ONE FOR THE WEALTHY AND ANOTHER FOR THE POOR . THE
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE RECOGNIZES THIS DOES NOT CONFIRM TO THE PRINCIPLES OF
FAIRNESS OF OUR LEGAL SYSTEM AND IT DOES NOT REPRESENT WHAT WE ASPIRE TO BE IN
AMERICA . YOU HEARD DENISE O’DONNELL TALKED THIS MORNING ABOUT THE SMART
DEFENSE PROGRAM THAT BRINGS TOGETHER RESEARCHERS AND PRACTITIONERS AND
GIDEON’S CALL, WHICH PROVIDES TRAINING TO DEFENDERS AND FUNDING AIMED TO
CASELOAD MANAGEMENT. WE ARE LOOKING CLOSELY AT THE JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM WITH
THE CRISIS OF COUNSEL WHERE IT IS AT LEAST AS PRONOUNCED AS IT IS IN THE ADULT
SYSTEM. ANYONE WHO WORKS WITH JUSTICE INVOLVED YOUTH KNOW THAT THE AND PEOPLE
ARE THRUST INTO A SYSTEM THEY DO NOT UNDERSTAND AND LEFT TO MAKE DECISIONS
WITH LITTLE GRASP OF THE CONSEQUENCES. IN MANY CASES, THEY ARE ENCOURAGED TO OPEN
THE OR IMPLICITLY WAIVED COUNSEL. THE SURVEY OF RESIDENTIAL AND YOUTH PLACEMENT
WHICH IS BASED ON SELF-REPORTS, FOUND THAT MORE THAN HALF
OF YOUNG PEOPLE IN THE DETENTION FACILITIES SAID THEY DID NOT HAVE COUNSEL
REPRESENT THEM. THIS LEADS TO WHAT THE SUPREME COURT 50 YEARS AGO CALLED THE
WORST OF BOTH WORLDS. NEITHER THE LEGAL ATTRACTION AFFORDED ADULTS, NOR THE
CARE AND TREATMENT OF YOUNG PERSON REALLY NEEDS AND DESERVES . LAST YEAR, OUR
OFFICE OF DELINQUENCY PREVENTION LAUNCHED ITS SMART ON JUVENILE JUSTICE INITIATIVE
TO IMPROVE ACCESS TO HIGH QUALITY LEGAL SERVICES FOR JUSTICE INVOLVED
YOUTH CREATE. — YOUTH. FOUR STATES RECEIVED GRANTS TO DEVELOP STATEWIDE
JUVENILE DEFENSE STRATEGIC PLANS. TWO OF THE STATES, DELAWARE AND INDIANA, OR
AWARDED FOLLOW-UP GRANTS TO IMPLEMENT THE PLANS. THE NATIONAL JUVENILE DEFENDER CENTER IS OUR
TRAINING AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROVIDED FOR THE PROGRAM
AND ARE WORKING WITH THEM TO SUPPORT REGIONAL JUVENILE DEFENDER RESOURCE
CENTERS TO PROVIDE DATA, TRAINING, CASE SUPPORT AND OTHER RESOURCES. THIS FRIDAY, I WILL BE AT THE CENTER SUMMIT WITH BROADDRICK JOHNSON OF THE WHITE HOUSE,
TO TALK ABOUT WHAT WE CAN DO TO ADVANCE THE ISSUES. OUR INVESTMENTS EXTEND BEYOND CAPACITY BUILDING
. A HALLMARK OF OUR MISSION IS TO LAY A FOUNDATION
OF KNOWLEDGE ON WHICH YOU CAN BUILD A SMARTER JUSTICE SYSTEM . OUR NATIONAL
INSTITUTE OF JUSTICE SUPPORTS RESEARCH ON EVIDENCE-BASED TOOLS, PROTOCOLS
AND POLICIES HELP STATE, LOCAL AND TRIBAL SYSTEMS MEET THE RESPONSIBILITIES TO
ENSURE EFFECTIVE SYSTEMS. OVER THE YEARS, NIJ HAS ENDED — FUNDED FRIDAY’S OF
PROJECTS, ONE THAT EXAMINES THE EFFECTS OF PUBLIC OFFENDERS VERSUS A COURT
APPOINTED ATTORNEY ON HOMICIDE OUTCOMES. FOUND THE WERE RATES OF CONVICTION AND SHORTER
SENTENCES AND PUBLIC DEFENDERS ARE ON THE CASE. THIS IS CRITICAL INFORMATION IN THE DEBATE
ABOUT THE ROLE OF ASSIGNED COUNSEL AND THE LACK
OF FINANCIAL INCENTIVES FOR PRIVATE COUNSEL. NIJ HAS SEVERAL ONGOING PROJECTS, WE ARE CONDUCTING
A MULTISITE EVALUATION OF HOLISTIC DEFENSE PROGRAMS, STUDYING
THE EFFECTS OF WAIVERS IN JUVENILE COURT AND LOOKING AT HOW DEFENDERS
CAN PLAY A ROLE IN REDUCING RACIAL DISPARITIES IN FELONY CASES, AND HOPEFULLY
MOST OF YOU KNOW ABOUT THE DATA COLLECTION THAT THE BJS HAS UNDERTAKEN, SO
OUR ACTIVITIES GIVE US A CLEARER PICTURE OF THE STATE OF DEFENSE IN OUR COUNTRY. IT IS SUCH A DISPARATE SYSTEM, IT IS BEEN HARD TO FIGURE OUT HOW THE CAPTION
WHAT IS HAPPENING. NEXT MONTH, BJS WILL PUBLISH DATA FROM A NATIONAL SURVEY
ABOUT THE DEFENSE SYSTEMS TO TELL US ABOUT STAFFING, BUDGET, CASELOAD IN OTHER
ASPECTS OF STATE AND COUNTY SYSTEMS. WORK IS UNDERWAY TO FIELD TEST AN INSTRUMENT
THAT WOULD CAPTURE THE EXPERIENCES OF ATTORNEYS WHO REPRESENT INDIGENT
DEFENDANTS. ALL OF THESE ACTIVITIES ARE KEY OR TOWARDS MAKING SURE
THAT WE HAVE THE INFORMATION WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND THE SYSTEM. AS PART OF THE EFFORT, LISA AND VANITA AND
I ARE WORKING TO REDUCE RELIANCE ON FEES AND FINES,
WHICH DISPROPORTIONATELY IMPACT THE POOR. OJP ALSO WILL TRY TO MOVE AWAY FROM THE FOCUS
ON MONEY BAIL, WHICH PENALIZES THE DISADVANTAGE AND MOVE TOWARD
INDIVIDUALIZED ASSESSMENTS BASED ON RISK . WE ARE TRYING TO IMPROVE OUR UNDERSTANDING
OF THE FACTORS THAT LEAD TO WRONGFUL CONVICTIONS AND WORK TO ELIMINATE
THOSE ERRORS. WE ARE PROVIDING TRAINING AND TOOLS TO HELP ATTORNEYS WHO REPRESENT
DEFENDANTS IN CAPITAL CASES, AS WELL. WE’RE SUPPORTING EFFORTS LIKE PROBLEM-SOLVING
AND OTHER DIVERSION ALTERNATIVES I CAN HELP ADDRESS
THE CHALLENGES OF MASS INCARCERATION AND BLUNTNESS OUTSIDE IMPACT ON POOR AND MINORITY
COMMUNITIES , AND ACCESS TO COUNSEL IS VERY MUCH TIED TO THE CHALLENGES
AND THEY MUST ADDRESS IT AS PART OF THE LARGER STRATEGY. WE HAVE A LOT OF WORK TO DO. WE HAVE MADE A LOT OF PROGRESS, BUT THERE IS SO MUCH MORE TO DO. I KNOW MANY OF YOU ARE WORRIED BECAUSE THREE OF US WILL BE LEAVING OUR JOBS
. SOMETIME IN JANUARY, BUT THE KEY THING IS YOU ARE NOT. YOUR VOICES ARE IMPORTANT, SO I WILL CALL
OUT SOME PEOPLE. NORM, [LAUGHTER] JOANN, YOU ALL DEMANDED THINGS
OF ME, DIDN’T YOU? YOU RAISED YOUR VOICES, AND OVER THE THREE YEARS,
THEY HAVE BEEN RELENTLESS IN REPRESENTING YOUR ISSUES AND YOU HAVE TO ASK
THEM IF THEY HAVE SEEN RESULTS IN MAKING THE DEMANDS. MY POINT IN TELLING YOU THIS IS YOU HAVE GOT
TO CONTINUE TO RAISE YOUR VOICES. IT DOESN’T MATTER WHO IS IN OUR SEATS. YOU KNOW WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE. WE PUT THE INFRASTRUCTURE IN PLACE IN OUR
OFFICES THAT WILL BE THERE WHEN WE ARE GONE . DEMAND CONTINUED
PROGRESS ON THESE ISSUES. DO I HAVE YOUR PROMISE TO DO THAT? THAT IS NOT THE REAL PROMISE. [LAUGHTER] [APPLAUSE] DON’T YOU ALL CARE ABOUT THIS? I’M COUNTING ON YOU ALL. LISA: THANK YOU, KAROL. VANITA GUPTA SERVED AS THE HEAD OF THE CIVIL
