QuoteBy Matt GalnorStory updated at 6:24 AM on Friday, Nov. 13, 2009
Arguments for and against a $400,000 elevated bridge connecting the prosecutor’s office and the new Duval County Courthouse hinge on security.
State Attorney Angela Corey says it’s essential for the safety of her attorneys and staff, who shuttle back and forth between their offices and the courthouse several times a day.
But Chief Circuit Judge Donald Moran says it just creates another access point into the courthouse that will have to be secured.
The proposed bridge, referred to in some cities as a skyway, would be enclosed and connect the buildings at the third floor.
The final design of the $350 million project isn’t complete, but the city expects to make a decision on the bridge in the next few weeks, said Misty Skipper, spokeswoman for Mayor John Peyton.
About $20 million has been set aside to renovate the old federal courthouse, where the State Attorney’s Office will be located.
The pricetag for the bridge has dropped from about $800,000 by reducing its width, but the final cost won’t be determined until the final designs are done.
“I wouldn’t be asking for a bridge if it wasn’t necessary for the safety of our employees,†Corey said, noting that the structure will be far more expensive to add after the courthouse is up and running.
Prosecutors now walk across Market Street from their offices to the courthouse. Corey said her attorneys are often threatened by the families of people being prosecuted, but she didn’t know of any incidents where prosecutors have been harmed walking between the two buildings.
Moran says the bridge is a waste of money for people walking just 110 feet. He also called it a safety risk because the prosecutors would control who gets bridge access.
Corey said everyone who gets into her office has already gone through security, so that’s a moot point.
“Judges should worry about their security and we’ll worry about ours,†said Mike Weinstein, assistant state attorney and executive director of the office.
While Moran questioned whether he’d have to build a bridge for the Public Defender’s Office, too, Corey insists her needs are greater.
Her attorneys and staff are often going to get warrants signed by judges, and prosecutors are involved in every criminal case, while public defenders only handle some, Corey said.
A spokesman for the Public Defender’s Office declined comment.
When four firms were part of a courthouse design competition back in 2002, each design included an elevated bridge.
But, as everyone affiliated with the project acknowledges, much has changed since then.
The first budget was $190 million, with a 2005 completion date. After various budget disputes and the firings of consultants and contractors, construction finally began this year.
The initial design included a large dome visible from the interstate, and the dome became the target of elected officials and other who pegged the building as too extravagant.
Money’s tight and Moran said he can’t justify anything non-essential â€" including the bridge â€" for the new courthouse.
Even so, the judge said: “If you ask me if I’d rather have a dome or a bridge, I’d pick the dome.â€
http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2009-11-12/story/state_attorney_chief_judge_at_odds_over_duval_courthouse
So ... it is mandatory for completely separate entrances, corridors, elevators, and bathrooms for "judge security" - but the State Attorneys, who prosecute the bad guys, well, they can just walk across the street and mingle with the bad guys' family and "business associates." Are we sure that is the proper spelling of the chief judge's last name?
What's really sad is the reality that the judges and primarily Moran were allowed so much power in the design of the courthouse. Citizens who are paying for it weren't allowed input, but the judges and mayor got whatever they wanted. Moran is a hypocrite. He says he can't justify a bridge because it would cost too much, yet in the next sentence he says he would rather have the useless dome. He is arguing against $400,000 for the bridge yet designed a building with a pricetag of $350 million. Really? For real?
I know we have argued about this disastrous project in hundreds of threads on here, but the same points keep coming up. This is the ultimate example of corruption in this city and slowly, unless we crush the good 'ol boy network, these people will ruin this city for good.
To be fair, the main building is expeced to cost about $190 million....the $350 number includes land acquisition, the new garage, and renovations of the old Federal courthouse and Ed Ball buildings.
That said, the quote at the end of the story is humorous (and sad)
It is sad. Problems problems at the Courthouse site. Just get the damn thing built already; it's been going on 5 years or so and counting.
Heights Unknown
tufsu 1
brain 1
A tie is fine with me. ;D
Next they're going to want armored cars and motorcades to get them back and forth to work.....
I was thinking clever disguises for everyone at the SA's offices.
Quote
When four firms were part of a courthouse design competition back in 2002, each design included an elevated bridge.
Yep... Those designs were all better than this one.
Why is something like this not adequate security????
(http://api.ning.com/files/Dc4AZ26o2twTo6OEfvb0TavXpACPwou2aD1j4ZTdkVU_/n789239447_305858_1283.jpg)
No one would ever recognize you.
