BishopAccountability.org
	Jury Awards $2.2 Million in Damages By Sam Hemingway Burlington Free Press October 9, 2009 http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/article/20091009/NEWS02/91008022/Jury-awards--2.2-million-in-damages UPDATE: 1:45 P.M.: A jury has awarded a former altar boy $2.2 million in damages today, finding the state's Roman Catholic diocese responsible for abuse by a former priest 30 years ago. The seven-woman, five-man panel spent parts of three days deliberating before returning with a verdict at 1:40 p.m. It awarded the Burlington plaintiff $2.2 million in compensatory damages -- the largest compensation award of the five priest-abuse trials to date -- but nothing in punitive damages. The specter of a mistrial hung over the Burlington priest molestation trial Thursday after a jury signaled it was struggling to reach a verdict in the case and was sent home for the night. At issue is how liable the state’s Roman Catholic diocese is for sexual abuse suffered by a former altar boy at the hands of the Rev. Edward Paquette in the 1970s, assuming the former altar boy’s lawsuit was filed soon enough to satisfy time-sensitive legal rules. The altar boy is suing the diocese, arguing it is to blame for his abuse because it placed Paquette at Christ the King Church in Burlington, where the molestations took place, knowing Paquette had previously abused boys in three states, including Vermont. The diocese does not dispute the abuse occurred but contends it relied on the advice of church doctors and psychologists when it hired and then retained Paquette. The Burlington Free Press does not publish the names of alleged victims of sexual abuse without their consent. The seven-woman, five-man panel got the case Wednesday afternoon and has since spent 10? hours trying to reach a verdict. It will resume deliberations at 9 a.m. today in Chittenden Superior Court. Thursday, the jury twice sent notes to Judge Helen Toor, asking in the morning for clarification of wording about the punitive damages portion of her instructions to the panel, and later to seek guidance because it was stuck on an issue it couldn’t resolve. “We have been discussing one specific point for over three hours and are unable to come to a common agreement. Do you have suggestions for how we may proceed,” read the note sent to Toor shortly after 2 p.m. Toor, after consulting with lawyers for the former altar boy and the diocese, met with the jury in the courtroom and read them a statement urging them to keep working. “This case is important to both the plaintiff and the defendant,” the note said in part. “The trial has required time and effort from many people. If this trial does not resolve the case, it may have to be retried a second time. There is no reason to believe any future jury would be any more conscientious or able to decide the case than you.” Toor, in a discussion with lawyers after the jury had left the courtroom, floated the idea of a partial verdict in the case should the jury conclude it is deadlocked on an issue. Under a partial verdict scenario, whatever the jury agrees on unanimously would constitute the verdict; a hung jury, or mistrial, would be declared for the unresolved part, which would have to be retried at a later date. Contact Sam Hemingway at 660-1850 or e-mail at shemingway@bfp.burlingtonfreepress.com. To have Free Press headlines delivered free to your e-mail, sign up at www.burlingtonfreepress.com/newsletters.
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.