RIGHTS DIVISION SINCE 2014. HIRED AND JOINED THE DEPARTMENT HAS LEGAL
DIRECTOR OF THE AMERICAN LIBERAL CIVIL’S UNION AND THE CENTER
FOR JUSTICE. SHE WAS PREVIOUSLY AN ATTORNEY FOR THE RACIAL JUSTICE PROGRAM
. OVER HER CAREER, SHE HAS EARNED A REPUTATION FOR WORKING CLOSELY AND COLLABORATIVELY
WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT , DEPARTMENTS OF CORRECTION AND ACROSS THE POLITICAL
SPECTRUM TO ADVANCE SMART POLICING AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORMS. AT DOJ, SHE HAS BROUGHT THAT COLLABORATIVE APPROACH TO ENFORCING OUR NATION’S
CIVIL RIGHTS LAWS. AS YOU HAVE UNDOUBTEDLY READ OR HEARD, VANITA AND
THE CIVIL RIGHTS DIVISION HAVE BEEN HARD AT WORK ON SO MANY CRITICAL ISSUES FROM
POLICING TO LANGUAGE ACCESS TO DISABILITY RIGHTS . FORTUNATELY, FOR ALL OF
US, PARTICULARLY ON THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL. VANITA ? [APPLAUSE] MS. GUPTA: THANK YOU. IT IS GREAT TO SEE EVERYONE AND I’M HONORED
TO SHARE THE STAGE WITH KAROL AND LISA, WHOSE LEADERSHIP
ON THESE ISSUES, NOT JUST A PROFESSIONAL COMMITMENT, BUT REALLY A VERY
STRONG PERSONAL COMMITMENT TO THE ISSUES. IT IS GREAT TO HEAR KAROL TALK ABOUT OJP’S
AMAZING WORK BECAUSE THE RESEARCH AND EVALUATION AND THE FUNDING AND
EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICES THEY’RE ARE HOPING TO SUPPORT AND PUSH OUT I THINK
ARE HELPING TO PUT NEW PEOPLE INTO THE WORK THAT ALL OF YOU ARE DOING EVERY DAY,
AND IT IS SO CRITICALLY IMPORTANT. I ALSO WANT TO THANK ALL OF YOU. MANY ARE FRIENDS I HAVE BEEN WORKING ALONGSIDE FOR MANY YEARS, AND I KNOW
KAROL CALLED OUT JOANN AND NORM IN THERE SO MANY OTHERS DOING THIS WORK. THIS IS CRITICALLY IMPORTANT WORK. WE’RE AT AN AMAZING TIME IN THE COUNTRY WITH
A NATIONWIDE CONVERSATION ABOUT CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM , SMART CRIMINAL JUSTICE
PRACTICES, BUT OFTEN , AND PROBABLY YOU FEEL THIS AS MUCH AS ANY OF US,
INDIGENT DEFENSE REFORM IS MORE OF A SIDELINE CONVERSATION AND IT SHOULD NOT
BE BECAUSE IT IS ATTACHED TO BROADER ISSUES THAT WE ARE SEEKING TO ADDRESS
TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE A THERE AND JUST CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM. THROUGHOUT THE CIVIL RIGHTS DIVISION’S POLICING WORK, SOME OF WHICH IS BETTER KNOWN
IN OUR WORK TO ENSURE ACCESS TO JUSTICE, WHICH WE DO ALONGSIDE OJP , BUT THROUGHOUT
OUR POLICING WORK, WE FIND, JUST LIKE OUR INVESTIGATION AND THE
PROGRESSING POLICE DEPARTMENT — IN THE FERGUSON POLICE DEPARTMENT, WE SEE HOW
BREAKDOWNS AND COMMUNITY POLICE TRUST REALLY HAVE MUCH RATHER CAUSES. THEY HAVE CAUSES WHERE THEIR GREATER SYMPTOMS OF DISTRUCT INSTITUTIONS AND THIS
OFTEN HAPPENS IN PEOPLE BELIEVE THE JUSTICE SYSTEM DOES DISTRA NOT FUNCTION EQUALLY
FOR LOW-INCOME COMMUNITIES AND COMMUNITIES OF COLOR AS IT DOES FOR OTHERS. WE ALSO KNOW THAT A JUSTICE SYSTEM THAT DOES LIVE UP TO EQUALITY UNDER THE LAW
IN A JUSTICE SYSTEM, AN IDEA THAT REQUIRES ENSURING A MEANINGFUL RIGHT TO COUNSEL,
THAT COURTS CAN SERVE AS A CHECK TO UNCONSTITUTIONAL PRACTICES, TO RESTORE
TRUST IN PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS, AND SIMPLY PUT, I THINK PUBLIC TRUST REQUIRES
PATENT IN THE LEGITIMACY OF OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM . PUBLIC TRUST REQUIRES PEOPLE
BELIEVE THAT OUR PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS PROVIDE JUSTICE AND FAIR TREATMENT
. THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL EMBODIES THE CORE TRUTH OF OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM. TO ME, IT MAKES REAL THE CONCEPT OF FAIRNESS UNDER THE LAW. ALL OF US HAVE KNOWN ALL TOO WELL THE PROMISE OF ACADIAN VERSUS WAINWRIGHT DECISIONS,
BUT WE ALSO KNOW TOO WELL THAT FOR TWO MINUTE PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY, GIDEON
IS A PROMISE AND REALIZED AND UNFULFILLED . IN TOO MANY COMMUNITIES, INDIGENT
DEFENSE IS IN CRISIS, AND THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL IS OBSERVED ONLY IN NAME. WHEN THERE IS MEANINGFUL LACK IN COUNSEL, IT AFFECTS THE JUSTICE SYSTEM, SO
MANY PROBLEMS WE FACE IN THE FACE OF POVERTY, INCLUDING THE FEES, RAIL PRACTICES
AND FINES, REALLY ARISE IN PEOPLE WITH LIMITED NEEDS ARE UNABLE TO NAVIGATE
OUR LEGAL SYSTEM. THERE IS NO MISTAKE TO BE MADE THAT PUBLIC DEFENDERS EVERY
DAY ARE WORKING TIRELESSLY AROUND THE COUNTRY TO VINDICATE THE RIGHTS
OF THE MOST HONORABLE AND MARGINALIZED AMONG US, BUT WE FIND THAT DO
TO UNDERFUNDING AND HIGH BURDENS, THEY CANNOT PERFORM THE CORE FUNCTIONS OF
THEIR JOBS IN TOO MANY COMMUNITIES, AND THE PEOPLE WHO SUFFER ARE THOSE IN POVERTY
AND YOU COME INTO CONTACT WITH OUR CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM. IN THAT REGARD, OUR COUNTRY FALLS SHORT OF IDEALS. THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT IS DOING WHAT WE CAN,
AND YOU HAVE HEARD FROM ME, KAROL , LISA, AND THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY
GENERAL THIS MORNING, WE ARE DOING WHAT WE CAN TO SHINE A LIGHT ON THE RIGHT
TO COUNSEL CRISIS THAT IS PLAYING OUT AT THE STATE AND LOCAL LEVEL. SOME OF YOU TALKED ABOUT THE LIMITATIONS ABOUT THE CIVIL RIGHTS DIVISION’S ABILITY
TO REACH THE ISSUES, BUT CERTAINLY, ARTHUR COMPONENTS ARE DOING EVERYTHING WE
CAN TO USE THE DIFFERENT TOOLS THAT WE HAD TO RAISE THE ISSUE AND TO ENSURE THAT
WE CAN ADVANCE JUSTICE THE WAY WE CAN. IN COURTS AROUND THE COUNTRY FROM WASHINGTON
TO NEW YORK , TO PENNSYLVANIA, TO GEORGIA, TO IDAHO, THE CIVIL
RIGHTS DIVISION HAVE ARGUED THAT IF PUBLIC DEFENDERS CANNOT TALK CONFIDENTIALLY
