Day 9:
It's over!!! What an interesting experience, to say the least. I am grateful to have had it, and now hope I never have to do it again. At least not one that covers 10 days total.
So yesterday we heard closing arguments all morning long and didn't really break much. By 1pm we were in the jury room deliberating and eating lunch at the same time. We had lost one juror several days ago who got sick. One more juror was sent home, being the other alternate just before we started deliberating. I'm glad it wasn't me as at that point I really wanted to finish the whole process. Throughout the trial the jurors spoke very generally about the case. Offering no opinions, just talking about what we saw going on. I had formed an opinion day one, but tried very hard to remain open minded. Almost wanting the plaintiffs to change my mind. They couldn't do it. The burden of proof lied with them, and to me they didn't prove the defendants did wrong. I will agree they maybe didn't make all the right decisions, based on all the information we have today, but given their experience, and information at the the time I felt everything they did was "reasonable". That is all the Utah Code calls for.
So originally there were 77 claims against the two trustees (defendants). Then we were told it was narrowed down to 5 main things they did wrong. We were given a packet of papers that had 29 questions we needed to answer. They were sort of divided into 7 sections, if I remember right. The first question in each section asked if the trustees failed to act according to their duties regarding a certain issue. If we answered NO then we could move on to the next section. If we answered YES then we needed to fill out the rest of the questions in that section. So we ended up not having to answer all 29 questions.
We talked about question #1 for almost 2 hours, getting nowhere. For each question, at least 6 people have to vote the same way (out of 8). We couldn't get 6 so we skipped over it and continued on. The next couple sections were easier. In each case, we never got 6 people to vote the same right away at first. I was stubborn and never changed my vote to a YES on any section. I ended up "loosing" 4 of the sections.
On the sections we voted YES on, we then had to answer if we thought damage was caused and if so, how much restitution should be paid back to the trust. I at least felt better that I was able to persuade others to vote for less money in restitution. So while not happy I "lost" a few sections I was happy the payments were much smaller than what the plaintiffs were seeking.
There were 6 sections based on "economic damages" or more like physical damage. The last was "noneconomical". The pain and suffering claim. The plaintiffs wanted $7M in total for the 6 economic damages. We were left to decide on our own with no real instruction for the pain and suffering. We ended up asking the trustees to pay $1.8M to the trust to cover economical damages. They will split that amount. They both have received close to $3M in fees and property as they were also beneficiaries, so it wont hurt too bad. They should also be able to recoup some costs that they "wrongly" paid to other lawyers.
The big one for me was the pain and suffering. We talked about this for quite a while. Everyone wanted to give them money, but me. I'm glad we talked it over before doing a vote. People wanted to give them anywhere from $50k each up to $100k each. There were 5 plaintiffs. I said if we give any money we should randomly give four of them a million each and the 5th gets nothing.
In the end I was able to convince the jurors not to give them any money. I took that as a big win.
With everyone wearing masks it was hard to get a feel for how they took the news when the judge read the verdict. Overall I took it as a win for the defense. They just presented their case so much better. We were thanked and excused to our room. We were asked to stay and talk to the judge afterwards and 4 of us did. He came in and spent a few minutes with us talking about the case and how impressed he was with our findings. He then told us the lawyers wanted to meet with us as well. We went back in the court room and actually had a very nice meeting with all of them. It was very casual with lots of laughing and joking. We gave them feedback on what we liked and didn't like about the procedure of the case. I was impressed they all knew and called me by my name, and not "#5". When I finally left if was close to 8pm.
In the end I'm glad for the opportunity and hope I never have to do it again. At least for such a long trial. This was considered a "huge" trial for a Utah state trial. As a rule I have always voted judges out when given the opportunity on a ballot, as I don't like keeping people in. I may have to rethink that a little now. I gained a lot of respect, at least for this one.
