in 2009 i've been through two election
cycles the city of bexley has always
been very gracious to me
and so i want to thank the organizers my
harmony project sister jyn mormon
robinson for inviting me
and i'm looking forward to dialoguing
with everyone tonight
wonderful thank you so much and um
judge beatty blount thank you so much
for joining us
if you could tell us about yourself
thank you for having me also
um my name's laurel beatty blount
i um actually grew up very close to
bexley in the east moore area um in
between
maine and dale um i went to
st catharines elementary school one
through five then went
to columbus school for girls six through
twelve
graduated from there and went to spelman
college in atlanta georgia
from there i went to law school at
vanderbilt university school of law in
nashville
after law school in this order i did
big firm medium firm small firm and then
went to be the director of legislative
affairs in the ohio secretary of state's
office
who at the time was jennifer bruner a
very exciting time in my life i went
from
applying the law to be on the side of
making the law
during a presidential year um
so i thank you for being here i was
on the common please general division
bench for 10 years from 2009
um until 2018 when i ran in
2018 for election to the 10th district
court of appeals
and so i went from general division
having adult
criminal and civil over 15 000
to the 10th district court of appeals
that all of the courts essentially
appeal to
so now i have criminal adult and
juvenile
i have all civil probate domestic
relations
as well as appeals from administrative
agencies that often time are from around
the state
um because the administrative agency
that they're dealing with is actually in
columbus so
that gives the 10th district
jurisdiction over those cases
i have been active for a very long time
um and very passionate about voting
and why people should vote for judges
in particular i have been in the last
several months been doing
a lot of education um about the court
system
itself what court does what and who goes
where
i mean it's something that i very much
enjoy because i think the public
needs to know and be informed voters
about who their judges are
absolutely um i had the privilege of
actually
having a mutual friend share some
education you gave
in the last 24 hours on oh yeah all the
people in our lives who
who are elected so that was that's
wonderful thank you so much
um so for the community i want you all
to know that
um the chat is now closed but the q
a option is there um so we do have some
prepared questions and um it's near
the the last portion of today um
we will open it up to um asking some of
those questions that the community
gives us as well um thank you so much
so with that being said good afternoon
everyone my name is monika williams and
i am
the co-moderator with miss becky guzman
and we are so excited that um jen
and monique came up with the idea to
create a platform for us to have a
community conversation
to help raise the awareness of the
justice system and how
systematic racism impacts the lives of
the people that get arrested
and then having to navigate the justice
system
so with that being said our first
question
is directed to um judge coecroft
ma'am if you could please explain
briefly
how a police encounter that results
in a criminal charge moves through the
court system
from mayor's court to the court of
appeals
please include anything around
arraignment bond
motion hearing trial the plea and the
sentence
and then when you finish if either uh
judge blound or
mr shannon would like to weigh in on
that we would appreciate it
well thank you so much that is a packed
question
because it is a fairly lengthy process
although
um it seems that it could be um move
quickly or robustly
so i will speak specifically from the
experience of working in the general
division the court of common pleas and
how that process works
so once someone is arrested um
there is generally the opportunity for
them to be summoned in for an
arraignment or if they are arrested they
can be held in custody
uh and then arraigned there are certain
days on which
arraignments take place uh in the court
of common pleas
and the municipal court those
arraignments can be handled by one of
the 17 judges in the court
or the other option is to have the
arraignment handled by
our magistrates generally magistrates
handle
civil matters with permission of the
attorneys who are
handling a case on behalf of litigants
but we also give them responsibility
of managing arraignments arraignment is
the formal process through which
a defendant is made aware of the charges
against him
or her and he or she then has the
opportunity to enter a plea generally
that plea is a plea of not guilty
and that is really what triggers uh the
whole process
of getting before a judge at that
arraignment
there is a bond that is set based on the
nature and circumstances of the crimes
charge the allegations against the
defendant the state of ohio
um prosecutes all criminal matters
through a county prosecutor of course
here in franklin county
that's the franklin county prosecutor's
office but every criminal matter
is prosecuted in the name of the state
of ohio and so the state may make a
request
to the judge or the magistrate regarding
what bond it believes
should be imposed based on the level of
the offense
in the state of ohio there are five
felony levels and probably mr shannon
may talk about misdemeanors but i'm
gonna focus on what i do with my court
there are five felony levels
one through five one is the most serious
five is the least serious and then based
on that range based on a defendant's
prior
uh history if there is a history of
context with the justice system
there is a determination that is made
regarding what bonds should be said
there is something called a recognizance
fund which is essentially
the defendant promising that he or she
will appear
when required to appear uh we are
trusting them essentially
to show up when they when we give that
next uh court date
there's something that's called a surety
bond or an appearance fund and it
requires
a defendant to put down a percentage
through a bail bondsman to ensure that
they will appear
um at future proceedings so that all
happens at the arraignment process
where that bond is set a plea is entered
from there we begin
kind of the trial process and when a
matter is then assigned to a judge
there is what is called the exchange of
discovery that is really the heartbeat
of the case the information
that the state believes will prove that
the defendant is guilty beyond a
reasonable doubt
uh there is a criminal rule criminal
rule 16 that requires the state and the
defendant to exchange
on that information so that each side is
aware of everything that
that is at play as the process uh moves
through
um the system once the parties have
exchanged
all of that information once each side
has an understanding
of the other side's respective positions
that's the time during which
the lawyers begin to discuss plea
negotiations
if that is even an option plea
negotiations are
solely at the discretion of the
prosecutor
or the state of ohio it can decide if it
wants to
uh reduce charges um let a defendant
plead to a lesser included offense
let's say if it's indicted as a felony
of the first degree which is the most
serious
the state could offer the opportunity to
perhaps plead to a felony of the second
degree
that is totally within the purview of
the prosecutor
neither the defense lawyer or the court
even has the ability to
influence the state to offer a plea
agreement
and so we start to see initially what
the balance of power is
as we are working through um the justice
system and so those plea negotiations
take place the court is always available
to
um assist the parties with looking at
the case from both perspectives but
really
i cannot require or persuade a defendant
to take a plea offer
now generally what i do in my courtroom
is if there has been a plea
offer i will review the plea offer with
a defendant
on the record there is something
powerful about hearing
all of the potential consequences um if
that defendant takes a plea offer
if he or she decides to exercise a
constitutional right to jury trial
hearing all of that information from the
judge and it's my responsibility