WITH THEIR CLIENTS AND CANNOT INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS, CANNOT MEANINGFULLY
PROSECUTE THE CASE, THAT CAN VIOLATE THE SIXTH AMENDMENT. YOU HEARD FROM MY COLLEAGUE TALKING ABOUT
THE LITIGATION AND JUST TAKING THE STORY OF JAMES
ADAMS, ONE OF THE PLAINTIFFS FROM THAT CASE, AFTER HE ALLEGEDLY STOLE STICKS
OF DEODORANT FROM A RIDE AID DRUGSTORE, POLICE ARRESTED HIM ON BURGLARY
AND HE FACED UP TO 14 YEARS IN PRISON. WITH BAIL SET AT $2500, WHICH SHE COULD NOT
AFFORD, HE SAT IN JAIL FOR MORE THAN THREE MONTHS AND NEVER SAW ATTORNEY
OUTSIDE OF OPEN COURT AND THAT ONE OF HIS COURT APPEARANCES, THE ATTORNEY
DID NOT ATTEND. ACCORDING TO THE COMPLAINT, HIS INCARCERATION COSTS AND TO
LOSE HIS JOB . WITH NO JOB, MR. ADAMS CANNOT SUPPORT HIS FAMILY OR PAY HIS
RENT , AND THAT LEAD TO ADDICTION. WE ALL KNOW THESE STORIES. MANY OF YOU HAVE THE STORES AMONG YOUR CLIENTS
THAT WE KNOW ALL TOO WELL . IT TOOK A LITTLE WHILE,
BUT WEEKS AFTER THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT FILED A STATEMENT OF INTEREST IN
THAT CASE, NEW YORK REACHED A CONFERENCE OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT TO IMPLEMENT
TRANSFORMATIVE REFORMS TO ITS PUBLIC DEFENSE SYSTEM ACROSS FIVE COUNTIES
IN THE STATE. REFORMS THAT INCLUDED GUARANTEEING THAT INDIGENT CRIMINAL DEFENDANTS
WOULD HAVE LEGAL COUNSEL AT THE ARRANGEMENTS, AND IT ESTABLISH CASELOAD AND
WORKLOAD STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC DEFENDERS TO ENSURE THAT THEY CAN ADEQUATELY
SERVE EACH OTHER. I JUST WANT TO POINT TO SOMETHING THAT DENISE MENTIONED THIS
MORNING AND I THINK IT WILL BE TREMENDOUS WHEN O JP PUTS OUT THE RESULTS
OF THE WORK STUDY THAT YOU HAVE BEEN FUNDING FOR QUITE SOME TIME BECAUSE IT IS
IMPORTANT. IN THE JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM FROM MISSOURI TO TENNESSEE TO MISSISSIPPI,
WE HAVE BEEN WORKING TO ENFORCE THE RIGHT TO ACCESS FOR COUNSEL FOR
ALL CHILDREN. FAR TOO OFTEN, CHILDREN LIVING IN POVERTY, CHILDREN WITH
DISABILITIES, CHILDREN OF COLOR, ARE GETTING STUCK IN THE JUVENILE SYSTEM AND FIND
THEMSELVES IN THE PIPELINE TO PRISON. IN SHELBY COUNTY, TENNESSEE, OUR WORK LED
TO A TRANSFORMATIVE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT IN THE SPECIALIZED JUVENILE
DEFENDER’S OFFICE. OFFICE CONTINUES TO BUILD CAPACITY, OR WORK IN PROGRESS,
BUT IT IS PROVIDING MORE YOUTH IN NEED WITH ATTORNEYS WHO HAVE REASONABLE
WORKLOADS AND EFFECTIVE TRAINING, AND WE HAVE SEEN THE NUMBERS OF
INCARCERATED YOUTH GO DOWN. IN MERIDIAN, MISSISSIPPI, OUR AGREEMENT WITH
THE CITY PREVENTS POLICE OFFICER SOME INTERVIEWING DETAINED YOUTH WITHOUT AN
ATTORNEY OR GUARDIAN PRESENT. IT ALSO MANDATES THAT OFFICERS INFORMED CHILDREN
OF THE MIRANDA RIGHTS AS SOON AS THEY REASONABLY BELIEVED HE OR SHE CANNOT
LEAVE FREELY. IN AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE YOUR PROBATION AGENCY, AND REQUIRES
THAT STAFF NOTIFIED CHILDREN OF THEIR RIGHT TO COUNSEL AT PROBATION REVOCATION
HEARINGS, AMONG OTHER PROTECTIONS. AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, THE CHALLENGES WE
SEE IN INDIGENT DEFENSE, MAINLY THAT PEOPLE IN POVERTY LACK
ACCESS TO JUSTICE, DO NOT RESULT IN A VACUUM. THE CONSTRUCTIVE AND SYSTEMATIC DENIAL OF
ONE’S SIXTH AMENDMENT TO TRIAL COULD CRIMINALIZE POVERTY, AND EARLIER
THIS YEAR, AS YOU KNOW, THIS EMANATED OUT OF WORK THAT NOT ONLY CAME OUT
OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS DIVISIONS FERGUSON INVESTIGATION BUT OUT OF RESEARCH
AND REPORTING FOR MANY OF YOU IN THE ROOM ABOUT THE PROBLEMS OF HEADERS PRISONS
AND COURTS AROUND THE COUNTRY, BUT THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT LAUNCHED AN INITIATIVE
, THE COMPONENT INITIATIVE, AND WE SENT A DEAR COLLEAGUE LETTER TO STATE
AND LOCAL JUDGES TO HELP THEM GUARD AGAINST UNLAWFUL FINES, FEES AND BAIL
PRACTICES THAT COULD RESULT IN AN INESCAPABLE CYCLE OF DEBT AND INCARCERATION. IT STATES THAT THEY MUST PROVIDE MEANINGFUL NOTICE AND INAPPROPRIATE CASES
COUNSEL WHEN ENFORCING FINES AND FEES. WE HAVE BEEN VERY ACTIVE IN TALKING ABOUT
BAIL PRACTICES AND IN FILING BRIEFS , ARGUING THAT IF THEY’LL PRACTICES
RESULTED IN JAILING PEOPLE BECAUSE OF THEIR PROPERTY WITHOUT CONSIDERATION OF
THEIR ABILITY TO PAY OR ALTERNATIVES TO INCARCERATION, SUCH ACTRESSES
VIOLATE THE CONSTITUTION. WE ARE WELL AWARE AT THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT THAT
THERE IS A CRISIS IN THE WAY THAT PEOPLE LIVING IN POVERTY EXPERIENCE OUR JUSTICE
SYSTEM INTO MANY COMMUNITIES AND WE ARE COMMITTED TO DOING WHAT WE CAN
TO ADDRESS THE CRISIS. AS KAROL AND LISA SAID, IT IS NOT ABOUT THE THREE OF US
ON STAGE. I WORK WITH INCREDIBLE LAWYERS AT THE DIVISION WHO WILL BE HERE,
CAREER ATTORNEYS COMMITTED TO THE IDEALS OF THE WORK THAT ALL OF US ARE DOING
RIGHT NOW , AND THEY WILL BE HERE, CARRYING ON THE WORK , BUT WE ALSO KNOW AND
WE RELY ON ALL OF YOU TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE DOING WHAT WE CAN AND WHAT WE
SHOULD BE DOING AT THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT TO LIFT UP THE ISSUES. WE KNOW THAT THERE IS MORE THAT WE CAN DO AND IT WAS TO THE ADVOCACY OF ALL OF YOU IN
THIS ROOM THAT WE LOOKED UNDER SOFA COVERS, OLD BRIEFS, AND FIGURE OUT THE
PATH WHERE WE CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE USING THE TOLLS WE HAVE AT OUR
DISPOSAL. WE NEED YOU TO KEEP RANKING THOSE IDEAS TO US REGULARLY AND OFTEN. I THINK ALL OF US IN THIS ROOM KNOW THAT LAWS AND DECISIONS ALONE DO NOT
INDICATE RIGHTS, PEOPLE DO, PEOPLE LIKE YOU AND YOUR COLLEAGUES . PEOPLE LIKE
CLARENCE EARL GIDEON, PEOPLE IN POVERTY YEARNING FOR JUSTICE, SO WHILE WE
HAVE MADE A LOT OF PROGRESS AND WE SHOULD TAKE PRIDE IN THAT , NONE OF US CAN
