Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => News Items => Topic started by: Ursus on January 28, 2010, 02:54:28 PM
-
Morning Star Boy's Ranch (Spokane, WA) is modeled after Father Flanagan's Boys' Town (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=29932) (Boys Town, Nebraska). It opened in late 1956.
For a number of years, sexual abuse cases have been brought to the attention of local religious authorities, law enforcement and social service agencies, but nothing much ever came of it. Evidence was lost, statements were "never received," certain individuals "couldn't recall" ever receiving said complaints.
In 2005, it was revealed that some of the perps were not only part of the extended religious community, but also part of that same local law enforcement and/or political scene to which complaints had been made, including Mayor Jim West himself. Talk about the fox guarding the chicken coop!
These cases have slowly percolated their way through the legal system, increasing in number. Last year, attorneys for Boys Ranch were successful in moving to have the cases split into individual trials, as opposed to one very large case.
There are now at least 19 Plaintiffs in the queue, awaiting their day in court. This month, the first of them, Kenny Putnam, steps up at bat.
-------------- • -------------- • -------------- • --------------
The Spokesman-Review
Trial is years in the making (http://http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/jan/03/trial-is-years-in-the-making/)
January 3, 2010 in City
Kevin Graman
Few court cases have so challenged the Spokane community's faith in a revered institution as the Morning Star Boys' Ranch lawsuits, the first of which goes to trial this week.
It has been more than four years since two former residents of the home for troubled boys accused ranch employees of sexual and physical abuse.
There are now 19 plaintiffs who claim that the ranch, which opened in 1956, for decades was "managed, staffed and run by and for pedophiles and other sadistic sexual predators of boys," according to court documents.
The first trial – that of alleged victim Kenneth Putnam, who was sent to Morning Star as a ward of the court in 1986 – begins Monday.
"The history of Morning Star is going to be presented in this trial," as generations of abuse victims "finally get their day in court," said Timothy Kosnoff, the attorney whose Seattle firm is representing Putnam and 14 other plaintiffs.
For its part, Morning Star will have its chance to clear its name, which supporters and its former director say have been sullied by allegations they vehemently deny.
Many of the accusers name the ranch's former directors – the Revs. Marvin Lavoy, who died in 1994, and Joseph Weitensteiner, who retired in 2006 – as their abusers.
Others say Morning Star administrators permitted known sexual predators such as defrocked priest and admitted pedophile Patrick O'Donnell to take boys "to other locations where they would sodomize and molest them," according to court records.
Morning Star Boys' Ranch officials declined, through their executive director Richard Petersen, to be interviewed for this story.
They say the nonprofit organization has provided a safe environment for more than 1,300 boys with behavioral problems for more than 50 years. The state continues to place boys in the care of the ranch, which today has about 11 residents.
In July 2008, ranch spokeswoman Jenn Kantz told the newspaper that the allegations "go against the very core of what Morning Star was founded on."
Attorneys for the ranch have shown no signs that they would consider a settlement, in contrast to the Catholic Diocese of Spokane, which in 2007 settled with 180 plaintiffs claiming to have been sexually abused by priests. The $48 million diocesan settlement also came with an apology from Bishop William Skylstad.
"In the diocesan cases, the bishop's apology made a difference (to victims)," said Spokane attorney Doug Spruance, whose client, Joseph S. Matherly, has filed claims against both the diocese and the ranch. "There has been none of that in Morning Star."
Instead, the ranch's attorneys have successfully moved to have the lawsuits split into separate trials that stretch into 2011 in Spokane County Superior Judge Kathleen O'Connor's courtroom.
Nevertheless, attorneys for the plaintiffs will attempt to present jurors with the cumulative weight of the numerous accusations against the ranch.
"We will be bringing other victims in to testify," Kosnoff said.
Defense attorneys, on the other hand, will contrast the community's regard for Weitensteiner with the credibility of the plaintiffs, many of whom have criminal records or histories of substance abuse.
"Did he (Kosnoff) tell you how many of his clients are felons?" Jim King, lead attorney for the ranch, asked a Spokesman-Review reporter in February 2008.
"We intend to try the cases and let a jury decide on the credibility of Father Weitensteiner," King told the newspaper. "These cases are going to involve the credibility of the accuser and the accused."
King has said that Weitensteiner has passed a polygraph test in which he denied the sexual abuse allegations.
Plaintiffs' attorneys say the abuse their clients suffered as boys is largely responsible for the men they became and that their testimony will be excruciating.
Putnam alleges that when he was 12 or 13 years old, Weitensteiner took him on an overnight boating trip on Lake Coeur d'Alene, during which the priest molested him. Putnam also claims in his lawsuit that he was bound in his bed at the ranch and molested by a counselor. When he complained to another counselor about the incident, nothing was done.
Putnam has a criminal history dating to 1988 that includes felony theft, burglary, assault and drug convictions.
Should a jury find in his favor, Putnam's legal battle with the ranch may not be over.
His attorneys discovered in November, too late to amend Putnam's complaint, that the ranch has transferred the bulk of its assets, including $12 million in securities and property assessed at nearly $3.5 million, to the nonprofit Morning Star Foundation.
Since learning of the transfers, Kosnoff's firm has filed a separate lawsuit under the state Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act alleging a "massive conspiracy to defraud the plaintiffs."
The directors of Morning Star Boys' Ranch and Morning Star Foundation denied the transfers were made to defraud potential creditors.
"It was transparent and done with the advice of legal counsel," Petersen said.
Attorneys for other Morning Star plaintiffs said they still have time to amend their complaints and intend to include the foundation as a defendant. The lawsuits seek unspecified judgments for damages to the plaintiffs, including the cost of treating their emotional injuries.
In addition to the 19 cases scheduled to be tried in O'Connor's court, two other former Morning Star Boys' Ranch residents, brothers Michael and Matthew Smith, have named the ranch in their separate lawsuits against the state of Washington and Spokane County.
Michael Smith says that while he was a ward of the state he was released from the ranch into the custody of a convicted child sex offender who molested him for years. His brother claims to have been sexually abused by the same pedophile, Gerald "Jerry" Allen, who is now dead.
The Smiths' cases, which are likely to be merged, are scheduled for trial in August in Judge Tari Eitzen's courtroom.
© Copyright 2010, The Spokesman-Review
-
Comments for the above article, "Trial is years in the making (http://http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/jan/03/trial-is-years-in-the-making/)" (by Kevin Graman; The Spokesman-Review; Jan. 3, 2010):
Sugar Shane on January 03 at 12:48 a.m.
"Did he (Kosnoff) tell you how many of his clients are felons?" Jim King, lead attorney for the ranch, asked a Spokesman-Review reporter in February 2008."
Well if they are felons, then they are sure to be making all this up. I know if I were a felon and had the chance to tell people how I was raped and sodomized publicly Id be the first one in line. Give me a break. One or two kids may lie, but 19. Boy attorneys must love their jobs, defending child rapists, murderers, and pedophiles. Nice that the state continues to place children in their care despite the allegations, innocent til proven guilty, wouldnt it be wise to maybe shut them down until the trial is over?