uh to ensure that all of that
information um the defendant understands
and that if they decide to take a plea
or enter a plea
that please made knowingly intelligently
and voluntarily so it's my custom that i
will review a plea
offer on the record and i will ask the
defendant is it your
decision to either accept or reject the
plea offer and then
of course to exercise your
constitutional right to jury trial if
that defendant decides that he or she
wants to accept the plea offer
we then move into accepting the plea
there are a series of questions
that i am required to ask a defendant
under criminal rule 11 to ensure that he
or she is again entering a plea
knowingly
intelligently and voluntarily generally
that process takes about 10 to 15
minutes where i
ask are they satisfied with their lawyer
do they understand the charge against
them
what's the highest level of educational
attainment are they currently on any
drugs or
alcohol or anything that might impair
their ability um to enter a plea i go
through all of the possible
penalties if i accept that plea um
from prison to probation if they go to
prison i explain
what parole or post-release control
looks like and then i discuss any
ancillary consequences
that might be attendant to that offense
in reference to fines driver's license
suspensions
any other ancillary issues that might
arise and once i go through that
colloquy
if they tell me they want to enter a
guilty plea i'll accept the plea i'll
enter a finding of guilt
um the lawyers have the opportunity to
decide whether or not they want the
court to order
what's called a pre-sentence
investigation report that report tells
me
all about a defendant's family
background mental health background
use of drugs or other substances
employment background
the facts of the case from the from the
perspective of the defendant
and from the perspective of law
enforcement i take all of that
information
i then reconcile it with the factors for
felony sentencing that are outlined
under ohio law there is generally a
range
of sentences that is associated with
each felony level
um in some instances prison may be
mandatory based
on what the legislature um has written
and so
there is a measure of discretion that
the court has in determining
what the sentence will be and that's
where the pre-sentence reporting those
factors for felony sentencing
um come into play if a defendant is
convicted
at trial he or she exercises that right
to jury trial
and they are then convicted um found
guilty
once i sentence them i then have to
notify them of their appellate rights
anyone convicted at trial
has an automatic right of appeal to
judge baby blunt's court the 10th
appellate district
i notify them that the notice of appeal
will be filed the council will be
appointed
if they can't afford counsel that they
will get copies of all records
associated with proceedings
those will be given free if they cannot
afford those
uh records and those transcripts and
then i ask if they need for the court to
appoint counsel
and i know that is a lot of information
that i've given in a very compressed
period of time um and i'm sure that my
colleague judge baby blunt and mr
shannon are going to add context
to that conversation but there are a
series of steps
that occur and the judge if he or she is
not the arraigning judge
does not get involved until almost at
the end of the process
and the supreme court of ohio has said
that from beginning indictment
uh to resolution it should take about
six months to resolve a criminal case
if it's a murder case that's not
realistic um from for some mid-level
felonies
that's not realistic and so the judge
has the responsibility of ensuring
that these things are coming um before
the court
in a timely fashion and sometimes it's a
balancing
act i have an active docket of about 268
criminal cases
that's not counting the civil cases and
so every day
i am managing or trying to figure out
how i can do what i need to do
in the most efficient way so i'm going
to stop talking because i feel like i've
said a lot in a
in a short period of time it was very
informative though thank you very much
um mr shannon did you have anything that
you would like
to add to that um response which was
indeed very thorough
well it was brilliant as well i mean
that is probably the best summation that
i've ever heard
of that process from the felony level
all the way up through appeal
so i hope that was recorded somewhere
because that's very
a very in-depth discussion what i can
add
is this as far as from a mayor's court
perspective
when someone gets a traffic ticket first
of all what we're dealing with are
misdemeanor offenses okay
we're talking about misdemeanors of the
first second third and fourth degree
minor misdemeanor offenses and what's
also called unclassified misdemeanors
unclassified misdemeanors and minor
misdemeanor offenses do not have any
possibility of jail
the misdemeanors of the first degree
deal with up to six
months in jail and a thousand dollar
fine misdemeanors of the second degree
convoluted to 90 days in jail
and or 750 fine and this one usually the
third degree can involve up to 60 days
in jail
and or a 500 fine and an m4
can involve up to 30 days in jail and or
a 250
fine so when someone receives a traffic
citation
um for say ovi it's a misdemeanor of the
first degree
or the what i'll call less serious
criminal offenses they're still serious
but they're not as serious as felony
offenses
those are also in the lines of assaults
domestic violence disorderly conduct
menacing those types of criminal
offenses now
mayor's courts cannot
have jurisdiction over certain types of
offenses multiple offense
ovis where there's been a prior
conviction within the last
10 years and also they can have no
jurisdiction
over domestic violence cases or cases
where a protection order may be obtained
that has to be all filed in the
municipal court from the start
but by and large once a person receives
a traffic ticket
or a criminal complaint they are
hailed into the mayor's court as the
judge indicated that is their
arraignment their initial appearance and
they can
decide what they want to do with their
case by entering a guilty plea not
guilty plea or no contest play
now if they do choose to have a trial in
mayor's court
mayor's courts are not courts of record
okay so their decision is not final
so as long as the person requests a new
trial within 10 calendar days from the
date of their
uh conviction they get a second bite of
the apple
it's transferred to the franklin county
municipal court and the proceedings
start
all over then
it goes through the municipal court
process as well
it can it can involve the arraignment
process again getting set before
a trial judge and going through that
process that the judge mentioned earlier
which
the supreme court has indicated takes
about six months
for traffic and or criminal cases
in any event once it proceeds to that
point
their avenue should they choose to
challenge the decision of the trial
court
in the municipal court is to the court
of appeals
so that's a kind of a quick version as
to
how it would uh proceed through mayor's
court
but uh i'll let the judge take over from
there as far as from the court of
appeals
and in your response will you include
um is the individual incarcerated
or imprisoned or general during this
process
very good question because six months
that you're referencing are they
in in jail um by and large no they're
not there are some cases where they
would be
i will say in a mayor's court situation
it is a rarity that someone is actually
incarcerated now every mayor's court is
a little different
upon arrest there are some mayor's
courts
that will not require an individual to
post a bond
in order to avoid being incarcerated on
a
on a jailable offense and going to an
arraignment process
many of the mayor's courts such as
bexley
will summons the person to come into the
mayor's court where they'll have their
arraignment
and i think there's that is for a couple
of reasons one
i think it's probably a very smart thing
to do because mayor's courts do not meet
as frequently
as say the municipal court court of
record that meets
you know every day of the week and so
someone that might get arrested
on a mayor's court case they may be
unable to
post bond and if that's the case i mean