AFFORD TO SETTLE FOR A JUSTICE SYSTEM THAT WORKS ONLY FOR SOME IN OUR COUNTRY
AND WE HAVE TO CONTINUOUSLY LOOK FOR UNUSUAL ALLIES THAT MAY TELL US TO
BRING THEM ON SO THAT INDIGENT DEFENSE REFORM CAN BE SQUARELY APART OF A
SOLID CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM PLATFORM. I FEEL OPTIMISTIC ABOUT THAT AND I WANT TO
THANK YOU ALL FOR WHAT YOU DO TO ENSURE EQUAL JUSTICE FOR EVERYONE
IN THE COUNTRY. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE] LISA: THANK YOU. LAURIE R. GARDUQUE IS A DIRECTOR AT THAT MACARTHUR FOUNDATION, WHICH SHE JOINED IN 1991. SHE SERVED AS THE DIRECTOR OF THE NATIONAL THE QUORUM ON THE FUTURE OF CHILDREN
AND FAMILIES, A JOINT PROJECT OF THE NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL AND THE INSTITUTE
OF MEDICINE . FROM 1984 TO 1987, SHE WAS THE DIRECTOR OF PROFESSIONAL
LIAISON FOR THE AMERICAN EDUCATION RESEARCH ASSOCIATION IN WASHINGTON. SHE WAS THE CONGRESSIONAL SCIENCE FELLOW IN THE UNITED STATES SENATE. THAT MCARTHUR , AS I AM SURE ALL OF YOU KNOW,
SHE OVERSEES THE FOUNDATION’S CRIMINAL JUSTICE
AND JUVENILE JUSTICE PROJECT AND SHE HAS BEEN A TRUE LEADER IN THE FIELD. SHE MOST RECENTLY LAUNCHED THE REMARKABLE SAFETY AND JUSTICE CHALLENGE, WHICH
I AM SURE SHE WILL TALK ABOUT TODAY. [APPLAUSE] MS. GARDUQUE: THANK YOU FOR THAT INTRODUCTION,
AND A SPECIAL SHOUT OUT TO ALL OF MY COLLEAGUES WHO JOINED ME TODAY AND TO
HAVE BEEN PARTICIPATING IN THE SAFETY AND JUSTICE CHALLENGE. IT IS MY PLEASURE TO BE HERE. I APPRECIATE THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL INITIATIVE IN THE WORK OF
THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND THEIR PARTNERS THAT HAVE BEEN REPRESENTED TODAY. MY CHARGE TODAY IS TO DESCRIBE THE CRITICAL ROLE THE DEFENSE BAR PLAYS IN THE
SAFETY AND JUSTICE CHALLENGE. THE MACARTHUR FOUNDATION’S INITIATIVE TO CHANGE
THE WAY AMERICA THINKS ABOUT AND USES JAILS. BEFORE I SHARE WITH YOU WHY ONE OF THE DECISION
POINTS IN OUR APPROACH TO THINKING ABOUT SYSTEMS REFORM
IS THE APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL, I WOULD LIKE TO SET THE STAGE BY DESCRIBING
THE THEORY OF CHANGE IN THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE SAFETY AND THE FOUNDATION’S
INITIAL $100 MILLION INVESTMENT IN ITS WORK. THE ORIGINS REFLECT MACARTHUR’S LONG-STANDING COMMITMENT TO THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES AND
VALUES OF A FAIR, JUST AND EQUITABLE SYSTEM OF JUSTICE THAT TREATS ALL
PEOPLE, ALL PERSONS IN CONFLICT WITH THE LAW WITH DIGNITY AND RESPECT. IT STEMS FROM HER EARLIER WORK IN MENTAL HEALTH OF THE LAW, AND THE WORK THAT
THEN FOLLOWS WITH OUR INVESTMENT IN JUVENILE JUSTICE OF THE MODEL THAT CHANGED,
ONE OF THE SIGNATURE INITIATIVES OF THE FOUNDATION. THE SAFETY AND JUSTICE CHALLENGE BUILDS ON
THE FOUNDATION WITH AN INTERPLAY BETWEEN POLICY,
RESEARCH AND PRACTICE AND FOCUSES ON THE WORK ON THE GROUND UP, AS WELL AS THE
TOP DOWN , AND IT TAKES A SYSTEMS APPROACH. SECOND SLIDE, PLEASE. WHY JAILS? AS MANY HAVE HER MARK TODAY, WE ARE AT A UNIQUE MOMENT HISTORICALLY WITH BROADEN
SUPPORT ACROSS THE IDEOLOGICAL SPECTRUM ON THE NEED FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE
REFORM. MUCH OF THE ATTENTION HAS BEEN FOCUSED ON THE BACK END OF THE SYSTEM,
THE NEED TO ADDRESS MASS INCARCERATION AND THE NEED FOR SENTENCING
REFORM . USUALLY, WHEN I TALK ABOUT JAILS, I HAVE TO GO THROUGH A LONG-STANDING
LITANY , I PROBABLY HAD 100 INTERVIEWS TALKING ABOUT THE SAFETY JUSTICE
CHALLENGE, WHERE I FIRST HAVE TO EXPEND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN JAILS AND PRISONS. FOR THIS AUDIENCE, I DID NOT NEED TO DO SO, BUT WHAT I EMPHASIZE IS THAT
THE PROBLEMS WE EXPERIENCE TODAY IN THE GROWTH AND INCARCERATION , THE UNNECESSARY
INCARCERATION OF SO MANY INDIVIDUALS, IS THAT IT BEGINS WITH JAILS. WHEN I SAY JAILS, I AM TALKING ABOUT THE FRONT END OF THE SYSTEM , NOT JUST
WHAT HAPPENS FROM THE POINT OF INITIAL CONTACT YVONNE FORCE MEANT TO BRING
IN AN INDIVIDUAL TO JAIL , TO THE APPOINTMENT OF LEGAL COUNSEL, HOW LONG IT
TAKES A PROSECUTOR TO FILE CHARGES, WHAT GOES ON AND COURTS AND CORRECTIONS, AND
IN WHAT HAPPENS WHEN AN INDIVIDUAL RETURNS TO THE COMMUNITY. IF I COULD HAVE THE NEXT SLIDE. I CITE THREE NUMBERS OR THREE FAX . I TALK ABOUT
THE NUMBER OF ADMISSIONS, THE 12 MILLION ADMISSIONS TO JAIL ANNUALLY, WHICH
STARTLES MOST PEOPLE. THE VAST MAJORITY OF INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE IN JAIL ARE
HELD ON MINOR OFFENSES AND ARE BEING HELD PRETRIAL. THE RACIAL DISPARITIES ARE QUITE DRAMATIC
AND STRIKING. OVER 30% OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE MINORITIES
IN THIS COUNTRY ARE PEOPLE OF COLOR, YET, REPRESENT OVER HALF OF THE JAIL POPULATION. AS MACARTHUR STARTED TO LOOK AT THIS SET OF ISSUES AROUND THE OVERUSE ARE
UNNECESSARY USE OF JAILED INCARCERATION, IT BECAME CLEAR TO US THAT
THIS IS NOT A MATTER SIMPLY A CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM, BUT ALSO A MATTER
OF SOCIAL , ECONOMIC AND RACIAL INJUSTICE. I COULD HAVE ALSO MENTIONED , AS OTHERS HAVE,
ABOUT LEGAL FINES, LEGAL FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS, THE MENTAL HEALTH
ISSUES THAT DRIVE MANY PEOPLE INTO JAILS. THESE ARE A REFLECTION OF PRACTICES THAT ARE
EVIDENCE IN WHY THE DRAMATIC GROWTH IN JAIL AND INCARCERATION
HAVE OCCURRED. DESPITE ALL OF THESE SOBERING, IF NOT STAGGERING STATISTICS, RELATIVELY
LITTLE ATTENTION IS PAID TO LOCAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM, WHERE MASS
INCARCERATION BEGINS, BOTH THE MAJOR DRIVER AND ELEMENTS OF OVER INCARCERATION,