As a former prosecutor at the SAO it can be unpleasant to have to "mingle" with some of those folks. It certainly was not a frequent issue. The majority of the time you just keep your head down and go on or you don't even see anyone. There were several times, however, that some rather unpleasant things were said. Typically defendants didn't act nearly as upset with me as their family did. The defendant knows that he screwed up and I'm just doing my job. The family thinks he's innocent, and they view the prosecutor as this awful demon who is telling lies about their baby and trying to get him locked up for something he didn't do. It is the families who tend to give the nastiest "stink eye" I have ever had hurled in my direction.
Is it worth a 400k investment? I don't know. I just wanted to make it clear that it is at least a worthwhile issue to consider and not some silly "wish list" item from Ms. Corey that should be laughed off.
I worked at the Leon County Courthouse for 2 years, with families involved in the legal system. Had to tesitify many times against parents regarding drug use, physical abuse, etc. Termination of parental rights were always a possibility. Some words were said on rare occasion, but I never felt threatened in the courthouse, walking out of the courthouse, or walking from one builidng across the street into the court house. A bridge would have been a perk, but certainly not a need. Just comes with the territory.
Yes, everything I mentioned that I dealt with just "comes with the territory". I agree 100% and always felt that way. The issue is the prevailing frequency of those things which do not "come with the territory" in the world today. 20-30 years ago the thought of being gunned down or followed and harmed as a prosecutor exited a courthouse would have been quite remote. In today's day and age, I am not so sure. Be it perception or reality, the world seems a much more dangerous place. It's very likely that nothing would ever happen without a walkway. If a prosecutor is shot leaving Court and another few people killed or injured in a hail of gunfire, would spending that $400k have been a worthwhile investment? I am on the fence about it because even though it is a drop in the bucket in a $350m project, it's still a lot of money to guard against a catastrophic act of violence, but in today's world it seems more important than ever to gameplan for acts of unthinkable violence.
Thanks for your insights, Tripoli. I think a hard look should be put towards spending this money for a crosswalk. Even without gunfire, I think protecting the State Attorney's from the potential negative environment and abuse from families is worth the expenditure. If so much is being done to protect/ accommodate the judges, I think the same courtesies should be extended towards the other members of the justice system.
Forgive the jokes earlier, they were more to make fun of the circus the courthouse has become, not discredit the professionals who keep us safe.
^ Good Point
I promise I'm not waffling, this is just a serious issue to me. Would protecting the State Attorneys de-humanize them to the families of the defendants? An instrument of justice coming out of the sky and then quickly vanishing to whence they came.
These are hard working Americans who make our city safer, but that is tough to see when they are so far removed for the populace they serve.
I have a feeling that it is not just a crosswalk vs. bridge issue...unless there would be special staff entrances, this would likely be about a 3 block walk (front door to front door).
Neverthess, I favor pedestrians on the street.
Stephen-
True point. Except prosecutors are not isolated from the impact of the administration of justice. They deal extensively with the victims of crime. The prosecutor's decisions are often heavily influenced by them. And by the way, they are the important consideration, not the defendant's family.
I often times felt quite bad for the families of these defendants, but that cannot cloud the judgment of the right thing to do in the case. Overall though, there are two important flaws in your thinking, even when dealing with victimless crimes. (well, crimes where 'society' is the victim)
1) You almost immediately become desensitized to the pleas of mercy from defendants or family. Do you have any idea just how often you hear a slightly different variation of the same sob story from defendant or family? Day in and day out, all day every day, it's the same thing said in a slightly different way. 95% of the time it is horseturd. I defend criminals now. That's how I now know the story is 95% crap. All of the emotion may be heartfelt for the 5 minutes before the Judge, but it ends there. Thus, "seeing the faces of who is touched by the administration of justice" is going to have next-to-no impact on a prosecutor. It's same shit different day. I always did my very best to be fair. I didn't want to hammer people for no reason, but I didn't want to let people get off light. The puppy dog eyes of a defendant's child doesn't go very far at all when dealing with real crime. Sure, those eyes may make me think twice about a 30 day sentence instead of 10 or 15 in a multi-offender driving with suspended license case, but when you are dealing with crack distributors or armed robbers, I could give a crap less about the sob stories, and so could everyone else I know who is working there.