ChefGus on January 03 at 6:34 a.m.
Living and serving in a setting with hundreds of ex felons, many of whom have become friends, (Shalom Ministries at Central Methodist Church, and House of Charity homeless shelter) who are now street people and homeless, you would be amazed at the variety and depth of the sad stories they tell of fractured home life and past abuse as children at the hands of parents, guardians, foster parents and other trusted adults in their lives. "Father" Patrick O'Donnel was the priest that abused and molested my little brother from Big Brother's of Seattle in the 1970's at St Paul's parish in Skyway. I did not realize who he truly was until moving back to Spokane five years ago..the church paid 50,000 dollars at the time to help with my little brother's treatment with a local expert Dr Dryblat. The little brother later became an offender of multiple other youngsters and eventually became a 3 time loser and likely still is encarcerated.
The breadth and depth of the social network of abusers in this city is beyond the average person's ability to comprehend, or believe. But given my personal experience as a Big Brother, I am convinced of the likely complicity of many who were staff and supporters and "visitors" at Morningstar. The list and offenses being charged is long and complex… but it is only a small part of the problems for agencies "serving boys" in our Inland Basin.
Dr John A Olsen Spokane
Shannon Sullivan on January 03 at 9:41 a.m.
The fact of the matter is that 90% of the boys that were at the ranch already had issues, either because their parents did not properly parent or due to their own choices. Predators prey on the week. Some of these boys had never had the type of attention (not the abuse) the ranch offered them. i.e. horses, motorcycles, outings and just the loving, and stable environment that the ranch offered them. For some, any attention, even molestation was more than they ever had.
I am sure that not all of the staff during this time period were predators, but I have no doubt that these allegations are true. Statics show that the hardest demon for any man to deal is being sexually violated, so it is no wonder that the majority of them are felons. I would bet my right arm that 90% were involved with drugs to try and escape the haunting scars that the Ranch left them with.
I pray for strength for these men, and some sort of peace. I also pray for the predictors, as I would not want to be standing with them on judgment day.
It is one thing to be violated, another to have it done to you in the name of God.
NO WONDER THEIR FELONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
whatafool on January 03 at 10:02 a.m.
King is a fool! Why do you think kids go the morning star and later become felons? ABUSE!!!! Saying "these kids already had problems". What ignorance…. These problems make them perfect for these pedophile priests and abusers like Joe ( I refuse to term him father). Farming kids out to other pedophiles? SICK!!!!!!!!! I saw the fruits of Joe with my own eyes. He was feared by all. Visiting families included. Loving environment? More like a hell hole and Joe as the devil! To now lie and fight this is proof that he is evil.
GingerGirl on January 03 at 7:55 p.m.
It sickens me to read that many of you think Father Joe is an abuser. He is nothing but a holy, dedicated man that would never in his life time hurt anyone. I pray for all you judgmental people..and as for this paper saying the boys ranch was "managed, staffed and run by and for pedophiles and other sadistic sexual predators of boys" I take offense to that as I once worked there and that is so untrue!
Maybe some should get some true facts before posting their opinions!
whatafool on January 04 at 1:04 a.m.
Ginger I know what I saw. The facts will come out. If you want to pray do it for mankind to not use power for evil. All mankind, priests alike.
ChefGus on January 05 at 8:32 a.m.
Ginger… you are certainly entitled to your opinion… but it is an opinion and not fact….
Re read my comments, and read Ms Sullivan's comments.. and believe what "What a Fool" commented…
I volunteer every day with 150-200 different "ex felons" and abused people that have been on the streets most of their adult lives, and often starting as youth because of sexual predation and abuse of other kinds..
My experience with the catholic priest who was based in Spokane for years, and likely spent time at the "Ranch" was real, and the aftermath for my little brother was a tsunami that flowed over his many many victims until he was put away for life…
He was a vulnerable boy who had a father that had sexually assaulted him, and beat him.. and shot weapons in the home… with an ineffective mother…. He had been sexually predated on by his previous big brother ( who later tried to become a priest, and we stopped in his filthy tracks).. two male janitors at two different schools, and the aforementioned Roman Priest at St Pauls in Seattle…
I have a hundred other stories i could share from the street people that are now on drugs and mentally ill and th row away's because of their being subject to male abuse… older men and older teen age boys in their lives.
Unless you can defend your space, a sexually agressive male will rape or seduce you, on a date, or in a dark alley, and often after plying you with alcohol or a drug…. 5 years on the King County Crisis line talking to men and women who called in "the morning afer" with suicidal ideation or intent gives another setting for stories I could share…
You are uniformed and naive at best.. Dr John Olsen
Pete Whipple on January 07 at 8:35 p.m.
I was a resident of Morning Star Boys Ranch for nearly 10 years, from 1967-1977. I never once heard about, witnessed nor was approach in an inappropriate or sexually abusive way by any staff member, visitor, volunteer and certainly not Fr. Joe. I'm not uninformed. I know sexual abuse of children is a real and evil plight on our society. But my experience at Morning Star was ALWAYS ONLY POSITIVE. I thank God for Morning Star. I have only respect, appreciation and love for Fr. Joe. I have real first hand knowlege that at least one of the allegations is patently false. As for allegations by boys that where at the ranch before and after my time there, I cannot speak. But, of course niether can most of those who have posted here. For anyone who has suffered abuse of any kind I only wish them justice and peace. However, I know Fr. Joe and he is not the kind of man who would do the things of which he is accused. Until you can say that you have even a fraction of the first hand experience with Morning Star that I have, perhaps you shouldn't rush so quickly to judgment. Peace
ChefGus on January 08 at 5:30 a.m.
Pete.. thanks for your comments here… I am glad to hear that your experience was positive… and i am also sure that many many of the young men at Morning Star likely had a similar positive experience…
Your positive experience does not preclude other experiences for other young men. In my years on the King County Crisis line, and in talking to hundreds of patients over the years often, all too often serial sexual abuse occurs in otherwise seemingly normal households, at the hands of seemingly kind and loviing parents. My comments are with regards my 35 years of experience as a health care provider, and support on the Crisis line to those that were singled out because they were vulnerable. Those vulnerable people were recognized as such, and singled out by their abuser.. and the abuse took place in mostly in private secret settings.
The NPR story of a 12 percent across the board occurence of sexual predation in 160 different settings across the country does point the the breadth of the problem.
I am glad your outcome was positive, and I am sure many others had similar outcomes. That is what the norm should be. Blessings and Shalom/Peace john
Pete Whipple on January 09 at 8:12 a.m.
ChefGus - Thank you for your response to my comment. Yes, my experience at MSBR was very positive. I also appreciate that you claim to have many years experience working and helping people in this area. I understand that there is a real problem of could have been more vulnerable than me. I was nine years old when I went to MSBR. I had absolutely no adult family - my brother and I were abandoned. I was often in situations where I was alone with staff and volunteers. And I was never ever madesexual abuse and the preying upon the young and most vulnerable of our society. Interseting that you bring up that point. Who to feel anything but safe.