WHERE THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM EXPERIENCE — IS EXPERIENCED BY MOST PEOPLE
AT THE LOCAL LEVEL, OR THE LACK OF CONFIDENCE AND MISTRUST IN OUR SYSTEMS UNDERMINES
RESPECT FOR THE RULE OF LAW , AND WHICH TAKES A TOLL ON OUR SOCIAL FABRIC
AND UNDERMINES THE CREDIBILITY OF GOVERNMENT ACTION. WHY IS THIS PROBLEM HIDDEN IN PLAIN SIGHT? DECISION- MAKERS WHO DON’T OFTEN REALIZE THAT THEY ARE
IN A SYSTEM OF JUSTICE . THESE ARE LOCAL PROBLEMS THAT REQUIRE LOCAL SOLUTIONS
. THE BURDEN FALLS DISPROPORTIONATELY ON LOW INCOME PEOPLE AND
COMMUNITIES OF COLOR , OR THOSE WHO ARE DISENFRANCHISED WHO SUFFER FROM SERIOUS
MENTAL ILLNESS , WHO HAVE UNDOCUMENTED LEGAL STATUS. WHEN MACARTHUR ISSUED ITS RFP, REQUEST FOR
PROPOSAL , FOR TWO LOCAL JURISDICTION TO PARTICIPATE
IN A SAFETY AND JUSTICE CHALLENGE, WE WERE UNSURE WHAT KIND OF RESPONSE WE WOULD
GET. WE WERE VERY GRATIFIED IF NOT OVERWHELMED BY THE 191 APPLICATIONS WE
RECEIVED FROM 45 STATES AND THE TERRITORY OF KUAN TO PARTICIPATE IN THE SAFETY
AND JUSTICE CHALLENGE. WE HAD A DIFFICULT CHOICE OF IDENTIFYING 20 JURISDICTIONS
WITH WHICH TO PARTNER TO BOTH REDUCE UNNECESSARY JAIL INCARCERATION AND
TO REDUCE RACIAL AND AT THE DISPARITIES. SO WE SELECTED 20 JURISDICTIONS ACROSS THE
COUNTRY THAT ARE REPRESENTATIVE OF WHAT JAILS LOOK LIKE IN
THE UNITED STATES. IT WAS OUR AIM TO CREATE A NETWORK OF PARTNERS TO MODEL AND
INSPIRE THE AFFECTS OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM ACROSS THE COUNTRY. MACARTHUR HAS NO PARTICULAR PLAYBOOK. THE CHANGES THAT THE JURISDICTIONS ARE GOING TO
UNDER TAKE ARE BASED ON THEIR ANALYSIS, EVALUATION OF THE PROBLEMS AND WHAT
SOLUTIONS AND OPPORTUNITIES PRESENT THEMSELVES. THEIR WORK, WE ARE CONFIDENT, WILL REVEAL
NEW AND BETTER WAY TO TARGET RESOURCES, NEW APPROACHES THAT
FOSTER COLLABORATION , THAT WILL IMPROVE PUBLIC SAFETY, AS WELL AS THE SOCIAL
OUTCOMES THAT ALL PEOPLE ARE ENTITLED TO. WE HAVE A DIVERSE ARRAY OF ORGANIZATIONS AND
INDIVIDUALS AND GROUPS THAT ARE INVOLVED IN OUR EFFORT. WE ARE CAPITALIZING ON THE REMARKABLE WORK THAT YOU HAVE HEARD ABOUT TODAY AT THE
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE , AS WELL AS OTHER PRIVATE PARTNERS AND PHILANTHROPY, HAVE
FUNDED. THEY ARE VERY DIVERSE WITH RESPECT TO LAW ENFORCEMENT, JUDGES, PROSECUTORS
AND DEFENDERS. THESE GROUPS ARE INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT TO US TO AMPLIFY
THE RESULTS OF WHAT TAKES PLACE IN THE SAFETY AND JUSTICE CHALLENGE
NETWORK TO SPREAD REFORM ACROSS THE COUNTRY. SO WHY DEFENDERS , WHY HAVE WE ENGAGE THE
DEFENDERS IN THE REMARKABLE WORK OF THE SAFETY AND JUSTICE CHALLENGE ? AS
YOU HAVE HEARD, IT’S ABOUT THE SIXTH AMENDMENT, IT’S ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE
OF THE RULE OF THE DEFENSE BAR IN A FAIR , JUST, AN EQUITABLE SYSTEM. THE SPEAKERS TODAY HAVE SPOKEN MUCH MORE ELOQUENTLY THAN I CAN ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE
OF THEIR ROLE , BUT WE HAVE A MORE EXPANSIVE ROLE IN MIND AS A PARTNER IN LOCAL
CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM THAN WHAT IS ENVISIONED BY WHAT IS SET UP BY THE ADVERSARIAL
NATURE OF OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM. THIS IS SOMETHING, A LESSON THAT HAS BEEN
LEARNED IN OUR WORK , IN MODELS FOR CHANGE IN THE JUVENILE JUSTICE
SYSTEM, AND OTHERS HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE NEEDS TO HAVE THE DEFENSE BAR AT THE TABLE. WHAT WE SEE IS NOT ONLY A ROLE IN TALKING ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF THE INDIGENT
DEFENSE BAR , BUT THEY NEED TO BE AT THE TABLE IN TALKING ABOUT THE REFORMS
SYSTEMICALLY THROUGHOUT THE SYSTEM . THE SAFETY AND JUSTICE CHALLENGE
HAS REQUIRED THAT THE PUBLIC DEFENDER BE AT THE TABLE WITH RESPECT TO THINKING
ABOUT THE REFORMS AT THE LOCAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM . THE SAFETY
AND JUSTICE CHALLENGE BOTH SUPPORTS MULTI-SYSTEM COLLABORATION ABOUT HOW TO COME
UP WITH SOLUTIONS TO THE PROBLEMS OF JAIL OVERUSE, AND ALL OF OUR SITES, THE
DEFENDERS ARE PART OF THESE COLLABORATIONS. DEFENDERS ARE IN CLOSE TOUCH WITH THE IMPACTED
PEOPLE AND COMMUNITIES AND CAN HELP ENSURE THAT THEIR
INTERESTS ARE REPRESENTED. FOR EXAMPLE, IN PHILADELPHIA, THEY ARE ENGAGED
IN REVIEWING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A RISK ASSESSMENT TOOL WHICH WILL GUIDE YOU
TYLER RELEASE DECISIONS. THEY’RE ALSO ENSURING THAT THE COMMUNITY, WHICH HAS
QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW RACIAL BIAS THEY BE BAKED INTO THE TOOL, ARE RAISING QUESTIONS,
BECAUSE THERE ARE CONCERNS ABOUT THE FAIRNESS OF THE INSTRUMENT . DEFENDERS
ARE ALSO IN A POSITION TO SERVE AS GOOD IDEAS. IN SOUTH DAKOTA, ADJACENT TO THE SIOUX RESERVATION
AT PINE RIDGE, ONE OF THE LARGEST RESERVATIONS
OF TRIBAL NATIONS IN THE COUNTRY, THE DEFENDERS KNOW ABOUT THE PEOPLE INVOLVED
IN THIS SYSTEM, THEY ARE FAMILIAR WITH THE TRIBAL CULTURE AND VALUES AND ARE
WORKING TO CREATE COMMUNITY SERVICES THAT ARE ALTERNATIVES TO THE USE
OF INCARCERATION. MOREOVER, AS MANY HAVE ARGUED, BETTER REPRESENTATION AT THE
FRONT AND WILL HELP SOLVE THE PROBLEMS. IN MANY PLACES, STRONGER AND MORE TIMELY REPRESENTATION
AT INITIAL HEARINGS WILL BE PART OF THE SOLUTIONS TO
THE PROBLEMS OF JAIL OVERUSE. SO WE HAVE DEFENDERS THINKING ABOUT INNOVATIVE WAYS
IN WHICH THEY CAN LOOK AT REVIEW BAIL DECISIONS, COLLABORATING WITH PROSECUTORS
, REVIEWING THOSE CASES AND TRYING TO COME UP WITH WAYS TO DIVER INDIVIDUALS
OF THE SYSTEM AND RESOLVE THEIR CASES WITHOUT EXTENDED JAIL SAIS . RECEIVED
THE JAIL POPULATION RESUME TEAM IN LUCAS, TOLEDO REVIEWING THE ENTIRE
PRETRIAL JAIL POPULATION IDENTIFIED DEFENDANT TO CAN BE RELEASED OR REFERRED FOR