2) In my experience, those close to the "real" defendants (felons of some seriousness) are either totally oblivious or just as guilty in spirit as the defendant. They either have 0 respect for authority and the system, or they are a poor old grandma who had this kid dumped on them to raise by their irresponsible daughter. The overwhelming majority fit the same mold. Those in the 2nd category tend to get it. You have to put their loved one away. They typically keep a "what went wrong" or "what can I do" type attitude about it. Deep down, however, they aren't the ones we are contemplating building a bridge to avoid. They understand the role of the prosecutor and while it all upsets them, they seem to adopt some understanding of it. The others are either life-long criminals themselves or they had full knowledge of what their loved one/friend was up to... and didn't give a crap. You could serve milk and cookies to them and they would still see all cogs in the judicial process as "instruments of justice coming out of the sky". Because they all share this perverted view of the world that people are out to screw them. We have your cousin on video with a gun in the clerk's face. "You lie, you doctored that video". "He confessed on a jail call to his girlfriend" "Y'all set him up, she's working with you". This is the attitude of that very large group of "support" for defendants, and walking past them on the way back to the office isn't going to change their opinion of "the man" nor is it going to change a prosecutor's perspective on how to do their job.
So has there been a rash of violence on prosecutors walking into courthouses or something? What am I missing?
Sure. A bridge would be a perk. So would a lot of things. This is just a case of a prosecutor trying to secure a perk that she and her department would like very much.
I don't blame her for advocating for it, but the logical answer is "no".
What point is that? Prosecutors need to be more touchy-feely and idealistic?
That isn't the real world. The system can be too hard on people sometimes. That was something I always tried to avoid. What you appear to endorse is substituting emotion for justice. Yes, all justice has an objective and emotional component but what I gather from you is you would take it much too far.
I struggle to find a more eloquent way of saying it, but I can't so: You just don't understand because you haven't been there.
Listen, over 90% of the people who actually look at jail time don't give a damn about their kids or their families. They aren't a good person who just screwed up once. At least not with me they weren't. Everything I had discretion on I felt I played it pretty straight. College kid with a little cocaine? Bad call, dude, but you don't need a felony or jail time. 4th time around with it? Different story.
No. Most everyone who is actually looking at going to jail for a while is on about their 3rd or 4th instance of selling crack cocaine. Or they go on burglary streaks knocking off cars and houses. Or they are on their 4th DUI.
They all come into court with people who rely on them. Pastors who talk about what a good kid they were (typically upon cross examination, 4-6 years ago was the last time the Pastor saw them in church). People begging you to keep him out of jail. We need him. He provides for us. He's really good. He's committed to getting it straight this time... I promise... just this once, pleeease.
Again, trust me, I now orchestrate these performances. Sometimes they are truly sincere. Often times they are sincere in their fear of consequences but not much else.
If we cut them a break because somebody loves them, what exactly is that going to do? "Oh well, you did stab somebody in the neck with a broken beer bottle during a fight, but you fix cars every other weekend and make a few bucks for your kids.. so we won't send you to jail on their account".
Listen, it sucks for the kids and the family, etc... but these people don't want to stay out of jail for their family, they want to stay out of jail for themselves. If they keep getting a pass, they will keep sticking glass or guns in people's heads. That is more unacceptable than a sad child. I'm sorry but it is. That may make you uncomfortable but it's reality. If the family gets "punished" by the justice system, don't look at the State, look at the defendant and ask yourself who is in control of whether their family gets "punished".
There is a time and place for them to meet face to face. Probably on the street is not the best.
Perhaps the reading into it came from what I perceived to be a bit of a swipe at me. When you say it may be best that it was a "former" job it is somewhat upsetting. I am very proud of the work that I did and frankly think I was an asset to the fair administration of justice... so I greatly disagreed with it being "better" (for the collective all, I assumed) that I not be doing that job anymore.
I do not think I am nihilistic. (In fact, I seem to be advocating a moral compass). If you mean overly skeptical, I don't think I am extremely so. The mouse can only get shocked so many times before he becomes skeptical of the value of getting that piece of cheese. I love defending people too. I often times sympathize with their situation and work like hell to help them out. In a truly detached sense, however, a person being honest with themselves would not see the system as the problem. The criminal is almost always the reason his family suffers.
I may be right-wing on several things, but seriously this isn't one of them. Like I said, I am more inclined toward leniency than many. You should never meet my wife, who is a current prosecutor. ;) But I do not believe sympathy for the defendant's family should cause the justice system to feel guilty when it finds a defendant guilty, nor think twice about advocating for a proper sentence on behalf of a crime victim.
Well then sorry to get touchy based on miscommunication.
I generally get off rather light. People think every night at home is a running episode of law & order or something, but it isn't. The same rules apply for this marriage as any other marriage: even though i am formally trained to argue and advocate, she's always right.