there's usually they have to be afforded
a hearing not usually they have to be
afforded a hearing within two days
but it can someone could be
you know wrongfully detained for a
period of time given the fact
that the mayor's courts some of these
courts are very tiny
and they don't meet as often and it's
hard to get them
into special sessions most of the
mayor's course in franklin county we
don't have that
issue we can bring someone out we have
police departments that are able to
transport folks but
um again by and large most of the cases
as far as coming through the process
the person is out of jail and
the bond issue doesn't really become a
question there are some
jurisdictions that will require they
have a bond schedule
so that when someone is arrested of a
certain level of offense
they're required to post a certain
amount of bond on a pre-determined bond
schedule and if they do
that they are not taken into custody and
slated at the jail
and then they just simply come to the
next mayor's court date for their
for their arraignment did that answer
your question
yes it did thank you very much judge
beatty blind
could you please talk to us about the
appeals court
um the the appeals court is quite a bit
different
than what's called the trial courts
which would be common please general
division
and municipal court and it's different
in that
what happens is that if someone
disagrees or thinks that there was an
error made in the trial court those
initial courts
then they can appeal to the 10th
district and the 10th district has to do
something with their appeal
then they both sides have the
opportunity to file a brief
and then if they want they can get an
oral argument
and an oral argument each side only gets
15 minutes
and where trial courts sit just one
judge at a time
appellate courts sit in three judge
panels
so whichever two agree is how the case
is decided after that
um is where a big difference comes in
because you've heard of course
of the ohio supreme court um the ohio
supreme court gets to choose
what cases it accepts and i think they
only accept five to six percent of the
cases that they are asked to review
so for that reason a lot of times the
cases
um stop at the appellate court level
i uh want to thank you all for doing an
incredible job
of conveying the really how a case
proceeds um
that that was awesome so i
i know that we're just gonna go right
jump right into
the nitty-gritty here um one of the
questions that we were thinking about
um is the charges that have come about
because of protests for people
advocating for black lives matter
um as a public defender i can say i've
seen firsthand
people charged with curfew offenses riot
obstructing official business um
disorderly conduct amongst others
um jaywalk violations so i
i i i guess i will ask if any one of you
have a burning desire first to
respond to what do you think about these
charges that have been
brought
and i realized as an attorney i realized
that
if a case is before you you can't
comment on that particular case but
just in general um if you could
give our community an idea of um
what you think about those charges well
becky i'll chime in
just because i can talk to you about a
recent experience which has been a very
positive experience for me personally
and professionally with respect to this
issue
um and for the city that i represent and
that's the city of groveport
i will tell you this that first of all
it is very important
that the first amendment right be
be permitted so that individuals have a
right to
protest issues such as this
you know the whole idea of petitioning
the government for a redress of
grievances
and all the that is the core of this of
this process of ours and
its core of the founding of our nation
obviously
so in in grove port we were contacted by
a resident who
also happens to be a pastor pastor
crenshaw
and he has a church out on the east side
of columbus reynoldsburg area
but he's a resident of the city of
groveport and he indicated
on a facebook site that he was planning
on doing
uh a protest um a black lives matter
protest and he wanted
the opportunity to avail himself of his
own city to be able to
congregate and and be able to express
themselves
and so what our department did and our
mayor did which i think was very
uh effective is they reached out to
pastor crenshaw
and said would you like to meet with us
and just give us an
idea of what you would like to do and
how we can help facilitate
your first amendment rights for you and
he was very receptive to it now
initially what they had talked about
doing was going down a median
strip grass strip on state route 317
in grove work which would have been a
very dangerous thing for the
participants and he understood after we
explained that to him
and so what we indicated was you know
why don't
why don't you consider
using our main street um you can have
folks gather together
and you can you know do a staging
area at the larger parking lot near
kroger's there
and then you're obviously you can do
whatever you would like
but we will assist you if you want to go
down on main street and actually went
all the way out to our rec
center and by all accounts it was a very
positive process
but it it involved communication and it
involved people get coming together and
just saying okay
people have a right to their first
amendment rights
and is there a way that we can work
together so that these things can happen
without
anyone getting hurt and so from my
perspective
i thought that was a very successful
situation they've actually
had two um two events
that they conducted um in the last
couple of months
and uh you know it's it's been very a
very positive experience
i think as a prosecutor
you know yes i have an obligation to
prosecute
offenses but we also have to keep in
mind
individuals have a right to exercise
their constitutional rights
and you have to have a violation of law
in order for there to be a prosecution
so
with respect to the charges that you've
indicated assuming that there was
probable cause to file those charges and
to proceed with prosecution
that's one thing but if individuals are
just
exercising their constitutional rights
those don't rise to a violation of law
and should not be prosecuted
and becky becky i can't um
comment on specific cases because they
could
be appealed to my court but i will say
uh just make an observation um
generally about what i've noticed
happening across the country
is that um you know as mr shannon stated
it is completely uh lawful to exercise
your first amendment right
but there's a couple places where i
think
some people think things go wrong and
those are when the protests um
are accompanied by people who are doing
illegal things um and also
when people who are lawfully protesting
feel as though they are being mistreated
and or treated differently than
people who are protesting for or against
something else
that's exactly right and i i absolutely
echo
judge betty blunt's um sentiments and i
think you know we'll just take a dive
i'll take a dive off the deep end since
we're talking about systemic
um institutionalized racism and more
specifically what i would say
is that when you think about the
protests
associated with um regulations
um associated with covet 19
um was there the level of
outcry regarding those events
and any um alleged
criminal activity and i think that's
where the challenge arises and why these
kinds of conversations become
necessary because as judge beatty blount
said um the appearance of inequity
creates a level of hostility and a level
of frustration
um i certainly advocate for the right of
law
enforcement to do the jobs that they are
sworn to do
but i think where people are frustrated
is that there is the appearance
that there is a level of inequity about
who is challenged
and when they are challenged and how
they are challenged and i think that the
second part of that
conversation is um the question was
framed in the context of
protests associated with black lives
matter and as judge babylon has pointed
out
are those illegal acts associated with
that particular movement
are are those actors persons who have at
a certain level
infiltrated to create a perception that
the larger
movement um engages in criminal
behavior so i think we have to just kind
of
call a thing a thing and be willing to