If there was an atmosphere favorable to sexual predators at MSBR, I would have been a perfect target. I became the kind of leader at MSBR that other boys confided in and came to if they were bothered by something. I never once heard even the slightest whisper of anything like that happening. As I wrote in my previous comment, I have first hand, contradictory knowlege which refutes at least one of the major allegations against MSBR.
I too have dedicated my life to helping people in the most difficult circumstances. I founded and ran a shelter for runaway teens in Newark NJ. I've been involved in urban ministry for nearly 31 years. I have counseled and ministered to more boken people than I care to count. All of which to show you I'm not uninformed about these matters. I have fought on the side of the abused. And, I've seen the reverse side - false allegations - that have done irreparable damage to the reputations of good people.
I have no "dog in this fight" other than to see justice served. I'm proud to be able to throw my support and help behind a man like Fr Joe and an institution like MSBR. I take no stand against any of the alleged victims or their claims of which I have no personal knowlege. One of the points of my previous comment was to challenge you and others to show the same kind of fairness. Work hard to not be driven by your personal bias as you comment about these cases. Let's be sure that justice, not agenda be that which motivates our comments and involvement. Peace
ChefGus on January 10 at 6:44 a.m.
Pete.. thank you again for your informative and fine comments… we could likely share stories and experiences.. and having folks like you that were rescued from the ditch ( similar to Carl Maxey here as a civil rights attorney.. great story to read by the way by Jim Kerschner).. your calling has likely served many many people over the years at risk of suicide and homicide.. thanks for being "in the trenches"…. I would hope they might call you as a character witness for the defense…. peace to you as well.. and if you have interest/energy/time come on down to Shalom at Central Methodist Church some mon-thurs morning any time after 0530 am- 0900 gus
ChefGus on January 10 at 6:46 a.m.
Pete… you or anyone who wants to serve/observe call me on my Cell 220 4534 j
Pete Whipple on January 12 at 8:28 a.m.
Thanks John. I will be in Spokane the first week in February, Lord willing I'll look you up. Peace
ChefGus on January 13 at 7:48 a.m.
that would be great…. i'm leaving on a jet plane on the 4th… back a acouple weeks later… j
ChefGus on January 13 at 2:02 p.m.
Pete… saw your letter to the editor in the paper this morning… glad you stepped up and gave a voice to your experience. best ..john
© Copyright 2010, The Spokesman-Review
-
The Spokesman-Review
Start of boys ranch abuse trial delayed (http://http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/jan/04/start-boys-ranch-abuse-trial-delayed/)
January 4, 2010 in City
Kevin Graman
The trial in the first of numerous lawsuits alleging abuse of a former resident of Morning Star Boys' Ranch was delayed today while the Spokane County Superior Court judge assigned to hear it reviews pretrial motions in the case.
Trial of the civil case, brought by Kenneth Putnam, will begin Tuesday in Judge Kathleen O'Connor's courtroom. Putnam is one of 19 former residents accusing the ranch of allowing physical and sexual abuse by ranch employees. It is expected that O'Connor will rule on several motions this week, as well as begin to seat a jury in the case.
························································································
Comments for the above article:
Shannon Sullivan on January 04 at 5:21 p.m.
Having been in front of Judge Kathleen O'Connor with clients, (myself as a paralegal) I am sure that she will up hold justice and be fair and just. At least this is what I pray for.
I have first hand knowledge that the allegations (in one particular case) that the abuse did in fact take place. I am sure that not all of the staff members preyed on these troubled young man, but the fact of the matter is: it happened. Father Joe should accept responsibility for his wrongs and repent!!!! That would be the catholic thing to do.
Statics do not lie, 90% of men would not make a false allegation, it is the most humiliating thing that can happen to a man.
NO wonder the majority of respondents are felons, they have spent years running away from the haunting scars that the Ranch has left them with.
I pray for strength for these men, and justice!
ChefGus on January 05 at 9:02 a.m.
Thanks for your comments and perspective Shannon.. particularly with regards the sincerity of the Judge…. that reassures me… your perceptions and personal experiences are valid with regards the sexual and physical abuse that males perpetrate… It is most males worst nightmare to consider being sent to the Spokane County Jail to share a cell with a fellow felon…
If you are not an Alpha Male you WILL be tested…. as a youth, and as an adult ….. If you are not an Alpha Female… you will be set upon and harassed by men all your life… especially if you are "pretty" it will be more a problem….
What's not to get here?? Men and women who are highly testosteronized will always be more agressive toward those of us that are not….always… it is part of what is the problem with our Police Force here in Spokane and multiple other ( 900 reported yesterday on NPR) cities/counties in the U.S. John
ChefGus on January 07 at 10:08 a.m.
Interesting piece in the news this morning that 12 percent of all juvenile prisoners in our jails in multiple different settings across the U.S. report having been sexually exploited… and that is the tip of the iceberg… j
© Copyright 2010, The Spokesman-Review
-
The Spokesman-Review
Region in brief: Pretrial motions heard in boys ranch abuse case (http://http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/jan/06/in-brief-pretrial-motions-heard-in-boys-ranch/)
January 6, 2010 in City
From Staff Reports
A Spokane County Superior Court judge heard pretrial motions on Tuesday in a lawsuit against Morning Star Boys Ranch by a former resident who claims he was sexually abused by ranch personnel.
The lawsuit, brought by Kenneth Putnam, is the first of 19 cases against the ranch by former residents who say they were sexually or physically abused.
Judge Kathleen O'Connor will rule today on the most important motion, whether to allow the testimony from any of the other plaintiffs or witnesses who claim to have been abused while they were residents of the ranch.
Plaintiff's attorneys say the issue is critical to their contention that Morning Star officials knew, or should have known, about the alleged ongoing abuse and failed to take steps to prevent it. Defense attorneys say that allowing others to say they were abused while at the ranch would be prejudicial.
Jury selection in the trial will not begin until next week.
© Copyright 2010, The Spokesman-Review
-
The Spokesman-Review
Abuse trial witness list grows (http://http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/jan/07/abuse-trial-witness-list-grows/)
Judge says four can testify in Morning Star case
January 7, 2010 in City
Kevin Graman
Attorneys for a man alleging he was abused at Morning Star Boys' Ranch scored a partial victory Wednesday when a judge ruled four other alleged victims can testify in the first abuse case to go to trial against the ranch.
The judge hearing the Morning Star Boys' Ranch child abuse lawsuits issued a split decision on a key pretrial motion in the case, the first of the 19 scheduled for trial in Spokane County Superior Court.
Attorneys for Kenneth Putnam and 14 other former ranch residents had sought to have as many of the plaintiffs as possible testify in Putnam's case to show that Morning Star knew or should have known of the alleged abuse at the ranch and failed to do anything about it. Putnam claims he was abused in the 1980s by ranch employees, including former director the Rev. Joseph Weitensteiner.
