It’s not every day that a judge on the city’s lowest court subpoenas the chief of police to make him answer such basic questions as when the Police Department’s Domestic Violence Division was created.
But such was the case this week in Judge Gloria Dumas’ court, where Police Chief Emmett Turner and 11 other high-ranking Metro police officials and prosecutors were ordered to appear to answer a litany of mostly mundane questions about how they do their jobs.
The bizarre—and perhaps unprecedented—court proceeding was also attended by Davidson County District Attorney Torry Johnson. Five of Johnson’s assistant district attorneys were subpoenaed to appear.
The hearing followed a run-in Dumas had about three weeks ago with officials from the Police Department’s Domestic Violence Division, during which the judge expressed frustration that detectives weren’t appearing in her court for domestic violence trials. Dumas indicated during the hearing that police officials—specifically domestic violence Capt. Shirley Davis and domestic violence Sgt. Gayle Bass—refused to cooperate with her. The judge indicated repeatedly during her questioning that the absence of detectives in court often leaves the testimony of victims uncorroborated, weakening the prosecution’s case.
The discord apparently has led several police officials to file formal complaints against Dumas with the state Court of the Judiciary, which oversees judges in Tennessee. (Those complaints don’t become public record unless the Court of the Judiciary finds probable cause to hold a hearing.)
So if Dumas’ proceeding on Monday wasn’t strange enough on its own, lawyers and others in the courtroom point out that the judge appeared to be reacting to the complaints against her by subpoenaing the complainants and questioning them under oath. In other words, not only was Dumas’ lengthy hearing a head-scratching legal proceeding, it also seemed somewhat inappropriate.
Most of the dozen officials Dumas subpoenaed came to her court under the impression that they would simply meet with the judge briefly to discuss how to ensure that Domestic Violence detectives would appear for trials.
But once there, it became clear Dumas had something more elaborate in mind. That is, she dramatically made the dozen officials swear an oath, then, one by one, while the others waited outside her courtroom in the Ben West Building, she painstakingly questioned them about how police and prosecutors handle domestic violence cases from the time of the complaint to the time those cases make it to her court.
Occasionally throughout the four-hour proceeding, which is set to continue on Thursday, Dumas referred to the affidavits of police officials. Neither Dumas nor any of the witnesses said explicitly what those affidavits related to, although courtroom observers gathered they were filed as part of the judicial complaints against Dumas, about which the Court of the Judiciary is required to notify the judge.
Dumas also ordered that each of the witnesses was bound not to discuss his or her testimony or the proceeding until she issues an order.
”As far as I know right now, I have not stepped over any lines,“ Dumas told the Scene the day after the hearing. Dumas didn’t confirm that complaints have been filed against her, but when asked whether it would be appropriate for her to refer to complaints in her own court while questioning the very people who had complained against her, Dumas said the court hearing was about something altogether different.
”I’m not trying to have a hearing on complaints, and if I were, believe me, the questions would be very different,“ she said. ”The questions I have asked have been how they have conducted themselves in my courtroom. As far as personalities and things of that nature, I’ve not gotten into that that I can tell, I don’t think.“
Dumas says her heated references to the affidavits only came when she knew a police witness wasn’t telling the truth. ”Reference to affidavits have come when they have either denied something or said, ‘I don’t know what you’re talking about,’ and I have said, ‘OK, here’s where I’m getting this from.’ “
Monday’s hearing was so unusual and confrontational that Police Chief Emmett Turner called in a Metro lawyer to represent him and others. And another police official, domestic violence Lt. Danny Driskell, brought Nashville attorney Ed Yarbrough as his private counsel, although Driskell wasn’t called to the stand Monday. He is set to testify Thursday.
At one point, the Metro attorney, Jim Charles, objected to the judge’s reference to police affidavits and asked her to clarify the nature of the proceeding. The judge berated him, told him the hearing was about setting procedures, overruled his objection, and continued her questioning.
”When clients—Metro employees—ask for our assistance, we try to provide it,“ Metro Legal Director Karl Dean says of Charles’ representation. ”It’s not really clear in this context what our assistance could be, but Metro is interested in seeing that domestic violence cases are handled appropriately and that there are proper procedures.“
Dumas told the Scene later that she had every right to hold the hearing and that lawyers and others confused by it simply weren’t used to the format.
”I have an absolute right to set any procedures in my courtroom,“ Dumas said. ”I think what is confusing people is that rather than just putting down an order and saying this is how you are going to do things in my courtroom, I’m actually listening to them to tell me what the problems are.“
Dumas’ questioning gave particular weight to her Jan. 7 meeting with prosecutors, domestic violence officials, and others. There was apparent agreement that police would make sure prosecutors knew who the detectives were in domestic violence cases so they could be subpoenaed to appear during trial. Apparently, despite the agreement, that information is still not being shared. Solving that problem seemed to be the central theme of Dumas’ lengthy interrogation.
Besides Dumas’ most recent altercation with the Police Department’s domestic violence officials, there was another subtext to Dumas’ hearing. As one of two judges who handle the domestic violence dockets, she’s been aware of recent turmoil within the division.
Earlier this year, the unit’s highest ranking official, Capt. Shirley Davis, arranged for the transfer of popular police Lt. Mark Wynn. Wynn, known nationally for his work and training on the issue of domestic violence, ultimately resigned. Shortly thereafter, the Scene revealed that unit Sgt. John Smith helped the Tennessee Titans’ Denard Walker make bail after the football player was arrested last summer for assaulting his girlfriend.
The unit has also come under fire for abolishing a children’s playroom at its office. That has meant children are often present to hear the retelling of violence when detectives interview victims.
Critics also point to what they say is a culture within the Police Department of not taking domestic assault seriously. Even the police chief has publicly said he’s not prepared to fire officers who themselves are involved in domestic assaults. ”I don’t think we can put a steadfast rule in place and say that for every simple assault in a domestic case we’re going to terminate people,“ he recently told The Tennessean. ”You have to look at the circumstances.“
