Freestone-Limestone Counties

Office of Indigent Defense

118 East Commerce, Room 205 200 West State Street, Suite 101

Fairfield, Texas 75840 Groesbeck, Texas 76642

Office: 903-389-3335 Office: 254-729-3810

Fax: 903-389-3839 Fax: 254-729-2643

April 28, 2006

Bryan Wilson,

Grants Administrator,

Task Force on Indigent Defense

P. O. Box 12066

Austin, TX 78701

Dear Mr. Wilson,

Due to the omissions in the Mental Health Defense Program final report and our failure to follow some of the prescribed procedures, I would like to take this opportunity to explain how we came to purchase the video-conferencing equipment that was included in our grant. Although we did not create a formal, written plan as was expected, a great deal of work and planning went into the video-conferencing aspect of our program.

A number of meetings took place between the county and district judges, sheriff’s department personnel, the contract attorneys, our technology experts, and me. Below is a list of the formal meetings that took place to make decisions and plans for video-conferencing, and please note that this list does not take into account numerous informal phone calls and visits that also helped to form our plans and expectations for our program.

5/16/05 I attended the Freestone County Commissioner’s Court to discuss the MHD Program and the video equipment. At this meeting, the commissioners were able to ask questions and make suggestions concerning the video-conferencing equipment.

5/25/05 I attended the Leon County Commissioner’s Court for the same purpose.

7/14/05 I met with Scott Wells, Limestone County technology consultant, to make plans for the video equipment.

7/18/05 Judge Elenor Holmes, Mr. Wells and I met for the same purpose.

7/22/05 Judges Holmes, Linda Grant, and Byron Ryder; Scott Wells; and I met in Freestone County specifically to discuss the video equipment. It was at this meeting that the majority of the important decisions concerning the video-conferencing part of our program were made, and other minor details about the actual implementation of the plan were left to me and Mr. Wells.

7/29/05 Scott Wells and I went to Leon County to meet with Judge Ryder and Steven Sutton, Leon County technology consultant, to discuss the video equipment, to look at the physical locations where the equipment was expected to be installed, and to determine what software and hardware requirements would be needed to complete the system. We also went to the Leon County Jail to talk to Sheriff Mike Price and Mike Starkey, head jailer, for the same purposes.

8/5/05 I met with the judges to follow up on the 7/22 meeting.

8/22/05 I met with Sheriff Ralph Billings of Freestone County to discuss the program and the video equipment.

9/13/05 Scott Wells and I went to Freestone County to meet with Judge Grant and Sheriff Billings. This meeting was similar to the 7/29

Leon County meeting and accomplished the same purposes.

9/20/05 I met with Sheriff Billings again.

9/27/05 I met with John Ashley, head jailer for Freestone County, to discuss installation of video equipment.

9/28/05 I met with Mike Starkey again.

When this grant program was first brought to my attention, it was explained to me by our county officials that part of the grant would include video-conferencing equipment. Throughout the course of our meetings, we determined that once the video system was in place, the contract attorneys, caseworkers, and others involved in the inmates’ defense could use the system to make contact and confer with the defendants who are in jail. This would be a cost savings, but more importantly, it would allow the attorneys and defendants to have more contact with each other than is normally the case due to the limitations of time and distance. Having increased opportunities for the attorneys and caseworkers to meet with their clients would undoubtedly improve the quality of representation for defendants in the Mental Health Defense Program.

The judges also believe that in the near future the video equipment could be used to allow inmates who were part of the Mental Health Defense program to be arraigned and make court appearances through the video system. This would enhance safety for the court, jail staff, and defendants, as well as be a cost savings for the transport of inmates. In addition, the counties involved felt this would be a good starting point for eventually creating a system that would allow virtually all of their inmates to appear in court through a video system.

In meetings between various county officials and our technology consultants, we assessed the current computer systems for Freestone and Leon Counties. It was determined that the current networks in both counties would support the type of system that would allow us to achieve our goals. We also decided what hardware and software we would need to purchase, the amount of money we could spend for it, where the money would come from, and how it would be installed at the various locations. Below is a chart showing what equipment would be purchased and where it would be installed*:

Freestone County / Leon County
Courthouse: One Polycom “Judicial Cart” – This is a self-contained, mobile unit with a camera, microphone, TV, and VCR/DVR that can be used in virtually any room in the courthouse. Attorneys and judges could use this unit to meet with mental health defendants who are in jail. / Courthouse: One Polycom “Judicial Cart” – See Freestone Co.
Jail: One Polycom “Judicial Wall System” – This is a wall-mounted, fully enclosed unit with camera, microphone, and TV that will be installed in a secure, private visitation room within the jail for attorneys to meet with mental health defendants. / Jail: One Polycom “Judicial Wall System” – See Freestone Co.

*These units would be used in conjunction with already existing video-conferencing equipment in Limestone County. The contract attorneys have access to a video unit in the District Courtroom and to a video unit located in a private consultation room at the Limestone County Juvenile Detention Center. These units will be able to connect with the proposed units in Freestone and Leon Counties so that our Limestone County-based attorneys can use the system to meet with their clients in any of the counties.

Once the purposes, expectations, and requirements for the video-conferencing system were decided upon, we could begin the process of actually purchasing the equipment. Since we used the state bid list for video-conferencing equipment, it was not necessary for us to publish an RFP. We bought the needed equipment and hired qualified companies to install it. We are now at the point where the systems are almost in place, and soon we can train the appropriate personnel and begin using the systems. All of the judges, jail staff, and contract attorneys are excited and ready to begin.

Sincerely,

Eric Turrubiarte,

Indigent Defense Coordinator