Morning Star's attorneys, on the other hand, tried to suppress the testimony of any of the other plaintiffs, saying that it would be unfairly prejudicial. They also said that Putnam's attorneys had not presented sufficient evidence for the court to find "by a preponderance of the evidence" that the other plaintiffs had actually been abused.
In a written decision, Judge Kathleen O'Connor ruled that the testimony of four of the other plaintiffs would be allowed because they had each reported their alleged abuse at the time it happened, a period that spanned from the early 1960s to the late 1970s.
The witnesses who will be allowed to testify are Paul Baggett, who says he was abused while a ranch resident in 1973 and reported it to Weitensteiner; William Call, who says he was abused by Weitensteiner in 1961 and '62, reported it to then-director the Rev. Marvin Lavoy, and was subsequently abused by Lavoy; Stephanie Miller, born Carl Smith, who says she was abused in the 1970s and reported it to Weitensteiner; and William Knapton, who says he was abused in the 1960s and reported it to Weitensteiner.
The issue, O'Connor wrote, was whether the ranch was made aware of allegations before Putnam's alleged abuse, which would have made "additional acts of sexual abuse a reasonably foreseeable risk."
In addition, attorneys for the plaintiffs have argued, the testimony of the four could serve to rebut any contention that plaintiffs recently fabricated their allegations.
None of the other plaintiffs reported their abuse at the time of the alleged incidents, and O'Connor said she could not find by a preponderance of the evidence that the acts of abuse they allege had occurred.
Morning Star's lead attorney, Jim King, declined on Wednesday to comment on O'Connor's ruling.
One of Putnam's attorneys said that while he respectfully disagreed with not letting all the witnesses testify, he expected to prevail in court with the ones permitted.
"We are happy the court has allowed some of the victims who were sexually abused while at Morning Star to testify at the trial," said attorney Dan Fasy.
© Copyright 2010, The Spokesman-Review
-
The blog Washington Courts is also covering this case. Here's their first entry on it:
-------------- • -------------- • -------------- • --------------
Washington Courts
Courts of Washington and Idaho
Morning Star Boys Ranch; Putnam v. (http://http://www.washcourts.com/?p=144)
Posted on January 18, 2010, 12:15 pm, by admin, under Morning Star Boys Ranch.
There are more than 18 sexual abuse claims filed in Spokane County Superior Court against Morning Star Boys Ranch (http://http://morningstarboysranch.org/) of Spokane, Washington. The trial of the first case began this past week (January 11, 2010) in Department 4 before Judge Kathleen M. O'Connor (http://http://www.spokanecounty.org/superiorcourt/content.aspx?c=1144).
The case is being tried to a 12-person jury. Jury selection took four days during the week of January 11, 2010. First, a large pool of jurors for the case was selected by the court system. This is the venire of potential jurors for the case. The members of the pool answered a set of basic questions presented in writing presented to them by the court. Prepared, I am sure, with the input of counsel. Then the potential jurors came to the courtroom to be examined by the judge and counsel for the plaintiff and the defendant. As a result of the questioning, the person was passed for cause by both sides of the case or caused to be rejected for cause. If there was agreement re rejection for cause, the juror was excused. When a juror was rejected for cause, there was really no debate regarding the rejection. The judge and counsel agreed.
About forty jurors remained in the venire after this process was completed. RCW 4.44.120 (http://http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=4.44.120).
The day after, all of the jurors were brought into the courtroom to be addressed by the judge and counsel for the parties. They were addressed as a group. Counsel had certain time to ask group and individual questions in front of the group. A good deal of "give and take" between the jurors took place with counsel asking questions all monitored by the court. Counsel alternated. This went on for about a day and a half.
Then the jurors were taken to the jury room and counsel and the court selected the jury. Jurors were assigned to positions in the jury box. New motions for dismissal of such persons were made for cause. One was rejected for cause. Next, the attorneys went through the process of using their peremptory challenges. Using such challenge, counsel rejected a juror for no reason that needed to be expressed. After going through this process, 12 jurors and three alternates were selected.
All the jurors were called back to the courtroom and the judge then filled the jury seats and the alternate seats with those jurors which were finally selected from the venire. The jurors, 12 plus three alternates, were empaneled. The judge then excused the other jurors gratefully thanking them for their service as potential jurors in the case. She did a good job in this and all of the jurors were appreciative and clearly knew their service was truly appreciated. They then went back into the main jury pool to be called perhaps in another case during the term of their service.
When counsel and court were not dealing with jury selection matters, various pretrial motions were argued and decided and orders signed. The judge and counsel were sincere in their thanks. Those of us who watched were much impressed by the civility and importance of the entire process.
With the panel and alternates seated, the court made a statement to the jurors. The process was explained and certain admonishments were made. RCW 4.44.280 (http://http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=4.44.280).?
On Tuesday, January 19, 2010, (at 9:00 a.m.) counsel will make opening statements to the jury. The plaintiff's attorneys will take about an hour for plaintiff's opening statement. Defense counsel will make an opening statement at this time (he could hold off until the beginning of the case for the defense, but that is somewhat unusual). The defense will take about half an hour.
Tags: Judge O'Connor
-
The Spokesman-Review
Lawyers lay out cases in Morning Star trial (http://http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/jan/19/morning-star-lawsuit-gets-under-way-opening-statem/)
January 19, 2010 in City
Kevin Graman
An attorney for a former resident of Morning Star Boys' Ranch accused the group home for troubled boys of turning a blind eye to longstanding sexual abuse there, while an attorney representing the ranch claimed those making the accusations are motivated by money. Those statements came this morning as both sides in a civil lawsuit presented opening statements in Spokane County Superior Court.
Attorney Tim Kosnoff, who represents plaintiff Kenny Putnam, said Morning Star administrators knew or should have known that abuse was occurring and alleged two of the abusers were ranch directors. He was referring to the Rev. Marvin Lavoy, now deceased, and the Rev. Joseph Weitensteiner, who Putnam accuses of abusing him while a resident of the ranch in 1988-89.
"Management knew because they were doing it themselves," Kosnoff said.
Defense attorney Jim King, in his opening statement, said Putnam and four other former residents who will testify in the case are making the stories up for financial gain. The four witnesses are among 19 former ranch residents with lawsuits pending against Morning Star. Many of them have histories of crime and substance abuse.
"It's Putnam that brings us here," King said. "He wants money."
The trial resumes this afternoon.
························································································
Comments for the above article:
tothetop on January 19 at 2:04 p.m.
