Miriam Cyrulnik has been the presiding judge in the Youthful Offender Domestic Violence Court in Brooklyn, N.Y. since June 2004. She spoke with the Center for Court Innovation’s Carolyn Turgeon about her experiences.
How did the court come about? What problem was it trying to address?
In 2003 the Center for Court Innovation and the New York State Court System identified teen dating violence as an issue. At the time, the only other specialized court that addressed the issue was the Santa Clara County, California, Family Court. There was an extensive planning process that brought together court administrators, representatives of the D.A.’s Office, the defense bar, and service providers to come up with a system that would promote victim safety by developing links that would foster behavior change among adolescents arrested for dating violence; that would foster a collaboration among the criminal justice agencies, schools, and community groups offering assistance to the victims; and that would result in more informed judicial decision making by having one judge handle each case from beginning to end. The hope was that if teenagers were involved in a relationship in which there was violence, early intervention that specifically addressed teenagers’ daily issues, learning skills, and cognitive abilities, and a program that utilized a special victim advocate trained to work directly with teenagers and familiar with their particular needs, would make a real difference in their lives.
Are these cases that for the most part would not be brought before a judge if not for this court?
A lot of these cases would have been dismissed outright without any real service to either person. I think that one of the other major concerns was that, in the rare case that would actually go forward, putting a 16- or 17-year-old young man in a program with 30- and 40-year-old batterers would be a grave mistake. Having a special program geared towards their learning skills and issues, and one that is shorter and free, is an important difference. If the Youthful Offender Domestic Violence Court didn’t exist we would have no choice but to place kids in programs where they might end up sitting next to someone who had been a batterer for 20 years or more, which could undermine program goals. In the Youthful Offender Domestic Violence Court, we have the defendants come to court a bit more frequently than their elder counter-parts. Recognizing attention span differences, I see these young defendants more frequently in court, and our program monitors them more often.
Who is involved in the court?
I think one of the hallmarks of this program is that it really represents an ongoing collaborative effort. The D.A., the defense bar, and the service providers have all had tremendous input. We meet regularly to talk about issues that come up. We’re always modifying our procedures to respond to those issues, and we have input from the defense bar as well as the D.A. on how to handle them. I don’t think we could have done this so successfully without that collaborative effort.
Has the model proved successful so far?
The definition of success varies. Certainly by virtue of the fact that there is a dedicated victim advocate, many more cases have corroborating affidavits. By having a specialized advocate who reaches out to the teenagers, a much higher percentage of them sign these corroborating affidavits allowing the case to proceed. We have quite a number of cases in which the young men take a program called STEPS, which is a 12-week program that is free, and a good percentage of them complete the program. I can’t say that we never see them again. We have a number who are rearrested for domestic violence. We also have a number who are arrested for much more serious non-domestic violence offenses—robbery, murder, and so on, which I think is perhaps indicative of their difficult circumstances and the many problems they face day to day. A fair number of the young people we see have children in common with their girlfriends. Many have dropped out of school. There’s unemployment, there’s sometimes alcohol and drug use, and many of them have been exposed to violence in their own homes. But there are many others who go through the program and, I hope, internalize the lessons they’ve learned, and we don’t see them again. So our success, I guess, is a work in progress.
What resources does the court have?
The links to social services—for the complaining witnesses, for example—generally come through the D.A.’s office. They have links to lots of other social services, but there are issues unique to teenagers that may affect their ability to access the help. Shelters might not take the teenagers on their own, it’s more difficult to do safety planning, and quite a number of the victims live with their boyfriend’s family, particularly if they have children in common. Certainly the defense bar has social services or social workers they’ll refer defendants to. Sometimes if there are serious alcohol and drug issues they might be offered a plea involving completion of an alcohol or drug treatment program. But in terms of the kinds of other services I think you’re asking about, those come from the D.A. or the defense bar rather than from the court directly.
I almost never see the complaining witnesses. They’re not required to come to court. In most instances, there’s a full order of protection in place to keep the defendant away from the complaining witness. The victim advocates will reach out to them after each court date to let them know the status of the case and the next adjourn date, and to provide them with copies of the renewed order of protection. I normally wouldn’t see a complaining witness unless and until their testimony is needed at trial.
One of the hallmarks of the Youthful Offender Domestic Violence Court, along with other specialized courts, is that we have a dedicated resource coordinator who works with the defendants and the different programs to monitor and report on each individual’s progress. The resource coordinators work to ensure that each individual complies with program requirements.
So how does it work?
After someone is arrested, the case is referred to me if the person meets the Youthful Offender Domestic Violence Court criteria—which include being age 16 to 19 and in a permanent partner relationship.
I have some felony cases but because my jurisdiction is restricted to misdemeanors, I cannot accept pleas on felony cases. The felonies that I have are for the most part awaiting grand jury action or reduction to a misdemeanor and if there’s no action within six months the case is dismissed. But certainly in the Youthful Offender Domestic Violence Court the vast majority of the cases are misdemeanors. Usually it’s assault. It might be something like aggravated harassment where there are claims of patterns of phone calls or contacts that are threatening, but for the most part there is an allegation of a physical assault, or violation of a prior court order of protection.
Once a defendant is sent to me, the prosecution of the case continues essentially as any other prosecution does: the People have to file a corroborating affidavit, they can make an offer that may or may not be accepted, discovery is turned over, and the case is then put on for trial. It works its way through the system until there’s a disposition, whether that’s a result of a trial, a plea, or a dismissal.
Domestic violence courts generally focus on two things: victim safety and batterer accountability. Those are the two big pillars of domestic violence courts. So ours is no different; what makes us special is the way in which we approach the particular needs of the defendants and complainants.
Are defendants generally put into STEPS program?
Generally speaking they’ll be offered a violation, which is not a criminal offense, and the program. Once they complete the program the case is adjourned in contemplation of dismissal, which means it’s adjourned for a year and then dismissed. In many cases the prosecutor will make the offer of a plea involving the STEPS program, and, for one reason or another, the defendants may or may not be interested. The defense lawyer may or may not feel it’s a good thing for the client. There are a lot of factors that go into the decision to take a plea on a case, and the defendant and his or her attorney discuss that. They evaluate how strong the case is, the likelihood that the complaining witness will cooperate and go to trial, and so on. The number of young people we have in the program at any one time varies. I think the program can handle 15 at a time, and we now have about eight or nine individuals in the program. If the injuries are more serious or if they’ve already done the program and then get re-arrested, they won’t be offered the same program.
How do you monitor compliance?
A representative from STEPS comes to court both to interview potential defendants who might be interested in the program and to report to me on compliance, so I get a report every week. The reports provide a summary of open cases, sentences, and attendance.
I see the defendants every four weeks, more or less. If they go into the program by taking a plea I’ll see them a week later just to make sure that they got into the program. I tell them I can’t reward them for being in compliance with the program, but what I can do is get them in and out of court quickly. Court sessions begin every Thursday at 2:15, and the kids are told that if they show up on time and are in compliance, we will call their cases early. The worst torture for them is to sit there all day, and I promise them that if they are doing what they’re supposed to, we get them out of there, and they listen to that. I also tell them exactly what it is that I expect of them. I tell them straight out what the consequences are if they don’t do what they’re supposed to, and then I act on it. I don’t make empty threats and I don’t yell and scream at them. But they are told in no uncertain terms: “I expect you and want you to succeed in this. I expect you to attend all court dates, complete the program, and abide by the order of protection. If you don’t, I’m going to hammer you.”