say that there
are some glaring inconsistencies that
give
people pause i i think also
you can't talk about this without
looking at the history of it
and and i understand a lot of people
don't want to look at the history of it
but
i would argue to you and anybody
else that throughout history how
how black people come to you today um
is with the stories of our parents
and our grandparents and our
great-grandparents
where the law particularly the
constitution
has not been applied equally to black
people
um you can go i mean you start with we
the people
did not mean everybody it meant white
male landowners
it left out a lot of white males even
initially um and then you can just go
through down through like you know the
first amendment
we are um we admire martin luther king
jr now
but don't forget a lot of the things
that he was saying
in exercising his first amendment right
landed him on the wrong side of j edgar
hoover's
um list um you know you talked about
things like
the sixth amendment that guarantees you
know the speeding trial and an impartial
jury and confronting your witnesses and
all of that
but we grew up with the stories of like
emmett till
that some really bad things happened to
him
for whistling at someone which as far as
i know
has never been codified as a crime in
the first place
much less him being afforded all of
those rights that are in the sixth
amendment
so you come to modern times
and you look at the protests going on
around the country
and when people feel that they are
exercising that first amendment right
that they
learned about in school but they see
another group
that's treated differently for doing the
same thing and that's where things go
wrong
thank you for those very thorough
responses
um i'm gonna move on to our next
question which is
related to your responses to the
previous question
and um i'll start with judge koproff
and then i would we would appreciate
everyone to respond to this question
do you believe there is bias at all
levels of the legal system
from deciding who to arrest what to
charge
and the length of sentences
what can be done to ensure a
non-discriminatory system
is there anything that can be done to
ensure that
ma'am well i think the the most
important thing for me to say is as
judges what i feel necessarily
doesn't really matter um we are taught
that our emotions are not to
influence any decisions that we make i
think what is more telling is that
statistically
we know that there is a level of bias
that exists
um in the justice system uh just a few
months ago our chief justice maureen
o'connor wrote
a missive what i call a missive it was a
statement that she issued on july 4th
that chronicled the history
of inequity in the criminal justice
system
um i just participated in the judicial
conference on last week and judge donald
who's a member of the 6th circuit
talked about inequities that exist just
based on
skin complexion and skin tone
and i'm sure that the audience members
have read
professor alexander's book and she goes
through
all of the inequities that exists
regarding persons who are
stopped um persons who are arrested
how charges are indicted how sentences
are imposed so there there are
documented instances um where
black individuals receive longer
sentences
and really if you think about it that
was kind of the genesis of the war on
drugs
and what we saw in terms of minimum
mandatory sentencing
um related to the crack cocaine epidemic
and the whole
evolution of two strikes you're out in
georgia
and three strikes you're out in
california and those lifetime tales that
were created
when we know that that um scourge
in the community was primarily
concentrated in the african-american
community conversely
if you look here in recent times and the
opioid
epidemic um there is now a leaning
towards treatment as rehabilitation
versus sending people to prison
and we know just based on the population
that there is a
huge um constituency of persons who are
dealing with the opioid epidemic
who live in suburban communities and i
actually was
at um a continuing legal education event
and the chairman of the um criminal
committee in the senate spoke
and he was talking about legislation
that was coming through that would
address the opioid epidemic
and he said he's a white gentleman i'll
say that candidly
and he said that his neighbor's son was
having a challenge with opioid addiction
and he said i just couldn't believe that
he was facing this challenge he grew up
in such a nice family
and there was a level of compassion that
he expressed
associated with knowing someone who was
facing that
crisis very specifically and so i think
that
yes it's documented that there are
levels of bias
that exist even though the law requires
in terms of sentencing
that judges treat similarly situated
defendants
similarly when we are imposing sentences
but if you look at um how the
disparities exist
for sentencing someone for crack cocaine
versus someone who
possesses powder cocaine there are
inherent
uh inequities that were written into law
that didn't give judges a lot of
discretion
and i could go on but i definitely would
like to hear from the other panelists so
my answer is
not based on what i feel but
statistically
what we know what has been documented uh
around the country
is that those inequities exist and i
would also encourage all of those who
are listening
to take a look at a report from 1999
that was completed by the
ohio supreme court dealing with racial
fairness and it documents
clearly all of those inequities
that exist not just for litigants but
for lawyers and how they perceive that
they are treated
for judges who are ethnically diverse
and how
they perceive that they are treated so i
would encourage everyone to take a look
at that report it is on
the ohio supreme court's website
i i would say um
that bias can come in
in many points in the process that
judge ko croft outlined and
if you look at that process it builds on
itself
essentially so for example
if you have someone with a bias or a
prejudice
that is the
telling the 911 what they believe to be
true who is then
telling the police that same story
and so that can affect even what the
police are thinking
when they show up to wherever
something's going on
also another example is
for example if um there is a
bias or racism in how someone is
indicted
once you go through that discovery
process that judge cocroft was talking
about
that person who was indicted
under the darkness of bias is in a
different bargaining positions once the
plea bargaining starts
so they're starting from a completely
different position and
and even trying to negotiate through the
system
so and the other thing that i want to
point out
is that you know don't forget the
criminal justice system is more
than just the police the criminal
justice system
is the police um it includes
the police chief and the safety director
that are
appointed by the mayor who is elected um
the sheriff that runs the jail um talk
about
how people are treated while they're
incarcerated the sheriff
is elected you talk about prosecutors
you know in franklin county of course
you
can't have one person you ever case so
you have an elected prosecutor that then
hires assistant prosecutors
who that prosecutor is and who that
prosecutor hires
matters because it's going to influence
how they are going to see each case it's
going to influence
who they indict how they indict them and
what for
it's going to even influence what jurors
they strike off of a panel
um and then you also have judges
judges are making decisions not only
about sentencing
but they're making decisions about what
evidence comes in what doesn't
who can testify into what um and lots of
lots of different things so it's a lot
more than the police it's the police
it's the judges it's the prosecutors
um it's the sheriffs that are all
involved
and if any of them have any type of bias
at any point it can lead to a negative
outcome
or an unfair outcome
i concur wholeheartedly
and what i'd like to say is
focus on what i can do as a prosecutor
because i think that both the judges
have very
adequately discussed does it exist and
clearly it does
okay so we know this what
can i do as a prosecutor well there's
two avenues here
one is the first is
and i've never had this happen to me and
i've been prosecuting since 1994 so i
