Recently I was told by a Woodstock businessman that I complained about everything and that I was too hard to please, and that nothing they could do would please me.
He might be right - about the first part. And he was wrong about the second part. I know that I see "what's wrong" first. That's who I am. That's what I do. Don't like it? Read What You Think of Me Is None of My Business. Yes, it really is a book.
This morning I went to court to observe a "routine" status hearing in the case against Christopher Branham. The case is in Judge Prather's court; however, due to a trial, Judge Gordon Graham heard the case this morning. Actually, the case is more well-known by the involvement of former McHenry County Sheriff's Department Deputy (former Detective) Jason ("Slick") Novak and his involvement with a confidential informant. This is causing Branham - and Novak - a lot of trouble!
Court convened shortly after 9:00AM, and cases were called according to which attorney had gotten in line in front of another. It was fairly easy to follow whether Judge Graham was hearing a case on Judge Prather's docket or his own. The attorney stepping up usually announced which call (docket), the page number, and line number and the defendant's name.
At 9:20AM an attorney stepped up and referred only to "Page 2, Line 4". No name. Was this Branham's case? Because of the low tones in the discussion between the judge and the attorney, it was virtually impossible to hear. There was also considerable noise in the courtroom and in the vestibule.
More than once I felt concern for my safety in the courtroom this morning, as prisoners entered and left. As the Corrections Officer escorted prisoners, the bailiff was unprepared for "action". There is probably only one gun in the courtroom, and it would not be difficult to assault the courtroom security officer and overpower her to grab her weapon. In almost all courtrooms I am shocked by such carelessness around prisoners.
At about 9:40AM Judge Graham announced a recess. After he was off the bench, I stepped forward to the attorney's table to read the docket. I was immediately challenged by the courtroom security officer. She told me I was not permitted in front of the railing - "Attorneys only". I asked her if she would hand me the docket after I stepped back behind the railing, and she told me to go to the Court Administration Office, if I wanted to see it.
Naturally, I headed down the hall to the Court Administration Office. The person I wanted to see was in a meeting, and I'm sure we'll talk later.
How interesting! In other courtrooms I have not been similarly challenged and have had no problem in looking at the docket, if I want to do so when the judge was off the bench (before or after court or during a recess). And I had previously been told by Court Administration that the public could view the docket in the courtroom!
Oh, and "Page 2, Line 4" at 9:20AM? Yep, you guessed it. That was the Branham case!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Now I just want to understand this better. You are suggesting this bailiff would be easy to disarm. But this is the same bailiff that protected the very area that you said needed to be protected from you (and she effectively stopped you in your tracks).
Huh????
Ah, but Ray... I didn't try to disarm her.
I'm curious whether the well is a prohibited area when court is not in session.
She did a fine job of protecting the wooden table and the paper docket. Let's say, I am not very concerned about either.
If bullets started flying in the courtroom because the court security officer lost her gun, now that I'd be concerned about.
What would you have done, Ray, if that had happened while you were in the courtroom yesterday?
Use you as a shield. Oh, sorry that question was meant for Ray.
Frank, you have an obsession with "what-ifs". You seem to get unusually excited by imagining concealed carry scenarios.
It's pretty creepy.
I have to think, in this hypothetical that if you tried to disarm the bailiff, she would have dropped you like a bad habit. Hopefully, she would have the courtesy to just wing you.
In answer to your other question. If there were any problems in the courtroom, I would immediately assist the bailiff, with due prejudice.
Now you've got me thinking about concealed carry, Ray, and how people claim how dangerous it would be for law-abiding citizens to be armed and how they might shoot without thinking.
Imagine a shoot/don't shoot situation in a packed courtroom. Do you really think the bailiffs are highly trained, drilled, coached, challenged on when NOT to shoot?
I guess this is the difference between you and me. I have to assume that they are properly trained, why wouldn't I?
Assuming that could get you a reclining seat in a long box looking out, instead of smelling the flowers and looking in.
If shooting starts in a courtroom, hold up your bulletproof briefcase - fast!
Post a Comment