Class Trip to Criminal Court

There are many headlines in the news today in The New York City papers involving the criminality of young people. Young girl, 9 years old kills 11 year old friend. 12 year old Long Island girl strangles mother to death. 17 Year old Long Island, NY boy choke holds his father to death at the family barbecue. I see these headlines and am numbed at the impossibilities and the possibilities. Why is it not impossible for a child to strike and kill the one that gave them life? And to do such a vicious act at an age that should be full of innocence? How is this possible that children are killing at the age of 9?

My daughter is 13 years old and her 8th grade class took a tour of the criminal court of New York City. I was asked to come along as a chaperon. I was happy to do something for the class and for my daughter. When I arrived at my daughter's school and was introduced to her classmates, I felt good about the excursion and the adventure it would bring us. I did not expect the trip to be as deeply emotional as it was.

The trip came about because the children had a mock court in their class and were learning of court procedures and rules. The teacher decided at the end of the two week mock court to actually have them visit the several courts in downtown Manhattan. We were to visit the many courts that are featured in Law and Order, the television franchised tv programs. We were treated very respectfully by the court officers who were cheery and smiling when ushering us through the process of being screened for weapons. They made the experience as good as possible, but though pleasant could not mask the seriousness included in having your body scanned for weapons. That was the first step in the children being aware of the possibilities of violence and crime and the real life in which it happens.

We were met by an Assistant District Attorney of which there are over 500 in Manhattan Criminal Court. He was very sweet and didn't take any mess from mostly East Harlem Children he would be escorting through halls in which he prosecuted hardened criminals. I worried previous to meeting him that he would be overwhelmed by the children, many of whom were much taller and bigger, and, some seemed, more street wise than even me. He was old hat with the children, not hesitating to tell them to be quiet when it was needed, telling them to act right, and doing so without looking at me or the teacher for the go ahead. There were seventeen children in all and it was just me and their teacher escorting them to and from the school, and during the court proceedings he was with us. We meet him initially in a conference room and we all were sizing each other up, doing the usually thing people do when meeting others for the first time. He was explaining what his position was and what was the difference between a felony and a misdemeanors, and because the children knew a lot of the answers he asked from where did they got their knowledge of the court system and its proceedings. Many said from watching show such as Law and Order and The Wire, which happens to be a cable show. He said incredulously, "Oh some of you guys have cable?" And the air just sucked out of the room. The kids and I looked at him, "Like, what we can't have cable? What, just 'cause we're from the inner city, we don't have money to afford cable?" No one said it, but we were all thinking those words. It was like, "Oh, this is a bleeding heart liberal trying to give back to inner city people, meanwhile we didn't ask him for jack." Everyone kind of held their breath, and just paused. I said to myself, "Uh oh, this guy just messed up real bad." But he felt the tension really quick and understood from where it came, and said "No, no, that's cool you have it. You're lucky 'cause I am way too poor to afford cable." Everyone exhaled because his statement was from the heart and seemed beyond truthful and not judgmental of the children's' financial situation, but simply, just sorrowful about his. Everyone laughed. He, at the point, was alright with the children because he passed a major test: that he did not fake the funk about his financial situation. Often times that is a ice breaker for many people in social situations, and more specifically, in this one involving children from the inner city.

We continued with the lesson of what happens in court and then he laid down the law as to how the children were to act when going to the various court rooms. We would be going to the arraingment courtroom first, and that involved people who were arrested the night before who would then, by law, have to be seen within 36 hours by a judge and told why they were arrested, and what was to happen to them to address the charge. Would they be given a desk appearance ticket to come back and answer to the charge? Would they be released on their own recognizance or have to put up bail to guarantee they return to court? Or would the crime be so serious there would be no bail and they would be put away in the jail until a trial? There were other circumstances a person could find themselves under in the arraingnment court. What was stressed the most was the importance of having the uptmost reverence for the proceedings as this was a life and death situation for some people. At minimum, family members were present in the courtroom and were likely to be upset that their loved one was locked up for the night in prison, and per that we were to be respectful which entailed no talking, chewing gum, cell phones, no movement, just complete and utter attention to the proceedings.