guess
26 years that is the prosecutor
knows that during the charging process
that racism was involved
okay i i've never had that experience
but
if a prosecutor knows that
our obligation the oath that we take
is what not to get a conviction of the
case it's to do
justice right so we take an
oath and if you take that as seriously
as you
should then if you learn of that you
have to
act and you have to act immediately
and that is you dismiss the case or you
don't even let the charges be filed if
you're in a position to do that
okay that's the first one
the second situation is let's say you
don't
know you haven't been told
you haven't seen or observed anything
which causes you to conclude okay this
something from the start was
wrong here but during this process
you you evaluate the case
and remember what your oath is as a
prosecutor you have to
promote justice so you look at this
and if things aren't adding up or if the
case is just a very poor case
if there is a lack of doc
documentation on the part of the police
department if there's something awry
here
that one of the judges spoke earlier
about the you know the prosecution
that's where we should utilize our
discretion and talk about
plea bargaining the case um
you know by and large i think that
most of my colleagues on the
prosecutor's side of the aisle
are extremely
fair and and do their very best justice
you have to take that oath seriously and
within this context you
always have to be on guard
it is your job to protect
everyone okay everyone
and there are those instances where
someone is wrongly accused
or there are two sides to every story
and the story
that you're hearing from one side just
isn't making sense
and sure you can say things like well i
don't believe i can prove the case
beyond reasonable doubt
and those kinds of considerations but
you're not in it just to simply
put a notch in your handle and get a
conviction
you know that's not what we signed up
for
so that's all i can add to that hey
becky
if i if i could add um you know i think
to the second part of your question
about what people can do
um i think a lot of people have a
misconception that in order
to um make any type of change
they have to do something really big
like they have to join
the police force or they have to run for
judge sure all of those
things are great but as i was outlining
i was telling you all of the people
involved in the criminal justice system
who are elected
so you can implement change by
educating yourself about the candidates
and voting for the candidate
that believes in the same thing that you
believe in
the other thing that you can do is
answer your jury summons
you have no clue how many times i have
been called
by friends trying to get out of jury
service which i'm never gonna do
tell you um but because a lot of
people don't realize that
especially in a criminal case if a
defendant decides
to have a jury trial it's the jury
that decides guilty or not guilty
what happens is the jurors are picked
they go through a process you know
opening statement
and hearing witnesses seeing exhibits to
closing
statements and then they get jury
instructions and the jury instructions
have the law
in them and what the judge is doing is
saying okay
you've listened during this trial decide
what and who you believe
from the trial and then apply that to
the law that's in these jury
instructions
and you 12 people on the jury
unanimously decide if this person
is guilty or not guilty so
you can um do a lot by even just
answering your jury summons i have
talked even a lot in my own community
because you hear people say oh well that
person
was convicted by an all-white jury um
and
and they're saying that critically but
if we're not answering our jury summons
that's going to happen because as a
judge even there's nothing that i can do
um unless there was some type of error
in the way that the
jurors were picked which is not common
because they're picked so
randomly um and i'm talking about the
big jury pool not the actual jury that's
seated on a case
um but so if if black people and
all types of people are not answering
jury summons
then you're never going to have a jury
that is representative
of the county population so two things
easy things you can do
answer your jury summons and vote
and and let me add quickly um jurors are
selected from registered voters
yeah so you're not ever going to be
called unless you're registered
um to vote the other thing that i would
add as judge
babylon and mr shannon were talking and
we're talking about all the people who
impact the system
legislatively um those at the ohio state
house decide what the parameters are
for me in terms of sentencing they write
the law
they set the the the book ends for what
i can impose
in terms of sentencing and i'll tell you
something that's a unique feature that
goes to the issue of
systemic racism we're talking about the
difference between crack cocaine in the
80s and 90s and the opioid
epidemic that is currently facing
our communities there is currently a
piece of legislation it's called
targeted community alternatives to
prison
within that legislation if the focus was
to deal with people who
were in possession of some illegal
substance or some prescribed substance
that legislation says that if that
person is pleading to a felony of the
fifth degree the lowest level felony
they cannot be sent to prison unless
they are pleading to um a sex offense
and offensive violence they have a prior
conviction for a sex offense
or an offensive violence and so what
happens maybe
intentionally unintentionally is that
you are eliminating a population of
people
who may be in the throes of
opioid addiction they are never going to
be subjected
to a potential prison sentence and so we
again start to see the disparities that
exist
for how justice was administered when
the drug of choice was crack
versus how justice is written
and administered when the drug of choice
may involve some kind of opioid
addiction so that's just a quick point
that i wanted to make
um and enough to your point judge
kimcroft you know
even though those disparities um were
technically fixed in the law it's not
like the people that were the victim of
those disparities were let out
so you still have a generation of people
that are eventually going to be released
from prison and they're
facing all of the barriers
that come with having a felony on your
record
i would argue that number one is getting
a job
and so another thing that people can do
is if you see that someone has had a
felony
don't
in the trash now look i'm not telling
you
to hire someone who was convicted of
embezzlement as your cfo
that's not what i'm saying but what i am
saying
is that to reduce the risk that those
people will go back to jail
we need to give them jobs we need to set
them
up so that they can succeed and
so that's what if you own a business or
know someone who does or if you're
involved in hr
don't let a felony be an automatic
knockout because the other thing
um that i've seen and i'm sure judge
koproff has seen too
is that you know certain law certain
convictions cannot be expunged
you can't get them sealed so we have
seen
people paying at 40 for what they did at
20
and you know as far as getting a job and
you know even how they're just seen in
society
getting a loan if they want to start a
business um getting
housing lot all of those barriers
you know once you have that scarlet
letter f
you know they are real and they are very
long
lasting
i am i am blown away
with your with your
honesty and knowledge and i'm so
thankful
that you all have um answered these
questions
um really i i i know
what how much it means to me and i'm
sorry that everybody that's my reminder
it's 8 o'clock
um i'm sure that everybody who is um
watching is
is absolutely um appreciating this as
well um
i um on a smaller level i
i wanted to just point out kevin you've
been the
mayor's corps prosecutor in bexley for
how long
a little over a year
um and i'm just curious um just on
our level if you know if you could just
um
i'm sure that you've made changes or
seen changes
in the year that you've been here and i
just wanted to know if you could
maybe dive into that a little bit
related to this
sure i i don't know how things were
conducted before
i got there as prosecutor i think that
we
do a very good job um