I see Morningstar Ranch will take the same stand as the Catholic Church has in its defense of its Sexual abuse cases. The Defense Attorney King states "many of them have histories of crime and substance abuse' Ya Think?", could that be a direct result of the abuse inflicted on them by the pedophiles he represents?.They also might have some major trust issues, failed relationships, some might have or will even kill themselves and then he goes on to say that they want money, UNBELIEVABLE. Money? Maybe he can tell me what else is available at point? Does he realize that after the attorneys get half plus expenses not alot is left. The pain and bull that a guy is made to relive is something that no amount of money can justify. The satisfaction of holding them accountable is the only real satisfaction one can hope to gain. Maybe Mr. King is defending Morning Star for free? Money is the only way to hold these people accountable for the crimes children suffered at there hands while management looked the other way. Sounds much like the Church with Archbishop Raymound Haunthausen recommending the transfer of pedophile Priests to other churches in the 70's, then forgetting about it all at trial. My guess is we only know about a small fraction of the abuse that happened and so many victims will never be known. We should have great admoration for the Victims who stand up and take on the abusers on this public stage where there is really never a winner.
oneandtwo on January 19 at 5:58 p.m.
Well said tothetop.
King says the apposing attorny is just there for the money,
No I believe he is there for justice and to see that his clients are compensated for the abuse they took.
A way to determing that is to write a really big check and give it to them and see if they will go way or will stand their ground on their belief in justice.
No amount of money can go back and “undo” the harm done. No amount of money can hide your shame.
No amount of money will stop the nightmares
These men did not end up where they are by the good treatment of Morning Star Ranch..
Stephen Eugster on January 19 at 7:39 p.m.
http://www.washcourts.com/?p=149 (http://www.washcourts.com/?p=149).[/list]
© Copyright 2010, The Spokesman-Review
-
Washington Courts
Courts of Washington and Idaho
Morning Star Boys Ranch — Putnam Case, Day 1 (http://http://www.washcourts.com/?p=149)
Posted on January 19, 2010, 10:37 pm, by Steve Eugster, under Morning Star Boys Ranch.
Tim Kosnoff, the attorney for Kenneth Putnam, outlined his case to the jury this morning. It took about an hour and was tied to a computer presentation of pictures, diagrams and statements he said the facts of which he would prove through his witnesses. It was well done and forceful, but the first three witnesses he called did not do much to shore up what had been presented in his opening statement.
Jim King, the lead attorney for Morning Star Boys Ranch, spoke directly and consistently to the jurors. Like Mr. Kosnoff, he was calm and well-prepared. He did not use props of any kind. And, his presentation was matter of fact and directly contrary to most, if not everything, Mr. Kosnoff said.
Opening statements concluded, Mr. Kosnoff called his first witness, Bill Call. Mr. Call, a man who is from North Carolina and is a retired military man who works part time. Mr. Call is really Michael Call. Michael Call was dishonorably discharged from the military in a military court martial. Later, lying to the military, he got back into the military using his brother's name and other identification. He remained in the military, but after 20 years or so, was found out. He was allowed to serve out his time. Later he applied to a job in a sheriff's department and again lied about who he was. He also lied in answers to interrogatories and deposition questions, both under oath. He says he was sexually assaulted when he was at Morning Star Boys Ranch in the early 1960's. He said he came forward when he read about cases for sex abuse against various Catholic Dioceses years ago. He also has a claim against Morning Star Boys Ranch.
The next witness was Stephanie Miller, another claimant. Ms. Miller testified that, then, he was asked to perform sexually inappropriate acts when he was at Morning Star Boys Ranch in the mid 70's. She could not identify who the person was who approached him. She said he had long blond hair. She did not say he was sexually contacted, but said he was burned.
The next was Billy Knapton who said he liked Morning Star Boys Ranch, but one time, one day, he, along with some other boys who were not abiding by the rules when they were supposed to be out of school because they were all sick, had to put up with the indignity of a joke of having some iris flowers stuck in their butt cheeks– the first one of them being subject to being "hacked" if the flower stuck between his cheeks fell down. Billy is a nice kid. He did not lose. He did not testify as to any sexual abuse by anyone on the staff at Morning Star. When one of the jurors asked, through Judge Kathleen O'Connor, why he had brought a lawsuit against Morning Star Boys Ranch, he really could not say. He said something about talking on the phone to Mr. Kosnoff.
In the morning, Wednesday, January 20, 2010, Mr. Kosnoff will continue presenting plaintiff's case. Four or five witnesses will be called in the morning. In the afternoon, Father Joseph Weitensteiner will be called. Father Weitensteiner became the head of Morning Star Boys Ranch in the 60's. He retired about 2006. His testimony is scheduled to take all afternoon – from 1:30 P.M. to 4:00 P.M.
‹·›
-
The Spokesman-Review
Boys ranch abuse trial opens (http://http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/jan/20/boys-ranch-abuse-trial-opens/)
Former Morning Star residents testify to mistreatment
January 20, 2010 in City
Kevin Graman
Either Morning Star Boys' Ranch management turned a blind eye to decades of child sexual abuse or it is being persecuted by discreditable former residents looking to make a buck.
Those were the strategies outlined by legal adversaries in the first of 19 lawsuits against the facility in opening remarks to jurors Tuesday in Spokane County Superior Court.
"A group home for troubled boys has a responsibility to use reasonable care to protect boys from harm," said Tim Kosnoff, attorney for plaintiff Kenneth Putnam, who claims to have been abused by ranch employees, including its former director, the Rev. Joseph Weitensteiner.
"Management knew because they were doing it themselves," Kosnoff said.
He portrayed Morning Star as a nonprofit dictatorship under Weitensteiner, who became director in 1966 after his alcoholic predecessor, the Rev. Marvin Lavoy, now deceased, stepped down.
Kosnoff described Weitensteiner as a "Jekyll and Hyde" character who could be charismatic and warm one moment and explosive and violent the next.
Morning Star's attorney, Jim King, set out to discredit Putnam and four other plaintiffs whose trials are scheduled to begin in Judge Kathleen O'Connor's courtroom in the coming months.
"It's Mr. Putnam that brings us here," King said. "He wants money."
Putnam, who was born in 1975, was sent to the south Spokane home for boys as a ward of the court in 1988 because of drug use and bad behavior in school.
Despite constant oversight of a state case worker and a legal advocate, Putnam "never said one word" about sex abuse at the time, King said. Since leaving the ranch, "he has spent more than half of his life in jails or prisons" because of criminal acts fueled by drug dependence.
Kosnoff described his client as angry, depressed and restless – feelings he said were caused by post-traumatic stress.
He did not deny Putnam had problems going into Morning Star, but "abuse greatly complicated and aggravated those problems."
But the crux of Kosnoff's case is that generations of boys were abused by administrators, employees, other residents and pedophiles from the community who took boys out for overnight outings.
To make his point, Kosnoff on Tuesday brought in three former Morning Star residents who are suing the ranch.
William Call, born in 1946, testified he was sexually abused by then-counselor Weitensteiner in 1961 and 1962.
Call said the priest threatened retribution if he said anything. When Call mustered the courage to tell Lavoy, he said, the director then began abusing him as well.
"I was afraid nobody would believe me," Call said, his voice cracking.
