Comments (5) | Add a comment
Colleagues challenge judge's comments on security cameras
-
DUANE PROKOP/LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL
Trees block security camera angles at the Regional Justice Center. » Buy this photo
Tools
LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL
Infighting has erupted among judges at the Regional Justice Center in the wake of a Las Vegas Review-Journal story about flaws in the building's security camera system.
In a series of e-mails obtained this week, several judges appeared to be more concerned about how the public learned of the security lapses than about any effort to correct the problems. Some expressed displeasure that a reporter was allowed into the courthouse control room to see how trees and shrubs blocked surveillance camera angles. And one judge has come under fire from her colleagues for discussing the problems with the Review-Journal.
In none of the e-mails obtained by the Review-Journal does a judge ask about fixing the problems.
Dan Kulin, a spokesman for Clark County, which controls the Regional Justice Center's budget, said county and court officials "came up with a mutually agreed upon solution" he would not discuss.
Court Executive Officer Steve Grierson said he doesn't agree that security camera angles were obstructed, but he would not elaborate. As of late Thursday, none of the blocking trees or shrubs appeared to have been trimmed.
Tension between judges at the 17-story courthouse began to mount well before publication of the newspaper article.
In a July 2 e-mail, Chief District Judge T. Arthur Ritchie Jr. chastised District Judge Susan Johnson for talking to a Review-Journal reporter and taking him into the building's control room. Johnson chairs the courthouse security committee.
"I assume you meant well, but you were specifically told that you were not authorized to address this issue for the court," Ritchie wrote. "I am disappointed that you would take it upon yourself to address this issue in this way. ... We will see whether your approach makes this better or worse for the court."
Johnson responded that, "You never informed me I was not authorized to address this issue for the court. Your response was ... that you would 'handle this,' which you did not do. Further, while I respect your role as chief judge, you have no authority to instruct me or any district judge that he or she cannot speak to the media without your consent."
"I did not call the reporter. The reporter telephoned me. He was writing the article with or without comments from me. While you may take a 'no comment' approach, I will not. I believe it best for the court to answer reporters' questions and diffuse any perception we are trying to hide something, which we are not."
Johnson then told Ritchie about the obstructions she saw, including trees outside the Regional Justice Center's main entrance and carports at a parking lot south of the building that form blind spots for the camera. These obstructions were apparent on monitors during the control room visit, and also were observed by District Court spokesman Michael Sommermeyer and Lt. George Glasper, who oversees courthouse security.
On July 6, the morning the story was published, Chief Justice of the Peace Ann Zimmerman e-mailed Johnson, criticizing her for talking to the newspaper.
"I believe that your interview further compromised security at the RJC by exposing potential weaknesses to those who may wish to do harm to our judges and/or the public at the RJC," Zimmerman wrote. "I believe you had good intentions, but the outcome is otherwise."
In an e-mail a few minutes later, Johnson told Zimmerman she didn't share that view. Johnson again said the Review-Journal reporter had made it clear he was going to write the story based on anonymous sources "with or without comment" from her.
This week District Judge Doug Smith set off a new round of e-mails between the judges.
In correspondence sent to all of the judges, Smith told Ritchie, "In the future, please do not disclose our safety to the newspapers. I don't feel comfortable with that disclosure."
When one judge responded with a simple "?", Smith wrote back in capital letters: "THIS IS IN REGARDS TO THE NEWSPAPER PERSON ALLOWED INTO OUR BACK OFFICES AND THE BAD PRESS WE RECEIVED. WHO APPROVED THE RELEASE(?)"
District Judge Elissa Cadish chimed in, "I too was extremely disturbed to read in the paper about exactly what cameras around the courthouse don't have the view they should have because they're blocked by trees or otherwise out of position. I do think it can easily put us at risk."
Johnson repeated her comments about her involvement, adding that her information, "in fact, made the story less negative than it would have been."
Cadish thanked Johnson for her explanation, but added in her response, "I'm just concerned about who those anonymous sources might be."
Contact Jeff German at jgerman@reviewjournal.com or 702-380-8135 or read more courts coverage at lvlegalnews.com.
Trending topics:
Comments
Terms & Conditions
The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The Review-Journal does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please use the Report Abuse button.
Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 24 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
see this:http://www.hiddenvideosurveillancecameras.com
@YOUR.RIGHT - what does the fact that Judge Ritchie went through a divorce have anything to do with him while he was Presiding Judge of the Family Division? Personal life and work life are two seperate items. Obviously you must be bitter because a Judge ruled against you, and probably did so correctly.
the govt should fear its citizens and not vica-versa-thomas jefferson
Those judges are paid by taxpayers, but they are afraid of us?????????????
Then don't become a judge.
Jeff German - Thank you for introducing "Chief" (?) Judge Ritchie to the elephant in the room. Judge (?) Ritchie is as out of touch with the judges as he is with his cases. Thanks for the exposure. More on Judge Ritchie is coming.
By the way, as long as you are exposing Judge Ritchie for who he is - He was divorcing while Presiding Judge of the Family Division. We are the mothers of abused children that he court ordered to their abusers to be re-abused. This biased and prejudicial judge's legacy is about to be exposed, with or without his cooperation.