with respect to the administration of
justice in our mayor's court and i think
a
big component of that was providing
a public defender
for individuals that have been charged
with an offense
now we have to all understand our roles
you know the judges understand their
roles very well
and the prosecutor has to understand
their roles and they don't really want
to
get into the situation where they're
giving legal advice to the defendants
because obviously we're prohibited from
doing that
be that as it may a lot of these folks
that come in
just need someone that they can talk
with and explain what's going on with
them with respect to the kinds of cases
that we deal with which are by and large
licensing cases and things of that
nature
and so mayor kessler took a very in my
opinion a very proactive approach
because
you have to understand you don't have
typically public defenders in marriage
courts
it just doesn't happen um their
individuals will sometimes bring their
own lawyers with them which
obviously they are entitled to do but
there's not a public defender system
that's set up for the mayor's courts and
so the cities
if they want to or elect to do that
they have to contract with an attorney
to provide those services and we have
an exceptional lawyer that is doing a
great job
for the city of bexley um with respect
to providing such representation
to individuals are charged and leslie
albeite
and she is fantastic and
yes yes we do have to go through our our
dueling at times because that's
that's the system in which we're in i'm
the prosecutor and she's the defense
lawyer
but the point is is that um
we both have a job to do and at the end
of the day
i think that we've provided a very fair
form for individuals to resolve their
cases in bexley mayor's court
so that's been the biggest change um and
that's not done
in every mayor's court now a lot of the
recovery courts that are being set up
across the county and hilliard um
there is a recovery court in hilliard
and there is a public defender that's on
contract there as well
it does an exceptional job and so
i think that is a very
and a trend that i'm proud to be a part
of quite frankly
um i think it's it's essential that uh
folks just have an opportunity to go
into a closed room with someone that's
advocating for their interests and cares
about their interests because
you know they come in and they talk with
me and they're they're indicating what's
going on
they understand at the end of the day
because i tell them now you know i'm the
guy who's prosecuting you and you got to
be careful of things that you tell me
because
i can use those things against you you
understand that and so
that kind of gets people a little
unnerved and it should
and now we at least in the city of
bexley have an opportunity for
individuals to go and talk with our
public defender
so um as far as other changes i
i just think one of the things i did and
i'm not
tooting my own horn here but in what we
deal with as far as mayor's courts and
municipal courts probably the most
overriding charge is driving under
suspension cases
and the judges talked very um eloquently
earlier about types of legislation that
gets into place
let's look at the driving under
suspension laws and and how they were
set up
okay and basically in my opinion and and
i'm probably going to get in trouble
with the insurance industry over this
one but
you know it pretty much set up a
debtor's prison right because once you
got into bmv hell you weren't going to
get out
you you get these suspensions on your
record um they're getting charged
and then of course there was there was
case law which allowed officers to
simply run license plates
and if the driver of the vehicle matched
the description
of the individual that was said to be
under suspension per the
uh the leads printout that they have on
their mobile data terminal
well they could pull them over and they
would write them the ticket so you start
seeing all these cases coming in again
and again and again and again
all right well we need to do something
about this right
these folks are making a decision to
feed their families and go to work and
they can't afford
two thousand three thousand dollar
reinstatement fees and i understand that
there's
amnesty programs and those are very good
and they set up payment plans thank god
that at least gave some people the
opportunity to do so but at the end of
the day
all right again what did we sign up for
we signed up to to try to resolve these
problems and at least on my end to do
justice
and and i've had these conversations
with chiefs of police and i'm very
fortunate with the
chiefs that i represented in
reynoldsburg
and and now and bexley on their
departments
you know i'm able to convey this and we
don't always have to agree with this but
they do agree with me on this one what
did we sign up for we did not sign up
to just simply write tickets and keep
people um
shackled in bmv hell okay we've got to
give them an opportunity
to get their drivers license so that
they can get a better job
so that they can drive and not drive
with a cloud over their head and
wondering now
i'm not talking about folks that are
driving under ovi suspension
i'm talking about these dreaded fra
suspensions and
security suspensions and license for
sure suspensions
we've worked very hard and by having a
public defender now
in bexley be able to actually sit down
with individuals
go through their record and say their
driving record say this is what you need
to do
come up with this type of money for this
payment plan come back valid
and then you come to me what can i do
well i can dismiss the case
i can dismiss the case and let them pay
court costs
because if i have to have that
conviction guess what they have to show
insurance
and if they don't have insurance which
they're not going to have insurance
right because they're making a decision
to
feed their family as opposed to pay the
insurance bill
well they're just going to end up in bmv
hell
so we dismiss the case for costs and i
want to tell you that
i cannot think of an individual that's
come back before me
that's obtain a valid driver's license
and then comes back to
you know six months a year later and
they're under suspension again
okay so this is the kind of effort that
we need and this is the kind of
progressive effort that i think
that we've uh
undertaken index and and i've tried to
do it in the courts where we don't have
public defenders and and talk with
people as much as i'm permitted to in
the law and explain to them to go to the
bnb
but there's nothing better than having
someone that is your lawyer
all right being able to explain things
to you actually maybe possibly make
phone calls for you
and get you back with a driver's license
because
the our clerk at bexley ruby i saw her
say to an individual
the other day she said to a young man
she said
don't you feel better and he just smiled
he felt i mean for you know five six
years he'd been dealing
with you know having very low paying
jobs because he couldn't drive
all right um and now he's valid and
he's getting a shot and i think that's
what we're about
clearly at the mayor's court level and
i'm very proud of that i'm very proud
that the mayor
did this with respect to um having
leslie come aboard
i'm sorry for going on with that but i
got really compassionate on that one
thank you thank you very much we really
appreciate that um
thorough explanation and i'm just going
to say that
in the interest of time we do have a
number of questions that have come
through the
question and answer um chat so we're
going to
try to clip through those pretty quickly
and then
wrap up promptly at 8 30. so um
instead of going through all three of
you for the next few questions we'll
identify
one person um to answer the question so
we can try to get through these um
remaining questions uh so judge
baby blount yes one excuse me
um in your observation
has there been a requirement for members
of the
justice system to take implicit bias
or cultural sensitivity training
if so how would it have
how would it have or how has it changed
how you do your job
was that clear yes um
for us judges where most attorneys have
to get
24 hours of cle of continuing legal
education
judges have to get 40. 10 of those have
to be from the ohio
judicial college and judge koch helped
