Tag Archives: James Farren

Ready for citizens panel to monitor Amarillo PD?

Let’s go carefully on the notion of setting up a citizens advisory panel to monitor the activities of the Amarillo Police Department.

The issue came up this week in a public hearing. Some residents have complained that the police department has committed acts of “brutality,” mostly against minorities and poor residents.

http://www.newschannel10.com/story/29558538/police-brutality-claims-stem-oversight-committee-proposal

Let’s hear the examples, chapter and verse.

The allegations leveled at the police department contain some tough language. The very word “brutality” connotes something quite a bit more severe than an arresting officer twisting a suspects arm a bit too aggressively while slapping on the handcuffs.

I don’t object to a citizens panel being selected to review cases of alleged brutality when they occur. But you’ve got to be careful in selecting individuals to serve on this panel. They need to be as impartial and fair in their assessment as, say, someone selected for a trial jury. There cannot be any predisposition of bias either for or against law enforcement officers.

First things first. There needs to be a compelling need for such a panel to exist. So far, I haven’t heard it.

Randall County Criminal District Attorney James Farren — himself a former police officer — noted that the system already has a “checks and balances” provision built in. He said he’s prosecuted only four police officers during his more than two decades as district attorney. OK, fine. That might be the result of grand juries’ reluctance to indict officers.

This topic has been broached once again.

Let’s talk about it. Carefully and with great care.

 

Stop griping about jury duty

Jury box Photo by Jason Doiy 2-9-11 054-2011

My friends keep griping about getting jury summonses.

“I don’t have time,” they say. “Why don’t they just quit calling on me?” they ask. “Aww, what a nuisance,” some have actually said.

If only I’d get picked for a jury. My life would be a little more complete.

Alas, it’ll never happen.

I’ve long ached for the chance to serve on a trial jury. I get maybe two or three such summonses a year from Randall County. They usually come from the District Clerk’s Office, which means they could be looking for jurors to sit on a felony criminal trial.

Oh, I wish I could get the call.

It’s not that I consider myself a model citizen, or a paragon of civic pride. It’s just that I’ve long considered jury duty to be one of citizenship’s primary responsibilities. Someone gets into trouble, has to stand trial and he or she deserves to be tried by an impartial jury of citizens.

But almost every time I’ve ever received a summons, I’ve called the evening before and the automated system tells me all potential jurors have been excused.

Damn!

I did get a jury summons one time, not long after moving to Amarillo. It came from the 47th District Court. I reported that morning, went to the jury waiting room and then, well, waited for about three hours. Then the judge, David Gleason, came out and told us we were excused.

I was crushed.

That was when I was working full time for the local newspaper. A colleague of mine told me I’d likely never be chosen because the nature of my job — as editor of the opinion section of the paper — meant I knew too much about too many things to be considered “qualified” to serve on a trial jury. Well, that was his view. Not mine.

Then came the deal-breaker. I got a chance to serve on a grand jury. This is the panel that decides whether someone committed a crime that deserves to be prosecuted. We met several weeks and indicted dozens of individuals; we also no-billed many others, meaning that the complaint brought to us by the district attorney didn’t merit a trial.

However, before we started our work, Randall County Criminal District Attorney James Farren told us something that has stuck to me like Gorilla Glue. If any of us ever thought about getting picked for a trial jury, he said, we can kiss that notion good bye. It isn’t going to happen. Why? Farren said our service on the grand jury would label us as biased toward the prosecution.

Huh? But, I can be impartial. Honest, man.

Too bad. The DA said we were tainted by our grand jury service.

I’d trade places in a minute with those who gripe about getting a jury summons.

If only …

Grand jury reform arrives in Texas

Way back when I arrived in Texas, in 1984, the newspaper where I started working had just begun an editorial campaign to change the way the state impaneled grand juries.

The Jefferson County criminal justice system had come under fire over suspicions that a grand jury might have been seated to get back at political foes of a district judge. Our newspaper, the Beaumont Enterprise, disliked the jury commissioner system and we called for a change to select grand juries the way the state seats trial juries — using the voter registration rolls.

We finally persuaded the county’s two criminal district judges to adopt a random selection method.

