EXXON JURORS DESERVED MORE RESPECT
Jan 23, 2001
MONTGOMERY ADVERTISER
Regrettably Skip Tucker has impugned the character, intelligence and integrity
of the twelve citizens of Montgomery County who made up the Exxon jury
(“Exxon verdict unjust, will not stand” - 1/12/2001). The
language and logic he uses is the same rhetoric increasingly used across
this country by those with the goal of undermining this country’s
civil justice system and our precious Bill of Rights, which includes the
right to trial by jury.
Tucker has substituted his judgment for that of a legally constituted
jury impaneled under the law. He well knows that all parties in litigation
have the same rights insofar as the selection of a jury is concerned.
He no doubts considers his knowledge, skills and abilities superior to
that of these law abiding citizens who did their civic duty and abided
by their oath to fairly and truly try this case and to render a just verdict.
Tucker, a spectator from afar, (I surmise that Tucker did not attend this
trial) instead maligns these citizens who should be applauded for being
courageous. As a citizen of this state, I could not be more disappointed.
In decrying the $3.5 billion in punitive damages assessed against the
corporation, Skip said the verdict revisits a time “where the wealthy
personal injury trial lawyer uses his or her wiles to beguile innocent
people into numbers that a few understand.” While the unfair stereotype
of the “snake-charming attorney” might be convenient for his
argument, it makes quite a few faulty assumptions.
It assumes that Exxon, with its huge bottom line, was either unable to
afford adequate representation or that the whole corporate defense bar
is helpless to defend their clients from the “powerful trial lawyer.”
It assumes that a Montgomery judge stood by passively, defenseless and
dumbfounded while plaintiff trial lawyers had their way, hypnotizing the
jury to forget all of their common sense and logic. Any practicing attorney
regardless of whether they represent plaintiffs or defendants knows that
we have a strong bench with judges that follow the law, demand professionalism
amongst the lawyers that practice in their courts, and give each side
a fair and impartial trial.
Tucker appears to assume that the residents of Montgomery County are,
to state it harshly, idiots. Apparently, Skip believes the citizens of
this county are easy to “beguile,” unable to follow a judge’s
instructions, unwilling to listen to evidence, and incapable of deliberating
in an intelligent manner.
I have argued before Montgomery County jurors for more than 23 years,
and I know that citizens who serve on our juries work hard, take their
oaths as jurors seriously and do their level best to follow the law.
The truth is that only those 12 citizens on that jury heard all of the
evidence and arguments suggesting that Exxon deliberately tried underpay
the state on royalties for 13 natural gas wells. Only those jurors heard
the evidence and arguments against that point of contention. Only those
jurors, after listening to the judge’s instructions, deliberated
on a verdict.
To insult their intelligence by second-guessing them without having gone
through the same process is arrogance.
This jury no doubt thought that its verdict must do what the law expects
punitive damages to do and that is to punish the wrongdoer and deter other
who might try to engage in similar misconduct.
The rhetoric use in Mr. Tucker’s article are the statements of a
movement which seeks, through decreasing access to the courts and spreading
mandatory, binding arbitration to allow corporate citizens to escape what
we, as private citizens, cannot escape -- responsibility for our actions.
As our founding fathers knew well, the collective intelligence of 12 citizens
working together in a jury is our greatest insurance that wealth and power
will not allow some to escape justice.