The courtroom itself was much different than any other we had previously seen. The room was quite small for the amount of people that were there for the trials. Little room was devoted to seating for observers and families. Over half of the room was space given to the lawyers, jurors, and the judge to do their business. The jury section was empty that day until just before 1:30 when two Oakland County Sheriff’s Deputies escorted nine shackled prisoners in a row into the courtroom. Each of the nine prisoners, seven male and two female, had on different colored Oakland County Jail issued uniforms and they were seated in the jury seats of the courtroom. The demographics of the incarcerated were five white males, two black males and two black females. Their age range was from a nineteen year-old female to a 52-year-old white male. At 1:30 exactly a pretrial finished and the lawyers in unison approached the jury box to talk to their respective clients.
There were twenty or more pre-trials or trials that day. The speed in which they were handled was surprisingly fast at times. One could tell that everyone involved in the court had went through these procedures many times before. The chaos as we saw it looked very routine for the people invested in the cases. The crime du jour seemed to be violation of probation. Of the cases we saw violation of probation was the charge in at least half. Other charges that day included possession of a controlled substance, oddly enough cocaine in all of these instances, failure to pay child support, and attempted armed robbery. Violation of probation was a result of a few defendants committing these other crimes. The attorney’s main focus seemed not to prove their clients innocence but to lessen the penalties through plea-bargaining. In many instances the attorney’s achieved their goal. In some due to the defendant’s prior record a lessened penalty was just not an option. There were only a few cases that were resolved and sentenced that day. Most of the cases were adjourned until other dates, December 8th being the most popular. The latest a case was scheduled to return was January 15th of 2006.
There were many trials to watch that day but one of them stuck out most clearly in our minds. The case was People vs. Randall McQuaid. In this a 29-year-old African –American man, Randall McQuaid, had attempted an armed robbery then was pulled over by the police. In an attempt to get away he ran from police on foot, and was apprehended. Randall was not one of the men in shackles but by the end of the trial he joined the others in the jury’s box and in shackles. Randall had a few prior convictions in Michigan, as well as, Hawaii where he is from. He had also spent time in jail, on work release, and was still on probation when this event occurred. He was also a father of three and currently working two jobs. His lawyer, who we cannot name due to the quickness of the proceedings, asked the court for work release for less than twelve months so Randall could continue to make money to pay the fines and child support. The charges were felony and could result in three to five years. The public was seeking a sentence of fifteen to eighteen months with the last six as work release and counseling. The defendant after being asked his age, education level, reason he is at court that day, and other questions to check the level of his comprehension of the court and his charges was asked if he had anything to say to the court. He apologized for what he did in a way that seemed somewhat sincere but also seemed like a broken record. After both sides stated their cases, the court’s revelation of past convictions, and Randall McQuaid’s apology Judge Warren decided to agree with the public’s recommended sentence. Randall was then handcuffed and placed with the others in the jury box. Looking back at his family that had come for the trial from Hawaii you could sense the emotion of what had just happened before us.
Judge Warren was a busy man that day. With the load of cases before him he handled each case in an efficient, attentive, and careful manner. Not once did he seem to get riled up by a case, attorney, or defendant. Judge Warren asked questions and stated official courtroom lines with such speed and accuracy that amazed us and made it hard for us to follow every word. Clearly the Judge need not read these lines any longer. They were stated aloud through memory and repetition. Even though it seemed like the same old script for each case he judged each individually and fairly. At times he used humor to lighten the busy atmosphere. In one instance he said he agreed to lessen a sentence of a man accused of assault with a knife because he was wearing a Michigan football jersey and he even cheered “Go Blue.” Judge Warren was fair and honest, and handled the courtroom like an experienced veteran.
The courtroom observation experience was fascinating. At times throughout the course of our education we had both attended other court trials. We had never been to a court where so much was going on in a single day. The speed and efficiency of the court was a bit overwhelming at times. At the end of the day we agreed that the courtroom was an interesting experience and that we never wanted to be on the other side of the courtroom.