Under cross-examination by King, Call revealed that he was born Michael Lewis Call and he enlisted in the Army in 1963 but was court-martialed within two years for larceny and going absent without leave. A few years later he re-enlisted using his younger brother William's identity. It was a lie that he attempted to perpetuate even under deposition in 2006 after filing a lawsuit against Morning Star. He has since legally changed his name to William.
Next on the stand was Stephanie Miller, who was born Carl Smith but underwent a sex change operation. Miller testified that a counselor whose name she cannot remember demanded oral sex. When she refused, she said, the counselor burned her with his cigarette; she bears the scar on her chest today.
When Miller told Weitensteiner of the alleged abuse, she said, "He told me to keep my mouth shut because he didn't want me screwing up the program."
King presented evidence that Miller told a health care provider in 1989 that she didn't know how she had been scarred.
Tuesday's final witness was William Knapton, who was born in 1956. He lived at Morning Star from 1964 to 1968.
Knapton described how counselors, angry that he and three or four other boys would not stay in their beds, placed irises in their rectums with Vaseline and photographed them.
He said the photo was widely shown at the ranch and that Weitensteiner did nothing to discipline the counselors.
"I was humiliated and embarrassed," Knapton said, adding that he was afraid that the kids at school would see the photo.
Knapton also said he saw Weitensteiner break a plate over the head of one boy who would not eat his vegetables and bust through his office door while locked in a violent fray with another boy.
Such events scared Knapton so much he wanted to escape, he said. But under King's questioning, Knapton acknowledged that he "liked and respected" the priest he and the other boys called Father Joe.
Knapton also said he had taken methadone for 20 years through the Spokane Regional Health District program after he had become addicted to codeine and that he was a recovering alcoholic.
Under cross-examination by King, Knapton said that some of the happiest years of his life were spent at Morning Star. But when Kosnoff redirected questioning, Knapton also recounted being sexually abused by an older boy at the ranch.
Trial continues today with testimony from Weitensteiner and another former resident who accuses Morning Star Boys' Ranch of abuse.
························································································
Comments for the above article:
Stephen Eugster on January 20 at 2:48 a.m.
Please see this post for more —
http://www.washcourts.com/?p=149 (http://www.washcourts.com/?p=149).[/list]
© Copyright 2010, The Spokesman-Review
-
Washington Courts
Courts of Washington and Idaho
Morning Star — Day 2, Limitation on Meaning of Testimony (http://http://www.washcourts.com/?p=158)
Posted on January 20, 2010, 10:48 pm, by admin, under Morning Star Boys Ranch.
Yesterday, one really had to wonder why witnesses Call, Miller and Knapton were appearing as witnesses in the Putnam case. Their testimony seemed prejudicial. The testimony was seemingly not relevant to the issue in the case of Kenny Putnam against Morning Star Boys Ranch.
There was an instruction to the jury prior to the testimony of Mr. Call. The jury was instructed that Mr. Call's testimony was only relevant with respect of Morning Star Boys Ranch to the extent of forseeability, notice and common scheme – that the Ranch had notice of bad conduct taking place.
This instruction was not given with respect of the testimony of Stephanie Miller and Billy Knapton.
Before the start of trial today, Judge O'Connor corrected this problem and so instructed the jury that the testimony of Miller and Knapton was limited only to the purpose of forseeability, notice and common scheme.
Frankly, I do not see how the jury can actually avoid the meaning of the testimony and attempt to limit it to foreseeability, notice, and common scheme. The testimony still seemed prejudicial and unrelated to the claim being brought by Kenny Putnam against Morning Star Boys Ranch. Perhaps this will be an issue on appeal if there is one.
Nevertheless, Judge O'Connor did a good job of correcting the problem and making it clear to the jury what the limitations were with respect of the testimony of witnesses Call, Miller, and Knapton.
‹·›
-
Washington Courts
Courts of Washington and Idaho
Morning Star — Day 2, Witnesses (http://http://www.washcourts.com/?p=162)
Posted on January 21, 2010, 10:41 am, by Steve Eugster, under Morning Star Boys Ranch.
The first witness in Day 2 was Paul Baggett. — When he was 9 or 10, his mother, who worked at The Spokesman-Review, sent him off to, and paid his way, at Morning Star Boys Ranch. He was there for two to three years. He says he has no clear recollections of the Ranch. He said he was small and that a bigger boy named Tony molested him on several occasions. He said he told a certain nurse. He also said he told Father Joe Weitensteiner, but that Tony's efforts continued.
He said he was in a boxing program and that Patrick O'Donnell introduced himself to him and that they became friends. O'Donnell did not work at the Ranch. He said that O'Donnell engaged in sexually inappropriate contact with him at an outing at Priest Lake. He also said that this contact took place in Mr. O'Donnell's car in the Spokane area. He said there were 4 or 5 times that O'Donnell and he were together. He said he told Father Joe of this at the Ranch. He said that about the time he saw O'Donnell in the hallway and that he went in to father Joe's office. He said the sexual contact continued.
The plausibility of this testimony seemed to fall away as Jim King, the attorney for Morning Star, conducted cross examination. At one time, Mr. Baggett had provided a therapist with information about his sexual history. He said he was heterosexual, that his first sexual relationship was when he was 11 and that was a positive experience, that the touching was not uncomfortable, that he was promiscuous.
He described a long history of using a variety of drugs including heroin, amphetamines by injection, methamphetamine at age 15 and daily marijuana use.
Back to O'Donnell — there were only two occasions. The other boy was Tony Thornton.
The nurse he said he talked to was not the one he said – at another time under oath he designated a different person.
Mr. Baggett hears voices. He met the Devil in Portland in 1987, he was black and wearing a baseball cap. The Devil told him about himself but did not say anything about Morning Star Boys Ranch. He said the Devil told him he was the Devil's son. Mr. Baggett speaks matter of factly when he describes his relationship with the Devil.
Next came Robert Duggan, a former board member at Morning Star Boys Ranch.
Then Shane Mayfield, a friend of Kenny Putnam. Mr. Mayfield is an interesting young man. He grew up in broken home and spent a good deal of time in trouble. But he turned himself around when he met his wife and went to community college and learned how to repair automatic transmissions. He says he is fascinated by the hydraulics and what one can make transmissions do. He has a transmission repair shop in northeast Spokane.
He has known Putnam for years, along with some other people in Spokane who have come from tough family situations. He spoke of Putnam's moods, his outbursts, his difficulty with women, his love of his daughter, his drug use. The picture one has from the testimony is that Kenny Putnam is aggressive at times and assertive at others; can also become quite withdrawn and has no trouble speaking up for himself.
Then another witness, Edmund Braune, was called about his work as a Board Member of Morning Star Boys Ranch.
The first witness in the afternoon was Sharon Saito, Putnam's attorney when he went to Morning Star and after. She became quite close to Putnam and saw him on many occasions. Putnam never mentioned being abused to her.