EXPEDITED CASE RESOLUTION . IN CONNECTICUT, THERE IS A COLLABORATIVE ONGOING
REVIEW TEAM WHERE PROSECUTORS AND DEFENDERS IT TOGETHER TO RETUNE THE REVIEW
CHARGING DOCUMENTS TO IDENTIFY DIVERSION CASES. FRANKLY, MANY PEOPLE ARE IN JAIL MUCH LONGER
THAN NECESSARY DUE TO CASE PROCESSING INEFFICIENCIES . I
WAS RECENTLY AT OUR SAFETY AND JUSTICE CHALLENGE NETWORK WHERE I HAD THE
BRONX DEFENDER AND THE BRONX PROSECUTOR AGREEING AT THE NEED TO SPEED UP
COURT PROCESSING. SO WE SEE ROCKET DOCKETS IN NEW YORK AND HARRIS AND IN SHELBY
COUNTIES, ALL WITH THE AIM OF EXPEDITING COURT PROCESSING. BUT LET’S NOT LOSE SIGHT OF THE FACT THAT
FUNDING ADEQUATE REPRESENTATION IS A PUBLIC RESPONSIBILITY,
NOT A PRIVATE ONE. MACARTHUR CAN HELP CREATE THE TABLE, IT CAN
HELP PROMOTE POLITICAL WILL. IT CAN GIVE JURISDICTIONS THE CHANCE TO EXPERIMENT
AND INNOVATE WITH POLICIES AND PRACTICES. IT CAN HELP COLLECT THE DATA AND DO THE RESEARCH
NEEDED TO DEMONSTRATE EFFICACY AND EFFECTIVENESS, BUT
IT WILL TAKE ALL OF US IN THIS ROOM AND BEYOND TO CREATE THIS MOVEMENT THAT
IS NEEDED TO CREATE A MORE FAIR , JUST, AND A QUIBBLE SYSTEM. DEFENSE BAR IS A NECESSARY PARTNER IN THE
SAFETY AND JUSTICE CHALLENGE AND NEEDS TO PARTNER
WITH ALL OF THE STAKEHOLDERS AND BE ENGAGED IN THIS PROCESS. THE PROGRESS WE HAVE SEEN IS ENCOURAGING AND
THE KIND OF RESPONSE AND ACTION WE HAVE SEEN AT THE
LOCAL LEVEL IS INSPIRING , AND WE WILL PROMOTE AN CHAMPION THIS WORK THROUGH
THE SAFETY AND JUSTICE CHALLENGE . BUT AS THE WORK OF ALL OF YOU THAT IS CRITICAL
TO MAKE OUR JUSTICE SYSTEMS MORE EFFICIENT, MORE HUMANE, AND IMPROVING
THE OUTCOMES FOR INDIVIDUALS, AND COMMUNITIES. SO WE LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUING PARTNERSHIPS
WITH ALLIES WE HAVE ALREADY ENLISTED IN OUR CAUSE AND I HOPE NEW
ONES THAT MACARTHUR IS ALWAYS ON THE LOOKOUT FOR GOOD PARTNERSHIPS AND ALLIANCES. THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST SERIOUS CHALLENGES THAT OUR COUNTRY AS A NATION
FACES TODAY . I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH YOU AND HOPE THAT
YOU WILL FOLLOW THE SAFETY AND JUSTICE CHALLENGE .
THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE]>>THANK YOU. WE ARE ACTUALLY A LITTLE BIT AHEAD OF SCHEDULE,
SO I WILL DO TWO THINGS. IF PEOPLE HAVE QUESTIONS , I THINK I CAN PERSUADE
CAROLINE AND — KAROL AND VANITE AND LAURIE TO ANSWER THE
QUESTIONS.>>I AM A FEDERAL JUDGE IN THE WESTERN DISTRICT
OF WASHINGTON. I APPLAUD YOU FOR ALL THE THINGS YOU ARE DOING TODAY, BUT
I DO HAVE A QUESTION. DOES THIS SIDE OF JUSTICE EVER TALK TO THE OTHER SIDE
OF JUSTICE ABOUT WHAT THEY — THE OTHER SIDE OF JUSTICE CAN DO TO ASSIST YOUR
PROGRAMMING? FOR EXAMPLE, I JUST HEARD THE FASTER WE PROCESS PEOPLE , THE FEWER
DAYS PEOPLE SPEND IN JAIL. THE FASTER THE MAIN JUSTICE TURNS OVER DISCOVERY,
THE FASTER PEOPLE CAN GET OUT OF JAIL. SO THERE ARE SOME SIMPLE THINGS THAT COULD
BE DONE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF MAIN JUSTICE THAT WOULD CUT DOWN ON THE COST
OF HOW MUCH PUBLIC DEFENDERS ARE COSTING.>>I AM SO GLAD KAROL AND BONITA ARE HERE
TO ANSWER THE QUESTIONS.>>THE PERSON YOU SHOULD ASK THE QUESTION
TWO IS THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL OVERSIGHT OVER OUR CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM. THE CIVIL RIGHTS DIVISION HAS JURISDICTION OVER STATE AND LOCAL TOURIST
— JUSTICE SYSTEMS.>>I THINK THE SHORT ANSWER IS YES. PART OF THAT HAPPENS WITH PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM. AS SOME OF YOU KNOW, THE THREE OF US SIT DOWN
ON A QUARTERLY , AS OFTEN AS WE CAN BASIS, WITH A GROUP OF DEFENSE ADVOCATES,
MANY OF WHOM ARE HERE , AND WE LISTEN TO THEIR CONCERNS ABOUT HOW
BOTH THE FEDERAL SYSTEM WORKS AND ALSO TO LISTEN TO THEIR SUGGESTIONS ABOUT
WHAT WE MIGHT DO TO IMPROVE THE SITUATION IN THE STATES. CERTAINLY, THE ISSUE OF DISCOVERY HAS COME
UP IN THAT FORM AND THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL WAS PRESENT
AT THE LAST MEETING WE HAD. THE GROUP IS MEETING AGAIN IN DECEMBER. BUT WE WILL SHARE THE CONCERN THAT YOU RAISED WITH OUR LEADERSHIP BECAUSE WE ARE
ONE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT AND IT IS CERTAINLY TRUE THAT WE NEED TO HAVE OUR OWN
HOUSE IN ORDER BEFORE WE ARE OUT ADVOCATING .>>I AM A STATE COURT JUDGE BUT I WANT TO
ECHO THE COMMENTS FROM THE FEDERAL COURT. I HOPE THAT MAIN JUSTICE, IN TERMS OF YOUR
STATE RELATIONS , DOES ENCOURAGE PROSECUTORS TO SAY THE ISSUE OF
TURNING DISCOVERY OVER IS A BIG ISSUE, IT’S A KEY COMPONENT TO GETTING PEOPLE
FAIRLY TREATED . WHEN THERE ARE DELAYS, IT ENDS UP HAVING PEOPLE STAY IN JAIL
, AND THIS IS PARTICULARLY UNACCEPTABLE ON LOW-LEVEL OFFENSES IN WHICH
ALL WE HAVE TO DO IS GET THE POLICE REPORT , AND WE CAN DEAL WITH THE CASE. SO THE LEADERSHIP THAT COULD COME FROM MAIN JUSTICE IS REALLY TO ENCOURAGE
STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO SAY, YOU HAVE TO FIX THIS . WE ARE IN AN AGE
WHERE THE INTERNET, COMPUTERS — THERE IS NO REAL EXCUSE TO SAY IT TAKES A
MONTH TO GET A POLICE REPORT.>>I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO TALK TO JEREMY
TRAVIS , THE INSTITUTE THAT I TALKED ABOUT , WHERE THE INNOVATION OR PROSECUTION
WILL RESIDE. THEY WILL BE LOOKING AT THESE ISSUES IN TRYING TO PROVIDE
BEST PRACTICES FOR PROSECUTORS , TO DO THOSE KINDS OF REFORM THINGS. IF YOU COULD HAVE BEEN IN THE ROOM YESTERDAY TO HEAR WHAT THESE PROSECUTORS WERE
SAYING, YOU WOULD REALLY COME OUT FEELING REASSURED THAT EVERYBODY GETS
THESE ISSUES, EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS THAT WE HAVE TO WORK MORE COLLABORATIVELY. I UNDERSTAND IS NOT UNIFORM ACROSS THE COUNTRY, BUT THEY UNDERSTAND THEY ARE
