Dismissed Jurors Would Have Ruled in Favor of Plaintiffs
Two alternate jurors, who were dismissed late Thursday night after closing arguments were completed, said they would have found ESD liable for gross negligence in a family’s civil suit against the school.
Jennifer Arnold, 27, and Daphne Alberty, 47, didn’t think ESD had acted in Jane’s best interest when they forced the girl to leave 60 days after her sexual relationship with a teacher was revealed. Alberty and Arnold also agreed that ESD wasn’t a charitable institution.
Arnold said the “sad story email” written by head of upper school Erin Mayo stood out to her as evidence that ESD wasn’t thinking of Jane when it made the decision.
Bill Black’s testimony, which was on Wednesday, made an impression on Arnold.
“The fact that he was still thinking about it so many years later was a big deal to me,” she said.
Black testified that headmaster Stephen Swann tried to force his daughter to leave ESD when she complained about a teacher sexually harassing her in 1993. Black said he “sold his soul to the devil” when he agreed to keep quiet about the incident in exchange for his daughter to be able to continue her education there. She graduated in 1996.
Alberty said she believed Jane had suffered mental anguish as a result of the sexual abuse and her removal from ESD. While the women were quick to point out why they felt ESD was at fault in this case, neither one wanted to assign a value to the damages.
“It’s hard putting a number to it,” Alberty said.
One number the women did feel comfortable discussing was the extra $100 they were given after about 10 days of jury service. Normally, jurors are paid $40 a day once a trial begins, but when several women complained they were being docked pay for missing work, someone stepped forward with funds to offset the loss. The jurors did not know who it was, and no attorneys present would comment on the matter.
Anderson found Charla Aldous, lead attorney for the plaintiff, and Royce West, co-counsel for ESD to be the most engaging figures in the courtroom.
“I’d want an attorney that had passion,” Anderson said.
Alberty said she didn’t feel like ESD had presented a strong defense, and she was left wanting more information from them.
“It didn’t click,” she said. “I think they could have done more.”
Both women said they were extremely engaged in the trial and took detailed notes.
“I couldn’t wait to come back and hear the rest,” Alberty said.
35 comments to "Dismissed Jurors Would Have Ruled in Favor of Plaintiffs"
It’s not the judge. Not the lawyers. Not the jury. It’s the facts.
A nice recognition and appreciation for the service of the Jurors and the disruption the length of the case has probably caused in their personal and professional lives.
I don’t know how those ESD people can sleep at night. Disgraceful behavior.
Having said that, I am still amazed at some of the blind loyalty that ESD parents have shown on these blogs.
The blind loyalty bunch are A-List families and those trying to sell souls to get on said A-List. It’s Dallas’ Car Dealer Royalty run amok at ESD. “Isn’t that right, Widetrack?”
@ Claire – Thank you for your coverage of this case! Superb job in making us feel like we were in the courtroom with you – day after day after day. Are you going to cover Campbell’s criminal case as well – whenever it stops being postponed that it is?
Then you forgot to mention, “it was for her own good.”
And, “it was for the greater good.”
Next, it was, “look at the bias on this judge.”
Then it was, “hey, no fair, the Does have attorneys on this blog.”
Not to be outdone by, “Claire is unprofessional and obviously against us.”
To, “if you aren’t part of our family, then you shouldn’t even have an opinion.”
I could go on…but ESD supporters don’t seem to get actual facts, laws and civil procedure. They truly believe that they are somehow above all those silly details. In the process, the damage done to ESD’s “reputation” (*now that’s some sarcasm, Easy School Dallas…) was done by it’s own “family.”
It’s a sick bunch of people who will gang up on a teenage rape victim.
Unless you believe that by the time another trial happens, the ESD administrators can get their stories straight.
“teenage rape victim” give me a break she was a very willing participant in this whole sordid affair, or does she normally open her front door to an adult while wearing nothing but a towel when her parents are off somewhere ??
Read the letter to the editor in todays DMN for the real story about ESD. Better yet, go spend a day there and you WILL change your Aldous influenced “mind”
So, this is their way of getting back at the parents whose children did get to graduate. This is a tremendous act of disloyalty for a school that had nurtured and prepared their daughter for almost 12 years. They refuse to think their own daughter, by greeting this teacher, in the summer, in an empty house, dressed in a towel, was in any way responsible for her own sexual behavior.
If this girl was such a victim, why did she keep talking about her affair, after she was told by the school to stop talking about it? I think it gave her a sense of power among her peers. She had seduced a teacher that some of her girlfriends probably fantasized about.
The only guilty party here is the teacher himself. The school doesn’t bear the guilt. This isn’t about justice for the girl. It is just about a family seeking a way to salve the wounds caused by their own failure to supervise their daughter and to train her in moral reasoning.
Here, the teacher is the vicious dog. He showed no obvious warning signs of being vicious. Then, a young girl starts flirting with him. He takes the bait and he has sexual intercourse with her, away from a place under control by the school, which we call “statutory rape.” While statutory rape is illegal and immoral, it is hardly as painful as a dog bite, but we’ll keep it as the analogy. What can the school do after the damage was done, especially when the girl, far from playing the role of victim, wanted to repeat her story to her fellow students. It seems to me the school did all it could have done. It got rid of the bad dog (the teacher) and it protected the remaining students from hearing about the sorded affiar over and over. The girl went on the thrive academically and athletically. Where’s the damage? I don’t see it.
You are wrong about ESD not proposing a settlement. They will propose one…any smart attorney in their present position would come up with an agreement of some type. Especially given the unpredictability of a jury. Oh, and I forgot to mention plaintiffs have proven their case! Nonetheless, defense doesn’t want to fight after this is over so they will propose a settlement, jury will follow through with deliberations and plaintiffs will be happy in the end and defense will not appeal. Defense will give some poor, lame excuse as to why they chose not to appeal and will blame someone for their decision. It happens this way quite a bit in Texas. It’s okay, Silverlining, you’ll have many shoulders to cry on afterward.
All this sad situation needed was a sick culture. ESD was a “perfect” place for it to happen. Swann, Royall, Salz, and Burrows all gave conflicting, and quite frankly, unbelievable testimony. Some of them are even responsible for repeatedly allowing victims to “happen” at this school.
Your dog analogy is cute, but flawed.
@ Interested Observer – you are right in your analysis.
“All the efforts of the ESD administration to squelch gossip have ironically led to a lawsuit more public and damaging than any whispered rumor ever was.”
D magazine article.
Sounds like the admin at ESD needs a good clean out.
Leave a Reply