Stephen, There are at least two kinds of "humans". Human beings and human animals. Frank Herbert in his first Dune novel had an interesting take on the difference.
There are a lot of mixed up human beings in the criminal justice system as well as people who are there because of stupid laws, but there are a lot of human animals in there as well.
Speaking only for myself, the important reasons for the bridge to me are severalfold:
1. Prosecutors often travel to court with their testifying victims and witnesses, as well as the families of victims. These victims are often victims of sexual abuse, domestic abuse, and violent crimes. Witnesses and victims' families are often concerned for their safety, especially when they know the Defendant or the Defendant's friends/family. The easier and safer we can make things for them, the better.
2. Especially during trials, prosecutors will stay late at the courthouse. I've gotten verdicts as late as 11:00PM. A couple weeks ago another prosecutor got a murder verdict at 11:45PM. That's a generally unpleasant time to be walking a couple of blocks back through a poorly lit area after 20-30 of the defendant's friends and family have preceded you.
3. Almost every prosecutor is in court a minimum 4 days a week, and many have morning and afternoon court. We are often transporting sensitive files. It's not unusual to see misdemeanor attorneys pushing carts with 3-4 buckets loaded with 100 files. We also have to transport evidence, charts, tech equipment, etc. when necessary. The further the distance and the worse the weather, the greater an issue this has been.
4. Right now prosecutors and prosecution witnesses enter and leave through the same entrances that jurors, defendants, and defense witnesses do. This has made for a number of awkward and tense interactions. I've been accosted at and around the courthouse a number of times, though thankfully never directly threatened.
5. Until a few years ago, most of the State Attorney's Office was located inside the courthouse and was just an elevator ride down to the courtroom floors. I don't think that diminished our "public" contact any. It just made it easier and safer for quick ingress and egress when necessary.
How about you do not build a suburban campus in the middle of downtown. You could build a 15-20-40 story building that houses everyone with private secure elevators. Oh well I will probably visit our new urban style transportation center more often anyway.
What are sure 5 blocks really, OK scratch the urban style comment.
The judges are going to have secure facilities - entrances, elevators, corridors, etc. - how many physical threats or attacks have there been on Duval judges? I say, give the SA the bridge.
An update:
Duval courthouse plans to have third-floor bridge for prosecutors â€" for now
Jacksonville is moving forward with plans to build a controversial elevated walkway connecting the third floors of the prosecutor’s office and the new Duval County Courthouse.
State Attorney Angela Corey has said connecting the buildings is essential for the safety of her staff, while Chief Circuit Judge Donald Moran calls the $660,000 walkway wasteful.
“There’s nothing wrong with them walking through the door like any other law firm,†Moran said.
The bridge still has to meet budget requirements and Mayor John Peyton has to be convinced of the security need, a city spokeswoman said. But the city needed to make a preliminary decision this month so the courthouse design can accommodate the bridge and, for now, the elevated walkway is in.
Prosecutors’ offices will be in the old federal courthouse, a $20.3 million renovation project about 100 feet from the county courthouse site.
Corey and Moran have differed for months on the need for the skybridge.
For Corey, it’s among her top priorities in the renovation, and Mike Weinstein, her office’s executive director, said you cannot put a price on the safety of employees.
Designs from all four firms in a 2002 competition include a bridge, Weinstein said, so others saw the need for it long before Corey was elected last year.
But, Moran says, those designs came when the Public Defender’s Office was also going to be in the building and before the new courthouse was moved closer to the offices.
“It doesn’t serve functionality, it doesn’t serve durability. It doesn’t serve anything,†Moran said.
The original plans also came when the budget was $190 million and the project was going to be done in 2005.
After budget issues, along with firings of consultants and contractors, the courthouse complex is now at $350 million and set for completion in summer 2012.
Moran said the bridge would also create a security issue because someone will have to staff the doorways to make sure only staff are allowed in.
Weinstein said previously that access will be controlled and everyone visiting the State Attorney’s Office has already been through security at the ground level.
Prosecutors now walk across Market Street between their offices and the courthouse.
http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2009-12-07/story/duval_courthouse_plans_to_have_third_floor_bridge_for_prosecutors_%E2%80%94_for_
Agreed, it is a waste.
It is a waste...but coming from Moran, its pot meet kettle
I am sure there will be more things that Moran and Corey will fight about, in public, so I can't wait........Yawn.
The Courthouse walkway is scheduled to be completed in March.
www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=541661
Almost 5 years in the making....