The Juvenile Judges

FOR YEARS, critics have charged that the juvenile justice system in Dallas County is hamstrung by a lack of
consistency and unity. It doesn’t take many visits to the courthouse to find out that the lack of unity goes all the
way to the top: Dallas County’s only two juvenile court judges act more like adversaries than allies. And the
critical treatment a young juvenile offender receives can vary erratically, depending upon whose court he or she
winds up in.

Judge Craig Penfold and Judge Pat McClung will acknowledge each other in the 6th floor hallways of the Records
Building. They’ll sit near, but rarely next to, each other in meetings several times a week. But for one judge to
have a drink with the other or talk shop over lunch? It rarely happens, say courtroom insiders.

Some people working in the juvenile department admire one judge and loathe the other; most people agree that the two
have different styles. Says one source: “One judge has his head in Highland Park; the other judge is grounded in Oak
Cliff. They exhibit two completely different approaches to juvenile justice. You can’t really say one’s wrong.”

McClung prides himself on keeping a close eye on the budget. Courthouse insiders say he’s more likely than Penfold
to dismiss a case or put a juvenile on probation because it costs the county money to send an offender to a youth
institution. In 1980, McClung dismissed three cases for every two that Penfold dismissed.

Judge Penfold, a 38-year-old Democrat, was elected in May 1977, one year after his appointment to the 304th Family
District Court; he ran unopposed in 1978. He received his bachelor’s degree in 1965 from the University of Colorado
and attended the University of Texas at Austin School of Law. “I believe in young people,” he says, “that’s why I’m
here.”

Judge McClung, a newly turned Republican, was appointed to the 305th Family District Court in 1975 and was
re-elected the following year. In 1978, he ran against former juvenile court judge Theo Bedard and won. The son of a
Baptist preacher (“we were poor, but proud”) and a graduate of the Oklahoma University School of Law, McClung
applied for an appellate court appointment this past summer but failed to receive it. “Well,” he says, “you always
try to advance yourself, but that doesn’t mean I’m unhappy with my current job.” Judge McClung has just turned 58.

Court sources describe Judge Penfold as “sickeningly ethical,” and “careful about his dealings almost to the point
of absurdity.” Some probation officers believe he’s “too much of a gentleman,” and that his “nobility of character
makes him unable to fight back.”

“He’s an aristocrat. He’s an intellectual,” says one court source. “When he first started here, he irritated some
people by seeming unnecessarily formal and hung up on his role. He had a habit of saying ’your good attorney’ as in,
’I’m sure, Mrs. Adams, that your good attorney will take care of that.’ He’d be presiding over a courtroom filled
with child abusers, prostitutes, mental cases – the sludge of the earth – and he’d be doing that your-good-this,
your-good-that routine like a British gentleman. He’s cut most of that out now.”

“He truly cares about the kids,” says another court source. “Sometimes I get the feeling he’s up there really
agonizing about what is the right thing to do.”

McClung, on the other hand, is said to be insensitive, a scrapper, a “little general obsessed with his godlike
role.” A lawyer who has worked with him says he’s really tough to get along with “but a good juvenile judge.” In
March 1977, the Times Herald printed a series of allegations against McClung slung anonymously by probation
officers. The reports included McClung’s making questionable rulings, canceling his court docket and ridiculing
probation officers. McClung denied the accusations. But some of the probation officers are still hot about it, and
they’re quick to point to a Morning News article of October 1979, when a “unique” cash-flow relationship was
revealed between Judge McClung and one of his campaign contributors, who also happened to be the most frequently
used of his court-appointed counsels. Several people associated with the juvenile department keep a “McClung file”
filled with clippings and the names of juveniles they believe were misplaced by the judge. It’s rumored that some
probation officers intend to form a coalition to work against McClung during the 1982 election year.

Both judges receive the same number and nature of cases. Judge Penfold claims that between 21 and 27 percent of his
kids leave his courtroom and commit other crimes. Judge McClung says the recidivism rate from his courtroom is much
higher, about 50 percent, and that such recidivism usually occurs within 90 days.

Court records reveal several differences that only prove there is more than one way to uphold the law. Judge Penfold
keeps a clean house by working to clear as many cases as he can each month. “I try to hear a case within 30 days of
the offense, and there’s no excuse not to hear it within 45 days,” Penfold says. Judge McClung, whose pending case
tally has been higher than Penfold’s almost every month for the three years we counted, says that the other types of
cases he handles take up the time he needs to hear delinquency cases. In January of this year, Judge McClung had 124
cases pending; Penfold had 80. In April, Judge McClung had 88 cases left unresolved; Penfold had 15. In all of 1980,
Judge McClung dismissed 305 juvenile delinquent cases; Judge Penfold dismissed 202.