Plans for a glass enclosure in Marin County's only juvenile courtroom

Marin County court officials defended their proposal Thursday to improve security by requiring juvenile suspects to sit inside a glass enclosure during court proceedings, regardless of whether those suspects are accused of violent crimes.

Kim Turner, executive officer of the Marin County courts, said the plan is a needed safety measure at the juvenile courthouse, which shares space with the juvenile hall on an isolated road near San Rafael.

The plan, which is awaiting approval by a panel of superior court judges later this month, would include the construction of a rectangular box roughly 11’ X 12’ and standing about 8 feet high. The walls would be made of tempered glass that is not bulletproof. Planners haven’t decided yet whether the structure’s door would lock only from the outside or from the inside as well.

The enclosure would be used during hearings to determine whether incarcerated minors should be allowed to live at home during their trials.

New York attorney Andrew Vachss, who has represented youth for 35 years, called the proposal “bizarre” and said he could not think of a jurisdiction in the U.S. that used such precautions.

“I’ve never heard of anything like this before, not on this planet,” he said. “Why you would use this incredibly elaborate contraption in that situation is absolutely wacky.”

Turner, who, along with judges and court administrators, has been instrumental in developing the plan, said she did not know how much it would cost to build the glass box.

But she said it would save the court money, although she acknowledged it would not replace the bailiff in the juvenile courtroom. According to Turner, the enclosure would limit the number of security personnel needed to safely conduct proceedings.

Since 2001, budget issues have forced Marin County to reduce the number of bailiffs from 24 to 16, Turner said.

The court’s isolated location — which is several miles from the main courthouse — has spotty cellphone reception, Turner said, and is far from law enforcement agencies that respond to emergencies at the court. An increase in cases involving serious offenses also contributed to the decision to contain minors in the glass box.

“Our idea is to create a little bit of physical security, because it would be difficult to get law enforcement back up out there,” Turner said. “There have been a number of concerning incidents even in the last 12 months that made us say, wow, we really wish we had some more security.

No injuries occurred in those incidents she said.

“Nobody wants to see anybody get harmed,” said James Nielsen, an attorney with Alternate Defenders Inc. in San Rafael, who is helping to circulate a letter among defense attorneys expressing concern over the plan. “The whole question is: is this really necessary?”

Turner dismissed a litany of criticisms from defense lawyers who likened the proposed structure to a “glass cage.” 

“That could not be further from the truth,” Turner said. “There are no metal bars.  The word cage is inflammatory, and that’s not at all what we’re trying to do.”

Nielsen and other lawyers said the proposal could infringe on civil liberties of juvenile suspects and interfere with their ability to defend their clients.

Nielsen said defense attorneys often get up to confer with prosecutors during proceedings.

“You would have to step out of the cage and walk over and slow down the proceedings,” he said. “Would I have to let the judge know I was leaving the cage?”

Turner acknowledged that a bailiff would probably have to let the attorney out of the box in such instances, but dismissed concerns that placing kids in the enclosure would violate any rights.

“If they think they have constitutional grounds to contest this, I have yet to hear it,” Turner said.

“From the court’s perspective, we have a duty to conduct these proceedings in a safe environment,” she added. “Whatever safety measure we take with that goal in mind is legitimate.”