me out here
i believe three hours
have to be accessed to justice yes um
the access to justice
covers um issues regarding race
issues regarding even um issues around
having interpreters in your courtroom
issues dealing with people with
physical disabilities um so
we are required to do that yes
um i always think that it's helpful and
here's how
you know i even have to admit that i
have my own biases
and so you know and i think everybody
does
the key though is to one recognize it
and it once you recognize it you can
check it
so that's how those cles are always
helpful to me because um
in all candor even in dealing with the
opiate epidemic
you could have a sentencing day where
you have one defendant who
you know grew up very poor
um did not have access to a good
education
did not have parents who treated them
properly
as a child they might have mental health
and substance abuse issues
um which really really really narrows
um the option of where a judge can send
them for help
um versus the person who might be
right after them that comes from
an affluent suburb with two working
parents
and they have insurance and so
sometimes it's like you can say well to
the second person
what's your problem because you don't
have it as bad as the first guy
you know it's human but you have to
recognize it and you have to check it so
that you are treating
everyone equally you are looking at
every case as its own case and every
individual as their own individual
thank you
okay um so one of the questions that
came through on the q a um is if you
could
speak to how the justice system failed
brianna taylor
that that's a he that's a huge question
um
and i think that the best starting point
and again i want to be very careful
because as judge vadey blunt has said we
have a responsibility not to
get too deep into the weeds um here's
what i will say
um there is an old saying an old maxim
that if a prosecutor chooses to do so
he or she can indict a hands-on
um it's it's very easy because it's a
lopsided process it is simply the state
or the prosecutor presenting
evidence that he or she believes
substantiates a charge
that he or she believes is appropriate
given the evidence and the facts
as he or she understands them so not
having been
in that presentation i will say um that
i i felt
as though the press conference that
explained
the grand jury's decision um
was a little too involved because those
are supposed to be secret proceedings
and so i felt as if there was
information that was given to the public
that was used
to justify an outcome and that's not
really the responsibility
uh necessarily of the prosecutor it's
just to present
the evidence as it exists um from
from what i've heard i know that there
are inconsistencies about who may have
heard what and who did not hear what
and so i think that um
when we start to
politicize legal decisions we create the
environment that we see
um is is manifested here
and i know that i'm speaking very
tenuously
and artfully um but i find it very
curious
that there are between 36 to 40
shots discharged in her property
and that the charge that was indicted
is associated with those shots that
landed
at another property i also find it
curious and if i were
inquiry if this were at trial and the
judge is permitted to ask questions at
times
i find it curious that there was no
decision to review the warrant itself
because that was the catalyst for the
interaction
and so if if the if the warrant
wasn't sworn out with an affidavit
that's substantiated or corroborated
even going to that home i would think
that that was something that
um a prosecutor may want to
address um and so
it's it's a challenging decision
and let me say this and this is kind of
off topic i think sometimes there's a
belief that because judge baby blood or
mr
shannon our other people are a part of
the system that we are somehow
disaffected
by what happens um as a black woman
i am challenged daily to do the work
that i do
um and present the way that i present my
last name is cochraft and so if people
haven't met me
they are surprised when they meet me
that i'm a black woman because it
doesn't sound as if i might be a black
woman
and so i am then having to prove
that i deserve to be in that
position whereas for others confidence
may be presumed
my confidence has to be proven and so
getting back to the original issue i
think that all of us are affected by
what we have seen because it makes our
jobs
tougher uh there is the thought that we
will
perhaps operate in a way that doesn't
display a level of fairness
and impartiality and for me that's
probably one of the biggest takeaways
i i agree with judge colecroft um we've
you every judge has also had a case um
where they experience
um it's hard for the media to tell the
entire story
my questions about the brianna taylor
case would be about the warrant
and they would also be about the grand
jury process
what what was presented to the grand
jury
i also agree that my worry
that is coming out of the brianna taylor
case
is the perception that black women
have of the justice system because right
now
you just look on social media there's a
lot of black women
that are feeling like the police can
just come in their place and shoot them
um whether that's right or wrong that
is the perception that they have right
now
um and so that that makes it tough
for the juries for the for the justice
system to work
um with a perception that it's so
inherently unfair
from the very very very beginning
and i think also if i could just say
quickly you have to reconcile the taylor
case
with the case out of minnesota that
involved justine
rusack and i'm probably not saying her
last name correctly
uh the officer involved was muhammad
noor
and that was another instance where uh
justine
approached the vehicle the officer
believed that there was some imminent
threat he discharged his weapon she was
killed
um he was indicted he was charged he was
convicted
he was sentenced justine is a white
female
uh the officer was of african descent
and so when you see
these cases paralleled you start to
wonder
what is the distinction
and so people are only left with so many
options
and it's it's a very slippery slope if
we start to
allow that perception as judge baby
blunt
has said to exist we we have to be
honest
and we have to be accountable and we
have to look at the
the historical underpinnings of this
country
and how it is that black people brown
people
have been historically marginalized
and overlooked and how um
coded language was used to advance
systemic racism we have to be really
honest about all of that
i could add just a couple of things
the first in in dealing
reviewing this whole situation with
brianna the thing that
first of all there's a very good reason
why
many states have done away with no knock
warrants
right this this is this is a situation
where
a no knock warrant executed at night
where you have someone and you know i
don't necessarily want to get into the
weaves but you know i have a concealed
carry permit
right i have a weapon in my home if
someone came
blowing through my door in the middle of
the night
i mean i think i would be reaching for
my weapon i understand that there's
factual
considerations as to what was said
was there you know one witness heard
someone say police and then there were
several witnesses that didn't hear
anything said just simply the busting
down the door
so that i think the no knock warrant
itself
is a is a very problematic thing
to begin with that's probably a topic
for another day
but also i think which uh
i agree with both of the judges as to
because the war
is based on this information about these
packages being sent to the apartment and
the post office was monitoring now then
you have the post office coming back
saying no wait a minute no no no there
were no suspicious packages coming there
you know and and so again
at the end of the day can you conclude a
reasonable person conclude that there
was a thorough
examination of all of the facts of this
case
all right i mean
that's all i want to say about that
but if i if i could add really quickly
mr shannon you know and let's not forget
again i keep harping on this there's a
lot of players in this system
so you know while the focus is on the
police and the brianna taylor case
don't forget they had to go to a judge
