Before taking the bench in 2022, U.S. District Court Judge Charlotte N. Sweeney was an employment discrimination attorney. While the cases could be emotionally charged, they were different from the criminal proceedings she is now handling.

“It wasn’t necessarily affecting people’s life and liberty. And once you hold those cards, I think you have an obligation to view it differently,” she said. “I was immediately struck by the lack of compassion that the criminal justice system seems to demand at times. So, I almost immediately set about figuring out how to make sentencings — not ‘compassionate,’ but just more human.”

Sweeney spoke to attorneys during a webinar on Tuesday about the topic of compassion in the courts. She focused on her efforts to connect with criminal defendants at sentencing and potentially set them up for success when they return to the community.

“I really do focus on talking to the defendant. At first, you could tell attorneys were not used to that,” Sweeney said. “No, I’m talking to Mr. Smith and I want to hear from him. Just little things about addressing the defendants personally and engaging personally sends a message that we’re all human here.”

Sometimes, she added, “victims feel like, ‘Why is she treating him as human? He’s a monster.’ And I appreciate that and I have to balance that.”

More unusually, Sweeney said that she has been meeting with defendants and their probation officers after the defendants’ release. There are no attorneys present, “which did cause a stir for the first six months until folks learned to trust me,” she said.

“I’m not in a robe. I tend to dress a little down on those days. And I come over and we sit and listen about, one, if they want to talk about their experience in the justice system. And, two, how they’re going to succeed from here on out,” Sweeney elaborated. “I think it’s imperative that these folks understand they’re back in society now. People care about them. We want them to succeed. … I understand it won’t help the majority of people I meet with. But it will help a couple.”

Also speaking on the webinar was U.S. Magistrate Judge Kathryn A. Starnella, whose interaction with criminal defendants revolves around initial decisions whether to detain someone before trial in accordance with the factors outlined in federal law.

“There are times when, despite the government’s strong arguments to detain somebody, I realize that treatment is not something that this person actually had the opportunity to participate in,” she said. “I’ve determined I’m going to release the person on conditions. I look at the person and I speak directly to the individual and I explain this is really an amazing opportunity for them. And it’s an opportunity I encourage them to seize. And they will get as much out of it as they put into it.”

In civil cases where she facilitates settlement conferences between the parties, Starnella said emotions can be “very raw.” She said her goal is to get the litigants to a result that will allow them to move on with their lives.

“You may have somebody who lost a family member and they can’t explain to their children why this person died,” Starnella said. “Or you may have somebody who strongly and firmly believes that their employer was racist and our society is racist.”

Rick Barinbaum, a clinical social worker who teaches at the University of Michigan, also joined the webinar and addressed the ways that compassion can be lacking in the legal profession.

While the justice system depends upon the cooperation of attorneys, “it’s an extraordinarily adversarial process, which means you’re constantly interfacing with people who are your enemy, or who seem like your enemy,” he said. “It’s emotionally challenging work where you have to hold in your emotions. The one exception is anger. You’re allowed to pound your first on the table and get angry, and that’s seen as normal.”

Sweeney said that juries, in her experience, do not like to see people fight. She recalled an insurance trial in which one of the attorneys struggled with the basics of federal court and the opposing counsel, at the end of trial, asked Sweeney’s staff how she could help the struggling lawyer in the future.

“I will remember that act of kindness forever. These things stick with judges because we don’t see it that often,” Sweeney said.

With self-represented, “pro se” litigants, Starnella said she takes the time to explain concepts to them that attorneys and judges are already familiar with. On one occasion, an attorney litigating against a pro se plaintiff put his concern on the record that Starnella was advocating for the unrepresented party.

“I also placed on the record an explanation of what I was doing. It was an equal access to justice issue,” Starnella said. “I was viewing it as I was trying to level the playing field and acknowledge the humanity of the pro se litigant, and that they didn’t have the wealth of knowledge that the attorneys and the court had.”

Finally, Sweeney disclosed that she maintains a “lengthy and detailed chart” about criminal sentencings that tracks various details about defendants and their cases, so that she can ensure she is basing her decisions on valid factors across all criminal proceedings.

“We’re really just talking about how to understand people for who they are and how they got here, and to recognize everybody has a story,” she said. “It’s an important story. And if you don’t understand the story, you can’t do any good moving forward.”

The Faculty of Federal Advocates sponsored the discussion.