Editorial: Grant Circuit Court: How secure are we in our house of justice?
Published 5:00 pm Tuesday, September 18, 2007
The apparent suicide attempt last week during a verdict reading at the Grant County Circuit Court has a lot of folks thinking about security measures for the county’s seat of law and justice. Judge W.D. Cramer himself raised the issue immediately. The defendant, Michael Heroff, had hardly been whisked from the room by police when the judge announced that he wanted the strictest possible security measures in place for this Friday’s sentencing in the case.
Trending
That’s not to imply that the incident last week would have been prevented by common security measures. Heroff, found guilty on five counts in a child sex abuse case, popped some material, later identified as rat poison, into his mouth while still seated at the defense table in the courtroom. Obviously, metal detectors would not detect that kind of material, and nor would a routine purse and briefcase search. Heroff had been free on a type of house arrest pending the completion of his trial, so his movements in preparation for the court appearance were not monitored.
The incident, in short, was bizarre and unfortunate. As such, it shouldn’t be the foundation for sweeping changes in security at the courtroom.
But it is a good discussion starter for a review of general court security. The Grant County Courthouse, and the Circuit Court in particular, have an atmosphere of easy access that makes them seem truly agencies of and for the people. They have a user-friendly mien that is increasingly rare in other areas, and probably reflects our rural roots. It says to the world: We are a community of neighbors, people who know and trust each other.
Trending
But it also leaves us with considerable risk. The world is changing, and few in the post-9/11 era would pretend that it is less violent than before. Our court system deals with violent acts, emotion-charged disputes, and sometimes life-altering resolutions to people’s conflicts. It seems prudent that the security surrounding our courts at least give a clear message that this is a house of law, and lawful behavior is required of all who enter it. It may not be enough anymore to send that message by merely posting a police officer or two near the doors.