Months ago I served on a jury. That’s right, I was on the jury, not in front of it. Honestly.
Most people dread jury duty, but I’d never served on one, so I was kinda interested. Plus, it got me two days away from my day gig, which was a welcome break.
It was a lawsuit trial, to determine the sum of money to be awarded in a drunk-driving case. A wealthy CEO of a fast-food corporation was driving drunk in a large, expensive pick-up truck, and rear-ended a smaller pickup truck at a stoplight.
The victim in the crash sustained a mild back injury which has not impeded his ability to work, nor has it required therapy, or surgery. The victim required no special medications and took advil for the intermittent pain, at a cost of approximately ten dollars a month.
Two months BEFORE the collision, the victim had visited a local clinic complaining of back pain.
This was an epic battle between two very capable attorneys. The victim’s attorney was seeking an award of two million dollars.
That’s right. Two million.
The defendant’s attorney was nothing short of brilliant. As the opposing lawyer demonized the defendant…villifying him thoroughly as a multiple-offender ( which he was) who finally had to face the music…the defending attorney only nodded. I was like…what the hell? You gonna help braid the rope for the hanging of your client, next?
Of course, the defendant was guilty as hell. He’d served jail time with work release priviledges, though he later resigned in order to have more time for counseling and rehab. His wife filed for divorce during the interim.
There was no doubt the victim in this collision could have been killed, but the defendant managed to realize the red light at the last minute and stood on his brakes. Still, the collision was hard and the defendant’s truck sustained 12k in damage. The victim’s truck was hit on the ball hitch of the bumper, and took less damage as a result, but the frame was bent from the force.
But…two million dollars. I had some reservations about that kind of sum for a back injury, one that had reasonable doubt, at that.
When the victims wife took the stand and literally yelled at the defendant for his selfish, reckless behavior, the defendent looked her in the eye and took it. He didn’t look smug, he didn’t look angry. Like his attorney, he only gave a slight nod at various points, admitting his guilt. He’d already been convicted of the criminal charges and had served his time and completed his rehab, at this point….the ordeal in court now, over money, was the final punishment.
But the victim’s wife seemed to really be laying it on thick. What could have happened….ok, but we’re to settle what DID happen. Legally, I had a question on how much we were supposed to award on the basis of supposition, vs. the actual events. Could you really sue for what MIGHT have been? Was a sporadic twinge in the lower back worth two million dollars?
Not in my book.
Now, here is the important part of this story, and I’ve meant to blog this for a long time, because it’s important everyone understands what happened in the end.
The jury was handed a blank check, to determine the amount of the award for damages. For pain and suffering, both experienced to date and likely to be experienced in the future. For the emotional trauma of the victim and his family. For whatever the hell we wanted. The plaintiff’s attorney recommended two million, but we were not bound by that amount. We could award more, or less.
We were sent to the jury room, after two days of hearing expert testimony about how drunk this guy really ways at the time of the crash, and his prior record for drinking, his lifelong habit of alcohol, and basically what a demon lurked beneath that suit. How if we “let him off easy” he would probably just fall off the wagon and maybe next time kill somebody.
We listened as the defendent himself took the stand, quietly recited the events of that day, for what he could remember, and admitted his guilt, and spoke of his journey to sobriety and his current involvements in AA and church.
The victim took the stand and mocked everything the defendent said. He didn’t care! He only wanted to save his fortune. His past history speaks for itself.
I’d never witnessed the legal de-humanizing of a person before. I hate drunk drivers and it’s no joke, what happened. But again, I kept coming back to what really happened vs. the comparison to a “state epidemic” and how ” an example must be made.”
Two million bucks. Or more, if we chose to award it….
The final speech by the defense attorney, surprised us with it’s simplicity.
“You should award the defendant money,” this little, Elmer Fudd kinda lawyer said. “You should award him as much as you feel is justified. I respectfully disagree, however, with the amount he is proposing, and so does my client’s insurance company. This is why you are here today, to make a fair decision, since the plaintiff would not accept our settlement offer. Thank you.”
And he sat down. That was it.
In that jury room, the arguements of the plaintiff attorney couldn’t hold up against that simple defense strategy…which seemed to be no defense at all. All the vindictive fire, all the sharp logic, all the expert testimony, proved overkill.
We awarded just under one-half million, in the end. Mind you, we had no structure for our math, and could only guess what occassional doctor visits and x-rays and possible surgeries might cost if the condition worsened as the victim aged. And we all questioned what the injury really was, as the guy could stand and walk and carry things, by admission of his own medical specialist. He couldn’t do his golf swing quite right anymore, but that was perhaps the wrong example to give a mostly blue-collar jury, composed of the retired, unemployed, and a couple folks like me who worked hard for our wages.
We were all a bit taken aback, and startled, by being given a blank check to decide the financial fate of these human beings. Do we destory one guy financially, to set up the other for life? Is this justice? How much is enough? When does proper economic punishment become hitting the lottery? Suing somebody for a mint was so freaking easy it scared us all.
When we walked back into the courtroom, hours later, the victim and his wife had already left, but their attorney remained. The defendant and his attorney remained. The judge looked patient and calm, despite the expectant tension in the room.
The speaker for the jury announced the breakdown of the award and then the total. The plaintiff’s attorney looked slightly disappointed but could say nothing against it; we will never know, if our award was better than whatever settlement that the defendant’s insurance offered.
For himself, the defendent closed his eyes at the amount and let out a breath. His attorney seemed pleased; little Elmer Fudd, the mild-mannered, bespeckled attorney, allowed himself a small smile and gave a respectful nod to the jury.
The judge thanked us for our service. We were dismissed.
I overheard the defendant’s attorney as he said something to his client.
“It’s over now, David.”