Awhile ago, she said she saw a newspaper article about Morning Star and the allegations of sexual conduct and mentioned the article to Putnam. Putnam acknowledged he was a part of the case.
It is odd he did not say anything to her when he was supposedly abused given the character Shane Mayfield described and the close relationship he had with Ms. Saito.
Father Joe Weitensteiner took the stand after Ms. Saito. His testimony will continue this morning. When it is finished, Kenny Putnam will be called to the stand, probably in the afternoon after court reconvenes at 1:30 P.M.
Tags: Baggett, Braun, Devil, Duggan, Mayfield, O'Donnell, Putnam, Saito, Thornton, Weitensteiner
-
The Spokesman-Review
Boys ranch ex-director testifies (http://http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/jan/21/boys-ranch-ex-director-testifies/)
Weitensteiner says he learned of ex-priest's pedophilia
January 21, 2010 in City
Kevin Graman
Patrick O'Donnell – whose infamy as the abuser of as many as 66 children was inextricably linked to the scandal that bankrupted the Catholic Diocese of Spokane – also insinuated himself into Morning Star Boys' Ranch, a Superior Court jury was told on Wednesday.
The former director and a former resident of the nonprofit home for troubled boys testified in the case of Kenneth Putnam v. Morning Star Boys' Ranch about their acquaintance with the defrocked priest O'Donnell.
Putnam accuses the Rev. Joseph Weitensteiner, 77, who retired as ranch director in 2006, and a now-deceased ranch counselor, Doyle Gillum, of sexually molesting him while he was a resident of the ranch in about 1986.
Putnam's is one of 19 lawsuits claiming sexual or physical abuse at Morning Star. The plaintiffs say ranch administrators knew or should have known about ongoing acts of child abuse and did nothing to stop it.
Under questioning by Putnam's Seattle attorney, Tim Kosnoff, Weitensteiner testified that he has known O'Donnell for decades and that O'Donnell was a Boy Scout in his troop when Weitensteiner was a Scout leader in the early 1950s.
Their acquaintance was renewed in the 1960s after Weitensteiner became a ranch counselor and later – after being ordained a Catholic priest in 1966 – director of Morning Star.
Weitensteiner testified that in the late 1970s or early 1980s, O'Donnell, a child psychologist who frequented the ranch, was preparing to conduct psychological evaluations of some of the boys. However, a woman called Morning Star to complain that O'Donnell was a pedophile who had undergone sexual deviancy treatment in Seattle from 1976 to 1978.
"We decided we better not use him," Weitensteiner said, adding that he did not believe O'Donnell returned to the ranch after that.
Weitensteiner said he did not notify the bishop or law enforcement about O'Donnell's relationship with Morning Star.
Also testifying on Wednesday was Paul Baggett, 48, who lived at Morning Star for about three years in the early 1970s. Baggett said that he was repeatedly sexually abused by O'Donnell on ranch property and on trips with the priest away from the ranch.
Baggett testified that he informed the ranch nurse and Weitensteiner of the abuse. Weitensteiner told Baggett he would speak to O'Donnell about it, but neither state child protective workers nor law enforcement were informed of the allegation, Baggett said.
Abuse of Baggett by O'Donnell and older boys at the ranch continued, he said.
Under questioning by Kosnoff and cross-examination by Morning Star's attorney, Jim King, Baggett acknowledged that he was a recovering drug addict who hallucinated that he heard voices and spoke with Satan while taking prescribed anti-psychotic medication.
Baggett also admitted to King that during a mental health evaluation in the 1990s he had denied having been molested. Baggett told King that he had lied about not having been abused.
"I'm ashamed of it, absolutely," he said.
Weitensteiner is expected to continue testifying today.
© Copyright 2010, The Spokesman-Review
-
The Spokesman-Review
Attorney alleges ranch director paid for witness' silence (http://http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/jan/21/attorney-alleges-ranch-director-paid-witnesss-sile/)
January 21, 2010 in City
Kevin Graman
An unexpected witness may testify that former Morning Star Boys' Ranch director Joseph Weitensteiner had him procure boys for sex and then gave the witness money years later to keep it quiet, according to a motion Thursday in the first sex-abuse trial against the ranch.
The dramatic revelation in the lawsuit by Kenneth Putnam came outside the presence of the Superior Court jury when Judge Kathleen O'Connor demanded to know why Putnam's attorney had called an unscheduled witness three weeks into proceedings.
That witness is Michael Clarke, a former boys' ranch resident who is currently an inmate at the Airway Heights Corrections Center on a conviction of first-degree theft.
Putnam's attorney told the judge Clarke informed him Friday that in 2006 Weitensteiner allegedly paid Clarke $2,000 in exchange for Clarke not revealing that he groomed and procured other Morning Star boys to have sex with Weitensteiner. Clarke told the attorney, Tim Kosnoff, that those encounters took place in a nearby farmhouse, owned by the ranch, where Weitensteiner lived in the late 1970s.
Under questioning by Kosnoff on Wednesday, Weitensteiner denied giving money to Clarke, but said he had presided at Clarke's wedding. On Thursday, Weitensteiner denied that Clarke had procured boys for him. But the reason for those questions wasn't revealed until later Thursday.
Morning Star's attorney, Jim King, protested the admissibility of Clarke's testimony and the potential new line of evidence, saying it was a violation of trial management and "a whole different trial."
If Kosnoff wants to present such a case, "let him take it to the prosecutor," King told O'Connor. "We don't think Clarke has any place in this trial."
Kosnoff told the judge "nothing could be more central to this case" than Clarke's expected testimony. He said he can produce a witness who saw Weitensteiner hand Clarke an unsealed envelope containing the cash.
O'Connor ruled that Clarke would appear before her Monday morning and she would hear what he has to say, without the jury present, before ruling on the admissibility of his testimony.
In other testimony Thursday:
• Weitensteiner denied grooming Stephanie Miller for sexual contact. Miller, a transsexual who was born Carl Smith, is a former resident of the ranch who has filed a separate lawsuit against Morning Star claiming to have been sexually abused there.
• Under questioning by Kosnoff, Weitensteiner had difficulty recalling whether the ranch had a written policy regarding allegations of abuse.
• Putnam, 34, testified that he had been molested by Weitensteiner and a counselor, named Doyle Gillum, who is now deceased.
Putnam said Gillum came into his bedroom late at night and fondled him while he was under the influence of medication given to him by the ranch to control his bed-wetting.
He said he reported the incident to a supervisor, but that a week later Gillum again entered his room at night and began molesting him until Putnam slapped the counselor. Gillum "punched me so hard in the chest I couldn't breathe," Putnam said.
• He also testified that Weitensteiner molested him on the priest's 27-foot powerboat on Lake Coeur d'Alene where the priest took him and another boy in the early 1980s.
While Putnam, who was 10 or 11 years old, was lying down seasick, he said, Weitensteiner pulled down his shorts and touched him until the boy kicked Weitensteiner in the face, jumped overboard and swam to another boat. The other boater returned Putnam to Weitensteiner, who said the boy was mentally ill.
