March 26--The first week of April ought to be interesting at the Leighton Criminal Court Building.
Starting April 2, those who show up to observe or participate in trials or who have other business in the massive edifice on California Avenue at 26th Street will find that lockers are no longer available for them to store their smartphones, which have been banned in the building since 2013.
I complained about the ban when it was imposed, even though it doesn't apply to working journalists and a long list of other exempt people, including jurors, attorneys and judges. It struck me as an excessive, tone-deaf response to a problem that seemed to be isolated and addressable by more clever and even lucrative means.
Cook County Chief Judge Timothy Evans said at the time that "people attending court proceedings were using their cellphones to photograph witnesses, judges, jurors and prospective jurors," and "appeared to be texting testimony to witnesses waiting their turn to testify outside the courtroom, while others were attempting to stream live, to media, comments by judges from the bench."
OK, so outlaw those practices, confiscate the phones of violators and fine the bejabbers out them. Don't inconvenience the vast majority of people who otherwise obey the rules of the courthouse and carry smartphones to stay in touch with clients, bosses, children, spouses, friends or ailing relatives, to keep track of appointments or to fill interminable waiting periods (common at courthouses) with idle electronic diversions.
The provision of storage lockers for phones and other banned electronics was a decent compromise with the reality that nearly everyone carries a cellphone these days and nearly every cellphone is "smart" in that it can connect to the Internet, take photos and make audio and video recordings.
That compromise began to fray about a year ago, according to a spokesman for Cook County, when the private company that had been overseeing the lockers decided to stop doing so. The county's Department of Facilities Management took over the task, but its civilian employees were troubled by the other forms of courthouse contraband -- including weapons and drugs -- they saw being stored in the lockers, the spokesman said. The department considered such contraband to be a security threat.
Unless they were worried about bombs, it's hard to see why members of the locker patrol felt they had to fret about or even take much notice of what courthouse patrons were stowing away for safekeeping. They're not security guards.
Nevertheless, Facilities Management officials told Evans on Feb. 19 that they planned to remove the lockers.
On March 2, Sheriff Tom Dart sent a letter to Evans predicting "chaos and confusion" and suggesting that Evans simply amend his 2013 order "to permit the public to bring cellphones" into Leighton, just as they can "in the Daley Center and police courts" as well as federal court buildings.
The ban has remained limited to Leighton, the main criminal courthouse, because "that's where the majority of the incidents were occurring," according to Evans' spokesman Pat Milhizer.
The problem of witness and juror intimidation using smartphone images is theoretically significant, but, just like three years ago when I asked, no one could point me to specific cases or otherwise demonstrate that it's a real problem, much less one of a magnitude that would justify inconveniencing hundreds of people a day, some of whom will have arrived at Leighton via public transportation and won't have the option of returning their smartphones to their cars.
A spokeswoman for Dart's office said Friday that there have been "very few instances of non-compliance" with the smartphone ban, "and those generally result in the person being held in contempt for a short while and the phone returned to them. I cannot recall any arrests."
Here's the solution: Confiscate the phone of any unauthorized personnel whose mobile device is visible in the courtroom or is being used to capture images anywhere inside the building. Ransom the phones for $300 and tack another $300 civil fine on top of that, and whatever problem you have, big or small, will go away.
Safe passage for Van Dyke
While I'm presuming to play courthouse administrator, let me add this:
Former Chicago police Officer Jason Van Dyke, charged with first-degree murder in the 2014 shooting death of Laquan McDonald, ought to be able to enter and leave the Leighton building unmolested by protesters or the media.
"He has been threatened every single time he's walked in and out of the building," Van Dyke's attorney told reporters Wednesday. He has been "told he was going to be killed, indicating that they hoped he was killed and raped in prison."
A defense motion has asked that Van Dyke, who is free on bond, be allowed to use a private entrance to the courthouse before and during his trial, just as R star R. Kelly did during his 2008 trial in the same building. Kelly was acquitted of child pornography charges.
This seems more than reasonable to me. No trial -- not even the trial of a widely reviled defendant at the heart of an internationally notorious case -- ought to be conducted amid rowdy atmospherics. A justice system that strives so mightily for decorum and formality and dignifying ritual inside the courtroom should make at least a minimal effort to expand the perimeter of seemliness and allow high-profile defendants the option of not having to run a gantlet every day.
Re: Tweets
It came down to a sweet 16 of finalists in the Tweet of the Week poll at Change of Subject online. The winner was "Maybe we're all being a little too hard on Donald Trump. Psychotic megalomaniacs have feelings too. Oh, wait, no they don't," by @WarrenHolstein.
You will not want to miss this week's contentious episode of "The Mincing Rascals," the local news-review podcast hosted by WGN-AM host John Williams on which I'm a regular panelist. It's available on iTunes and wherever fine podcasts are served free of charge.