TRYING TO BECOME LEADERS ON THESE ISSUES AND THEY RECOGNIZE THEIR ROLE IN FAIRNESS
AND PEOPLE’S PERCEPTION OF FAIRNESS OF OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM. THEY RECOGNIZE THAT IT WILL IMPACT THEIR PROSECUTIONS, IF PEOPLE DON’T FEEL AS IF THE
SYSTEM IS FAIR. THESE ARE OPPORTUNITIES FOR YOU ALL TO RAISE YOUR VOICES
AND GIVE IDEAS ABOUT WHERE THEY CAN DO THINGS TO IMPROVE THE FAIRNESS OF THE
SYSTEM. VANITA: I WAS BEING A LITTLE CHEEKY ABOUT
PUNTING IT, BUT REALLY, ONE OF THE CONSEQUENCES OF US LIFTING UP THESE ISSUES
AND MAKING THEM A PRIORITY HERE IS THAT WE END UP IN CONVERSATIONS A LOT WITH
GROUPS LIKE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL’S , THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE, U.S. ATTORNEY WHICH
SETS POLICY NATIONWIDE FOR FEDERAL, CRIMINAL JUSTICE PRACTICES AND BEYOND
. THESE ARE CONVERSATIONS AROUND DISCOVERY ISSUES AND THE LIKE THAT
THEY HAVE BEEN ENGAGING IN EVEN AS THEY THINK THROUGH THE SMART JUSTICE CRIMINAL
REFORMS THEY HAVE BEEN DOING OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS. CERTAINLY, WE FEEL AN ONUS TO MAKE SURE WE
ARE TRIGGERING THESE KINDS OF CONVERSATIONS, NOT
JUST IN THE WORK WE ARE PROJECTING OUTWARD, BUT INTERNALLY, AS WE
THINK THROUGH WHAT WE ARE DOING HERE AT THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT . THE GOOD NEWS
IS, A LOT OF U.S. ATTORNEY’S OFFICES ARE LOOKING WHOLESALE AT WAYS TO LOOK AT FEDERAL
CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM WHILE ALSO DOING THE CIVIL RIGHTS WORK IN PARTNERSHIP
WITH OUR COMPONENT. SO IT IS ABSOLUTELY A NECESSARY CONVERSATION, THE DISCOVERY
ISSUES ARE ONES WHERE I HAVE BEEN IN ROOMS , AND I AM SURE OTHERS
HAVE AS WELL, WERE ATTORNEYS ARE THINKING THROUGH THESE ISSUES.>>THIS ALSO GOES TO LAURIE’S POINT ABOUT
HAVING DEFENDERS AT THE TABLE, WHEN YOU HAVE PROJECTS LIKE MACARTHUR, OR ANY OF
THE GRANTS THAT OJP ISSUES, WHEN DEFENDERS ARE PRESENT, THEY CAN RAISE THESE
ISSUES DIRECTLY WITH PROSECUTORS. THAT IS THE IMPORTANT — ONE OF THE REASONS
WHY IT IS IMPORTANT TO HAVE THEM AS PART OF ANY CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM CONVERSATION. BECAUSE PRICELESS — PRECISELY THESE ISSUES WILL STOP US FROM GETTING
PERFORM IF THEY ARE NOT RESOLVED.>>I WANT TO TAKE ANOTHER STEP BEYOND THE
JUDGES EXCELLENT QUESTIONS AND POSE ANOTHER CHALLENGING QUESTION. THAT IS WHETHER DOJ EVER UNDRESSES INTERNALLY, OR WITH DEFENSE BAR LEADERS , I WILL CALL
IT AN INCONGRUITY THAT OUR NATION’S CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY IS SET IN SUCH
A LEADERSHIP EDITION WITH RESPECT TO THE IMPROVEMENT OF INDIGENT DEFENSE . OF
COURSE, WE GO TO THE PRINCIPLE NUMBER ONE OF THE ABA PRINCIPLES OF INDEPENDENCE
, TYPICALLY SEEN AS INDEPENDENCE FROM THE JUDGES . I KNOW THERE
ARE A HOST OF POLITICAL PROBLEMS WITH THE CONCEPT OF AN INDEPENDENT DEFENDER
GENERAL, OFFICE OF INDIGENT DEFENSE FEDERALLY . I KNOW PERSONALLY I PROPOSED
IT AT 2013 WHEN ATTORNEY GENERAL HOLDER DID MEET HONOR OF PUTTING ME
ON THE PANEL TO DISCUSS WHAT WE SHOULD DO AT THE 50TH GIDEON ANNIVERSARY . NOT
ONLY COULD I GET AN INDEPENDENT DEFENDER GENERAL, I COULD NOT EVEN GET A WHITE
HOUSE COMMISSION. BUT IS THAT SOMETHING THAT EITHER HAS BEEN TALKED ABOUT
OR SHOULD BE TALKED ABOUT BETWEEN NOW AND JANUARY 19?>>THERE HAS BEEN LEGISLATION INTRODUCED IN
THE CONGRESS TO CREATE A DEFENDER OFFICE. I KNOW OUR FRIENDS OF THE CONSTITUTION PROJECT
HAVE BEEN MONITORING THE LEGISLATION. WITHOUT CONGRESSIONAL LEGISLATION, IT IS TYPICAL
FOR THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT TO CREATE SUCH AN OFFICE. IT MIGHT BE A LITTLE DIFFICULT BECAUSE IT WOULD NOT BE INDEPENDENT. AS THE JUDGE POINTED OUT, WE ARE THE CHIEF PROSECUTORS FOR THE UNITED STATES. I THINK AN INDEPENDENT OFFICE IS PROBABLY MORE IN ORDER. BUT THAT LEGISLATION NEEDS TO MAKE ITS WAY
THROUGH THE CONGRESS BEFORE WE DO ANYTHING, AND FRANKLY,
BETWEEN NOW AND THE END OF THIS ADMINISTRATION , IS HIGHLY UNLIKELY THAT THAT
WILL HAPPEN , GIVEN THAT OUR FRIENDS ON THE HILL HAVE DEPARTED UNTIL AFTER
THE ELECTION. I WILL SAY, THOSE ARE THE KINDS OF THINGS THAT I’M HOPING YOU
ALL TALK ABOUT THIS AFTERNOON WHEN YOU ARE IN GROUP SESSIONS DEVISING AN AGENDA
FOR THE NEXT ADMINISTRATION. BECAUSE THERE IS UNFINISHED BUSINESS. THIS MAY BE ONE OF THOSE IDEAS THAT A FUTURE ADMINISTRATION IS WILLING TO STEP UP
AND TAKE ON.>>QUICK QUESTION, IF I COULD FRAME MY QUESTION
IN THIS WAY. I HEARD IF YOU PRINT EVERYTHING FROM THE INTERNET ONTO PAPER,
IT WOULD REACH FROM HERE TO THE SUN AND BACK. THERE IS THAT MUCH INFORMATION ONLINE. THE QUESTION IS THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE AND WHAT WE ARE DOING
WITH IT. AS I’M LISTENING TO THIS PANEL, THERE IS A LOT OF INFORMATION ON HOW
WE CAN COLLABORATE MORE. MY QUESTION IS HOW WE ACTUALLY DO IT. HOW DO WE PUT ACTION TO THESE THINGS. AS A LINE ITEM PUBLIC DEFENDER IN THE COURTROOM
IN FRONT OF THE JUDGES, I UNDERSTAND FROM THE MACARTHUR FOUNDATION THERE
ARE TABLES WHERE FOLKS ARE HAVING THESE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT DALE, JUSTICE,
ALL THESE ITEMS, BUT I’M NOT HEARING ON THE FRONT LINES , TO BE ABLE TO
ARTICULATE THESE THINGS TO JUDGES, CLIENTS , AND ANYTHING ELSE ON A POLICY LEVEL. SO MY QUESTION IS HOW WE DO THESE THINGS WE ARE TALKING ABOUT, ARE THEIR
JURISDICTION THAT ARE DOING THESE THINGS IN WAYS THAT ARE SUCCESSFUL AT THOSE
OF US IN CHARLOTTE COULD IMITATE, SO WE COULD DO IT THERE AS WELL?>>WHAT MACARTHUR HAS BEEN ABLE TO DO IS IDENTIFY
THE JURISDICTIONS WHERE THEY HAVE ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THEY HAVE A PROBLEM