What rattled many of us were that out of 10 defendants 3 were 16 years of age. That was a shock and many thought they should have been in Family Court. Upon leaving the courtroom we conferred in a common area outside of it, and were told by The ADA that what those teenagers were charged with obligated the courts to have their proceedings in Criminal Court. One of the cases involved a 16 year old who got caught up because he was in the wrong place at the wrong time. The police got a report of a young Hispanic man in a particular school with a gun in Spanish Harlem. Spanish Harlem is called just that because it is an enclave of Spanish, or rather Latino people, in Harlem. For the police to look for a Latino man in a school located within a Latino enclave that would presumably turn up the majority of the male population of the school as Latino, and do so without extreme care because of the great possibility of getting the wrong guy, is beyond me. This young man attended the school being investigated and was cutting class and was therefore the only one in the halls when the police pounced on him as he fit the general description of "Hispanic Male with a gun" He unfortunately did not react correctly as he fought the two plain clothes police men who undoubtedly were in fear of their life as they were doing their job and accosted him. They had probably cause as this young man fit the very general description of an armed man. Instead what they found was an unarmed man child, who was rightfully in the school he attended, albeit, he was out of class wondering the hall. Cutting class is an infraction of school rules but not a crime in the penal system. What is a crime is resisting being searched for a weapon when there is probable cause, and then fighting with and swinging on the police officers who are trying to frisk you, and doing the frisking within the letter of the law. This was explained to us by The ADA who noticed the looks on the children's, and I am sure, on my face, as to the ridiculousness of the situation that landed the boy, so young, in a prison, with grown men, for 36 hours, who will now, undoubtedly have a police record, because no matter that he was not the man the report indicated, but that he fought with the police in the course of their duty. And as such, these actions are punishable under the law.

We then went to another courthouse which had the trial phase of the criminal court process. After a person is charged with a crime should s/he not plead guilty to the crime and accept the punishment offered by a judge, the case goes to trial. We were witness to a murder trail and The ADA took the time to again stress the need for reverence and told of the two times he mistakenly thought his own cell phone was off and was reprimanded by the judge who took the cell phone away from him to only be returned after The ADA asked for it at the end of the work day. It was stressed that a man was on trial for murdering a man in the streets of Manhattan, and that should he lose the case he would be in jail for the rest of his life. We happened upon the day when the most riveting testimony happened, and it was the day the testimony was about how the murder took place. An eye witness came on the stand and told the gory details and we in the audience were riveted. It was an eye opening experience where the defense, trying to discredit the witness, got into the life of the witness and made it known that he was uneducated and a convicted felon, and the prosecution tried to paint a prettier picture of the eye witness by telling of his struggle of being born into poverty and struggling to survive. It was very interesting, and we happened on the day when the testimony was crucial.

The class trip was extraordinary in that I was able to spend time with my daughter in an environment that was hers exclusively. I saw her interact with her classmates and was struck by the respect they had for each other. Many of the students were from Spanish Harlem and were rough and tumble and were beautiful specimens of our youth. They were street wise, book smart, and respectful, and that is a wonderful combination. The trip was also extraordinary because of all the defendants in those Manhattan courtrooms, not one was white. All of the defendants were persons of color, and made me ask myself, "What, no White people committed any crimes on The Island of Manhattan." And all of the defendants are men. The Kings of people of color were locked up, and sure, maybe some of them were guilty, but why such a statistical lop-sidedness, a disparity, to the racial make-up of those being arraingned and tried. The young man who was arrested for resisting and was essentially in the wrong place at the wrong time, when released on his own recognizance, after spending the night in the infamous Tombs jail cells in the bowels of the city of NY only because he fit such a broad description in a neighborhood were the majority of the men fit it, was upsetting to see. When he turned from the judge and was released, an older woman, possibly his mother, met him in the aisle, with tears streaming down her face, and when he saw her, his face almost dissolved into tears but it was evident he choked them back and slung his arm around her neck and they walked out, him with defiance, and possibly with a hate for the penal system and its caretakers because of a situation that was all so avoidable. Will he be able to put this incidentsin a box within him so that it does not contaminate the goodness that is in him, or will he let it release into his soul, to darken it and darken his spirit? It was frustrating to see the many aspects of this court system and its incongruity and its exaggerated representation of the criminality we all know does not statistically occur in a metropolis like NYC.

It was a great class trip.