Well, this week, Gov. Greg Abbott signed a bill into law that makes it a requirement to seat grand juries in a random method.

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/06/19/abbott-signs-grand-jury-reform-legislation/

It’s a good day for the state’s criminal justice system.

As the Texas Tribune reports: “Under House Bill 2150, the state will no longer use the outdated system that lets judge-appointed commissioners pick jurors, a nationally uncommon practice that critics say is rife with potential for conflicts of interest.”

The old system allowed judges to pick jury commissioners, usually friends, to find grand jurors. It’s been called a “pick a pal” system. Friends pick friends, who then might be friends with the judge whose court has jurisdiction.

The “potential for conflicts of interest” surely did exist.

I once served on a grand jury, in Randall County, that was picked by the old method. We had an uneventful term, meeting every other week for several months. I learned a lot about my community.

My participation as a grand juror, though, all but eliminated me from consideration for a trial jury, District Attorney James Farren told us, as we then would be seen as “pro-prosecution” by defense counsel.

That’s fine.

But I’m still quite glad to see the Texas Legislature enact this long-needed reform, which follows the model used in the vast majority of other states.

If a randomly selected trial jury is qualified to sentence someone to death, then a randomly selected grand jury ought to be qualified to determine whether the crime should be prosecuted in the first place.

Just wondering: Why the no-bill?

It’s a bit dicey for me to question a grand jury’s deliberation, given that no one other than the grand jurors are supposed to know what goes on when the doors are closed.

However, I’m wondering about that Randall County no-bill decision regarding the Amarillo Animal Control Department’s euthanizing of unwanted pets.

The grand jury decided against filing criminal charges against anyone involved in what’s become something of a scandal at the animal shelter.

Animals were being put down in violation of state law. They were given the lethal drugs while failing to be weighed so officials at the shelter would know much of the drug to administer. There were reports of animals suffering greatly during the euthanasia process.

The top two animal control officers, director Mike McGee and assistant director Shannon Barlow both “retired” recently from the city — which, of course, is laughable on its face. They’d been placed on administrative leave when the animal control troubles became known. They should have been fired.

District Attorney James Farren, whose office presented evidence to the grand jury, expressed surprise at the no-bill. He’s not alone in the surprise. The grand jury said it found no animal cruelty at the shelter? I don’t get that one.

If animals weren’t suffering needlessly, then why did the grand jury ever get this case in the first place?

It’s one thing to accept — even grudgingly — a grand jury’s decision. It’s quite another to believe in it.

Grand jury no bills animal control

A Randall County grand jury has returned what could be seen as an unsatisfactory decision on Amarillo Animal Control’s controversial treatment of animals in its possession.

The grand jury decided against indicting anyone for criminal wrongdoing in what has been a major embarrassment for the city.

http://www.connectamarillo.com/news/story.aspx?id=1056604#.U5kLwFJOWt8

District Attorney James Farren expressed surprise at the no-bill decision.

I guess we have to live with the grand jury decision, given the system we have of investigating these kinds of activities.

The good news for the animals under the care of the city, however, is that (a) the two people at the top of the Animal Control Department chain of command are gone and (b) changes have been implemented to stop the kind of abuse inflicted on the unwanted pets.

Former director Mike McGee and assistant director Shannon Barlow both have “retired” from the city. They should have been canned after it was revealed that animals had been euthanized improperly. They were being administered the wrong drugs and there had been reports of considerable suffering by the animals during the process.

Changes were made almost immediately, while McGee and Barlow were put on “administrative leave,” which meant they were getting paid while being ordered off the job.

The city issued a press release that stated: “Operations at Animal Control move forward under the guidance of interim director Scott McDonald, as the search for a permanent animal control director takes place. The City continues to look at areas for improvement at the animal shelter with the goal of increasing adoptions and making the shelter a sanitary, comfortable place for animals. Improvements include operational changes and improvements to facilities, animal intake and care procedures, and employee training practices. An internal management review will be undertaken immediately to determine if there have been noncriminal violations of policies or procedures and to further assist in improving shelter operations.”

The city should proceed with that “internal management review.” Meantime, look long and hard for an administrator who will take better care of these animals. After all, a “shelter” by definition is a place where unwanted animals at least can be granted temporary sanctuary for the time they have left.