, THAT IT REQUIRES A SYSTEMIC APPROACH , AND THAT ALL OF THE PARTNERS HAVE
AN EQUAL STAKE IN SOLVING THE PROBLEM. IT IS VERY MUCH DRIVEN BY LOOKING AT THE DATA,
WITH THE DRIVERS OF JAIL INCARCERATION ARE , LOOKING AND BEST
PRACTICES, AND THEN MOVING TO IMPLEMENT THEM . I DON’T KNOW THAT THERE IS
ANYTHING MAGICAL ABOUT THE WAY THAT IS ACCOMPLISHED EXCEPT TO BE AT THE TABLE,
AND THAT IS AT LEAST THE WAY IN WHICH MACARTHUR HAS FUNDED THE SAFETY AND
JUSTICE CHALLENGE JURISDICTIONS, AND THAT WE PROVIDED INCENTIVES. THERE IS STILL A CHALLENGE WITH RESPECT TO THE DEFENSE BAR ‘S PARTICIPATION IN THESE
ACTIVITIES, AND MORE IMPORTANTLY, COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT IN AN AUTHENTIC AND MEANINGFUL
WAY. YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE THE TRAINING AND TOOLS TO SUPPORT THEM TO
BE A TABLE AND PARTICIPATE, WHICH IS WHY WE ARE PARTNERING WITH NLAA DA, TO PROVIDE
THAT SUPPORT, AND TO PROVIDE INFORMATION ON HOW TO OVERCOME THOSE CHALLENGES. IN THE END, IT COMES DOWN TO RELATIONSHIPS AND INTERACTIONS AND DEVELOPING
THAT TRUST. THAT IS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE ASKED IN THESE WORKING GROUPS
ENGAGED IN REFORM TO REGULARLY MEET, TO HAVE TEAMS , TO HAVE ALL THE VOICES
HEARD. IT IS A LONG SLOG. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT SYSTEMIC CHANGE, NOT DROPPING
IN PARTICULAR TOOLS , MODEL DEMONSTRATION PROJECT. ALL WE CAN DO AT MACARTHUR, WHICH IS WHY WE
TOOK THIS APPROACH, IS TO ENSURE THAT DEFENSE BAR IS
AT THE TABLE. AND TO SOMEHOW REMINDED EVERYONE THAT THEY SHARE THE SAME
PRINCIPLES AND VALUES AROUND A FAIR AND JUST EQUITABLE SYSTEM OF JUSTICE. KAROL: I HAVE A COUPLE OF SUGGESTIONS. THEY PUT OUT SMART SOLICITATIONS REGULARLY. THEY SOMETIMES ALTERNATE WHICH ONE IS SMART
DEFENSE, WHICH IS SMART PROSECUTION. YOU COULD DO SOMETHING INNOVATIVE AND PARENT
WITH YOUR PROSECUTORS AND SUBMIT A PROGRAM, IDEA. THAT IS WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO, SPARK INNOVATION. WE ALSO HAVE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AVAILABLE
TO YOU. WHAT I HEAR YOU SAYING IS HOW DO YOU CREATE THE TABLE? WE KEEP SAYING, GET EVERYONE AT THE TABLE, BUT THE QUESTION IS HOW YOU
CAN GET EVERYONE TOGETHER. IF YOU NEED OUTSIDE ASSISTANCE TO GET PEOPLE TO HAVE
A CONVERSATION AND BUILD A NETWORK, OUR DIAGNOSTIC CENTER AT THE OFFICE
OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS, WE GET INVITED IN TO HELP PEOPLE WITH THE SYSTEMIC
PROBLEMS AND DIAGNOSE THE ISSUE, COME UP WITH DIFFERENT SOLUTIONS FOR YOU ALL. AGAIN, THAT IS AT NO COST TO THE INSTITUTION APPLYING FOR HELP ON US. I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO TALK TO BETSY OR PR IYA, AND THEY CAN GET TO THOSE THINGS.>>TIME FOR ONE MORE QUESTION.>>YESTERDAY AT THE JUDICIAL ROUNDTABLE, THERE
WAS A CONSENSUS THAT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT COULD BE DONE FOR RIGHT TO COUNSEL
WAS TO ENSURE THAT EVERYONE BEING REPRESENTED AT THEIR FIRST APPEARANCE
HAD AN ATTORNEY . TO DISCUSSION, THOUGH, INVOLVED THE CULTURAL CHANGE NECESSARY
TO MAKE THAT OCCUR. PLACES LIKE NEW YORK CITY, IT IS COMMON. THERE ARE PLACES IN MICHIGAN WHERE IT DOESN’T HAPPEN AT ALL. THE WAY YOU HAVE TO CHANGE THAT , I THINK,
THE CONSENSUS WAS , WAS BOTH IN AN INDIVIDUAL LEVEL, BUT ALSO
AT THE 30,000 FOOT LEVEL. I’M WONDERING WHAT THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE CAN
DO TO HELP US DOWN ON THE LOWER LEVEL RAISE THE DISCUSSION SO THAT WE CAN
CHANGE THE CULTURE OF THE JUDICIARY AND THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM GENERALLY
TO ENSURE THAT THAT SIMPLE CHANGE OF HAVING AN ATTORNEY REPRESENTING EVERYBODY
THAT WATSON FOR AN ARRAIGNMENT, FIRST APPEARANCE , HAS THAT OPPORTUNITY. BECAUSE THAT WOULD CHANGE ALMOST EVERYTHING IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM,
STARTING WITH ALL OF THOSE PEOPLE IN JAIL AND DO NOT NEED TO BE. KAROL: THE PRETRIAL DETENTION WERE GOING ON
IS TRYING TO DO THAT VERY THING. AGAIN, WE HAVE LIMITED RESOURCES, BUT THROUGH
THE NETWORK, WE HAVE BEEN MAKING A BIG DIFFERENCE, AND THAT IS WHY WE ARE PUSHING
THE RISK ASSESSMENT TOOLS , SO YOU CAN COME UP WITH AN OBJECTIVE WAY OF
DETERMINING WHO REALLY NEEDS TO BE HELPED. I ENCOURAGE YOU TO TALK TO BETSY ABOUT THE
PRETRIAL INITIATIVE WORK HAPPENING. IF YOU ARE NOT A PART OF IT, HOW YOU CAN BECOME
A PART OF THAT WORK.>>LET ME ALSO SAY, SOMETIMES IT IS JUST USEFUL
TO USE US, AS VANITA SAID, LIMITED TOOLS, BUT ONE THING WE HAVE IS A
VOICE. YOU HEARD THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL TALK, ALL OF US HERE TO WE ARE HAPPY
TO COME OUT TO JURISDICTIONS OR SEND SOMEBODY OUT TO JUST SIT DOWN WITH FOLKS
AND SAY, THIS IS WHY IT IS IMPORTANT. YOU HAVE PEOPLE IN YOUR COMMUNITY , YOUR LOCAL
DEFENDER’S OFFICE, I’M SURE, CAN COME IN AND TALK ABOUT WHY IT
IS IMPORTANT AND WHY IT IS WORTH THE INVESTMENT. KAROL HAS PROVIDED A LOT OF TOOLS THAT CAN
HELP PERSUADE DATA AND EVIDENCE THAT CAN HELP PERSUADE JURISDICTIONS
THAT THERE IS ACTUALLY AN ECONOMIC VALUE TO DOING IT, AS WELL AS A JUSTICE
AND FAIRNESS VALUE TO DOING IT. SO WE ARE GOING TO TAKE A VERY SHORT BREAK
. I KNOW WE HAVE MOVED RIGHT FROM LUNCH TO THE PANEL. THEN WE ARE GOING TO COME BACK AND WORK IN
BREAKOUT SESSIONS. I WANT TO SAY THIS IS THE END OF THE OPEN
SESSION OF OUR MEETING, SO WE WANT TO THANK THE MEDIA , OUR FRIENDS IN
THE MEDIA WHO HAVE BEEN THERE , BUT EXCUSE THEM FROM THE PROCEEDINGS AT THIS
POINT. IF YOU WOULD ALL PLEASE TRY TO BE BACK AT FIVE MINUTES PAST 2:00,
WE WILL RESUME. THANKS. [APPLAUSE]

You May Also Like

About the Author: Oren Garnes

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *