By John Curran
Boston Globe
August 28, 2008
http://www.boston.com/news/local/vermont/articles/2008/08/28/mistrial_is_declared_in_vt_abuse_case/
Man says church is responsible for molestation
BURLINGTON, Vt. - A mistrial was declared yesterday after jurors deadlocked in the case of a former altar boy who sued the Roman Catholic Diocese of Burlington, saying he had suffered sexual abuse at the hands of a parish priest 30 years ago.
Three months after a similar case led to an $8.7 million damage award against the church, jurors in Chittenden County Superior Court could not return a verdict on the suit of a Waitsfield man who said the church was partly responsible for his molestation by a priest and should be held liable for damages.
 |
| Bishop Salvatore Romano, center, spoke to the press in Chittenden County Superior Court about a mistrial in the case of a former altar boy who sued the Diocese of Burlington |
They had deliberated for 16 hours over three days.
It was a legal victory for the church, but Bishop Salvatore Matano, the spiritual leader of Vermont's 118,000 Catholics, stopped short of calling it a relief.
"How can you talk about relief or optimism when we're dealing with the lives of people?" he said outside court. "I will only feel optimism or relief when all of this is brought to a conclusion and all of us can work toward reconciliation."
The man's chief lawyer, meanwhile, welcomed the mistrial and said he will seek a new trial. No date was set.
"We think that the jury worked really hard," said plaintiff's counsel Jerome F. O'Neill. "We think they saw information that they should not have seen."
The 40-year-old man, a former altar boy at Christ the King Church in Burlington, was not in court when the mistrial was declared. O'Neill and cocounsel John Evers had prepared him for the possibility of a mistrial.
The Associated Press does not identify victims of sexual assault without their consent.
The man said he was molested by the Rev. Edward Paquette in 1977 and 1978 while serving with him. He says it happened between 20 and 50 times in that period.
Paquette, who was suspended by the church in 1978 and now lives in Westfield, Mass., was not named as a defendant in the suit, one of more than a dozen filed against the diocese over his actions in Vermont.
The man filed suit in 2005, and his lawyers showed jurors documents that showed that Bishop John Marshall, former head of the diocese, knew of prior molestation allegations against Paquette during his stints in Fort Wayne, Ind., and Fall River, but hired him anyway. Paquette was assigned to parishes in Rutland, Montpelier and Burlington and was accused of molesting boys in each.
The Waitsfield man's lawyers urged jurors to award him up to $14 million in damages. But the church's lawyers cast doubts on his report of post traumatic stress disorder, sexual intimacy problems, and lack of trust stemming from his experience with Paquette.
They also told jurors that the man had never sought counseling, and that he did not file suit until after learning about a raft of sexual abuse settlements in Boston in 2001.
The facts closely mirrored those of the man in the earlier trial, but Judge Matthew Katz barred any mention of the $8.7 million award to the jury in this case.
When church lawyer Tom McCormick made reference to it in his closing argument Monday, O'Neill moved for a mistrial but Katz refused the request.
The seven-woman, five-man jury struggled with boredom and each other.
Just before closing arguments, one juror was dismissed because Katz said he had been sleeping through much of the testimony. He was replaced.
Then the panel wrestled with how much in compensatory damages to award, eventually sending a note Tuesday to ask for help. But Katz told them it was an issue they had to decide.
Yesterday, they said they were no longer making progress.
"You've given it your all, and that's all we can ask of you," Katz told them before dismissing them.
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.