to get that warrant exactly
exactly and you have to the judges are
voted
in at least in ohio they are i'm i'm not
sure about kentucky yes that goes back
to your point in the importance
of making sure you vote um
so we do have uh ten more minutes
or nine more minutes we have a couple of
extra questions
we will probably not get to all of the
questions this
this evening however i would like to
point out that
this opportunity to engage in the
dialogue
about this topic um you know systematic
racism
about how our government works about how
we as citizens
can um participate in the process
this is one opportunity and i believe
that monique lampke and jen robinson
have
other opportunities planned in the
future so please
keep an eye out for our next community
awareness building engagement so um
we're not going to end i'm going to go
ahead and ask
one more question and
just one more back here do we have time
for two more
i i have a feeling it's gonna be one
okay
are you saying i love it i love it
i'm going to blend two questions that
are similar
and actually gives our community members
an opportunity to figure out what do
they do
next so um do you have any suggestions
for members of the bexley community with
regards to the criminal justice system
how can community members advocate to
help change the system
and is there a specific call to action
for citizens
beyond voting and serving on jurors
and since that is such a loaded question
we'll have
all three of you respond and then becky
will come in with closing comments
well i would say just because i can
speak
speak mainly from my perspective as as a
law director for
for growth for i think as far as the
citizens
obviously we've already touched on the
importance of voting
but get involved with the community go
to the council meetings
all right get a become aware of the
processes of your local government
you know there's a whole legislative
process it usually
involves there being at least three
readings of any legislation that's being
introduced before
city council to be considered
there's a committee process and there's
an opportunity for the citizens to be
heard
on these types of issues so this covers
legislation that you know obviously
that's coming down the track
you may not agree with and you want
the ability to state your concerns are
and be heard before that third and final
reading
but also it gives you an opportunity to
come in
and address city council about those
concerns
or issues that you believe are at the
forefront of your community
and the things that need to be addressed
that you'd like to be looked at
whether it's you know by the police
department or whether it's you know
some other aspect uh with respect to you
know
life and bexley but you have to get
involved civilly
in that process
i i would say um
you know another way that you can
advocate is
through is at the state house because
again um
as i think uh judge ko croft or mr
shannon said
you know the judges apply the law but
it's
the legislators at the state house that
actually
make the law um so paying attention and
being involved
you know not only in voting but in
meeting with legislators and calling
them and telling them what you believe
is another way that you can help
make change um also
to be honest with you i think that you
all should
be honest with yourselves about what's
going on in bexley
um having grown up in columbus
very you know i grew up close to bexley
i went to school
in bexley um my first job was at the
drexel
um and it is it is almost
a given in the black community in
columbus that you be careful
driving through bexley um
and i'm not sure if a lot of people in
bexley know that
but you can ask anyone in the black
community
and that is what the majority of people
will tell you um the other part of my
answer is
is not as a judge but as a mother and
that
is to educate your children
and here's why because if
my son is stopped by the police
he could have a very different
experience than
a friend who was white and a friend who
is white
who knows those issues will not leave
him
and so i implore you
to educate your children not only for
the protection of their black friends
but also because they are the future
leaders
and even if we can make a incremental
change right now
they're the ones that can make big
change in the future
i i agree with all of those points and i
would say um
probably and it's very generic if you
see something say something i think
sometimes there's such a hesitance
to get involved when we see inequities
as they are taking place
in real time and if you are living a
comfortable
life um that is again disaffected
by systemic racism sometimes it's
difficult to step
outside of that bubble and address some
really
challenging issues and so often as black
people we are asked
to ally and to champion for everyone we
are asked
to get on board to support certain
candidates to support
support certain causes and issues and
then when the black community is called
caught in a bit of a storm we have to
sometimes rally people to even
acknowledge that the issue is real that
the issue
exists and i'll tell you candidly i had
a moment today where i was just
tired of being a black woman i'm tired
of having to
explain what is a very real
part of my life this isn't something
that we've imagined or created
or that we've blown out of proportion
this is
actually what is happening i have
actually had a conversation with my
nephew when he was younger
that no you can't play with that toy gun
because somebody might think that's real
and somebody may call the police
and the police may arrive and it may
turn into a situation
from which we cannot come back and so i
need for people to
acknowledge even if you don't unders
just acknowledge that the problem
is real um you don't have to you know
necessarily if you're not comfortable i
will say
with going to the state house and
talking with legislators talk with your
neighbors
talk with people within your sphere of
influence and start to have
those difficult conversations charity
starts at home
and then it spreads abroad and so as we
build those conversations
incrementally i think we will start to
see incremental change
absolutely fantastic more than what i
think we could have imagined
now i know i said i was turning it over
to becky so that she could close this
out
but i really wanted to thank each of you
again for um joining this
i wanted to highlight what the call to
action was
i'm just i took a few notes i'm gonna
highlight um what i feel is like the
seven
things that came out of this last
question
and hopefully we'll have these notes
available along with
the posting of the video but number one
vote
number two attend city council
meetings get involved civically number
three
get involved at the state house meet
with legislators
and meet with your neighbors and your
sphere of influence
number four educate your children
educate your children to be allies and
because they will be our future leaders
so help get your your children informed
number five if you see something say
something
don't be a bystander that doesn't um
call out injustice that doesn't call out
in equities
when you see something say something
number six
be an ally and acknowledge that the
problem is real
and then number seven i think someone
said this or maybe i just added it
myself
but educate yourselves make sure you are
a informed citizen an informed person
that goes to the polls to vote
an informed citizen that goes to city
council
and that goes to the state house so
those are my little added
comments because i thought that you guys
did a great job highlighting the call to
action
and i wanted to make sure everyone got
it becky
i um i am blown away
um i truly appreciate
the raw honesty and and
your gift of of sharing to me
um we really really appreciate it
and again i want to thank you judge co
croft judge b blunt
and kevin shannon um this has been a
really
a really big impactful evening for all
of us so thank you so much
um this is recorded and it will be
provided
um it will be on the city of bexley's
website um
for future reference if anyone wants to
see it um
or share it thank you so much thanks for
thanking me
thank you sydney bexley for being even
open to this conversation it is so
critically important so thank you thank
you
good night good night bye good night