That night Weitensteiner took the boys back to his home at St. Patrick's Parish where he was pastor and again molested him, Putnam testified. Putnam recounted that Weitensteiner told him, "Nobody is ever going to believe you. Look who you are, an orphan. Nobody ever comes for you."
• He said Weitensteiner later fondled him again when he forced the boy onto his lap behind the wheel of the priest's car. Putnam was later taken from Morning Star Boys' Ranch and placed in a foster home in Chattaroy.
• King declined to cross-exam either Weitensteiner or Putnam. Both will be called as witnesses when the defense presents its case, probably next week.
© Copyright 2010, The Spokesman-Review
-
Comments for the above article, "Attorney alleges ranch director paid for witness' silence (http://http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/jan/21/attorney-alleges-ranch-director-paid-witnesss-sile/)" (by Kevin Graman; The Spokesman-Review; Jan. 21, 2010):
Liberty_Bell on January 21 at 3:20 p.m.
It just never ends in Spokane Vote Lisa Brown!
RCW 9A.72.120
Tampering with a witness.
(1) A person is guilty of tampering with a witness if he or she attempts to induce a witness or person he or she has reason to believe is about to be called as a witness in any official proceeding or a person whom he or she has reason to believe may have information relevant to a criminal investigation or the abuse or neglect of a minor child to:
(a) Testify falsely or, without right or privilege to do so, to withhold any testimony; or
(b) Absent himself or herself from such proceedings; or
(c) Withhold from a law enforcement agency information which he or she has relevant to a criminal investigation or the abuse or neglect of a minor child to the agency.
(2) Tampering with a witness is a class C felony.
twoandthree on January 21 at 6:40 p.m.
If I was King, I wouldn't want someone testifying about the grooming and payoffs..
He may not be an ethhical lawyer but he's not a stupid one.
"a whole new trial"? nope just a more honest one.
Better entertainment than skating.
Stephen Eugster on January 21 at 7:52 p.m.
The trial Day 3, a Bomb is Dropped see
http://www.washcourts.com/?p=166 (http://www.washcourts.com/?p=166)[/list]
Daisy Minken on January 21 at 11:12 p.m.
Always seems so odd that there is no evidence…just testimony
the no one can corroborate. It's always about the money….and lots of it. Attack the dead priests who cannot speak for themselves. Have the author of this article bring up a defrocked priest …and do a story full of unsavory innuendo.
Worse!.. have the commenters convict the Ranch even though not one of them knows the evidence nor has been to court to watch and listen…like I did today..(I'm here visitng parents).
Grow up people. Some things may have been done wrong but the courts will tell us.
Liberty_Bell on January 22 at 7:12 a.m.
No the Courts won't Daisy?
Have you ever studied up on the Judges In Washington State?
An interesting model shown best in yesterdays trial, and Judicial Misconduct Commission hearings in Olympia?
Kind of like the Male Prostitution Ring, in the Pierce County Court, lead by the Judge of the Superior Court?
It's super duper, on the Superior Court too, pedophiles in action Judge Height likes em young too!
I suppose all those DSHS cases costing the State Hundreds of Millions, over the last few decades of incompentance, after the tip toe thru the tulip crowd decided that liberalism, needed to go to the priests hood too!
One step foward for a Republic, One step back for democracy@!
Liberty_Bell on January 22 at 7:27 a.m.
Just like the Catholic's eh Daisy, "it's always about the money." Thats why they have so much of it, stealing it for Jesus! Explaining the Catholics 2000 years ago!
"Jesus said, Though shall not commit murder, Though shall not committ adultry, Though shall not steal, Though shall not bear false witness…the rich man will hardely enter the Kingdom of Heaven…"
Whoops, troubling for the Pope, thinkin you can buy your way to heaven???
allabout on January 22 at 10:21 a.m.
I do think being in the court room and watching for one's self is a good way to form an opionion. I know it has got to be better than forming one from reading or watching TV.
If we all form opionions and have knowledge based on our own observations, that knowledge will serve us better than that of which we read in the paper or watch on the news.
Whether you believe what you hear on the news or read in the paper about anything, it is the "sources" opinion that is underlying in the writing -
© Copyright 2010, The Spokesman-Review
-
Washington Courts
Courts of Washington and Idaho
Morning Star, Day 3 — A Bomb is Dropped! (http://http://www.washcourts.com/?p=166)
Posted on January 21, 2010, 10:50 pm, by Steve Eugster, under Judging, Morning Star Boys Ranch.
Thursday January 21, 2010 — 7:06 pm
Today was the third day of trial. Tim Kosnoff, plaintiff’s attorney, asked a few more questions of Father Joe Weitensteiner. Then it was time for Jim King, the attorney for Morning Star, to ask some questions. Kosnoff had called Father Joe as an adverse witness in his case. King did not have to cross examine him so he passed and deferred to the questions and testimony he would secure when he called Father Joe as part of his case.
Then, Kosnoff put his client, Kenny Putnam, on the stand. ( More about this in a later post.) Putnam answered a several questions and then about 11:30 am or so Kosnoff was finished. King did not cross examine Putnam. Again, he deferred to the questions he would ask in the course of his direct testimony of Putnam when he puts on the case for the defense, for Morning Star.
There may have been another reason for waiting to do cross examination of these witnesses – to defer the questioning at a later time. This has to do with what I call one of the “local, local rules” which Judge O’Connor imposes in trials in her court. The particular local, local rule in question here is that in her court, the amount of time for cross examination cannot be more than the amount of the time of the direct examination. An interesting rule (to say the least).
Kosnoff expected the testimonies of Father Joe and Kenny Putnam to take the rest of the day. He had no witnesses to call, no witnesses present or available. What to do? The judge took this in stride and dismissed the jury for the day. They are to come back on Monday ready for trial starting at 9:00 AM, Monday, January 25, 2010.
With the jurors gone, discussions began about the future timing of the case and the witnesses. Mr. Kosnoff said his case would be over by Tuesday instead of the planned day of Wednesday. The first witness on Monday is to be Michael Clarke.
This is when the bomb was dropped.
There have been discussions regarding witness Michael Clarke all week. He is incarcerated at the Airway Heights Correctional Facility and there have been difficulties making arrangements for him to be transferred from the prison to the courthouse for the trial. Transportation must be arranged and officers present to ensure he does not break from custody. The dispute has been who is responsible for this effort and cost, the people at Airway Heights or the Spokane County Sheriff’s Office. Apparently arrangements have now been made for Monday.
Another part of the matter of Clarke as a witness has to do with why he is being called. He is being called at the last minute and apparently as a result of a reference to Mr. Clarke by Stephanie Miller (formerly Carl Smith). The attorneys were to have an hour or so with Mr. Clarke before he testified.
But, again, Mr. King wanted to know why Clarke was being called. At this time, Mr. Kosnoff explained the Miller connection and then, rather dramatically, he looked back toward the audience in the courtroom and then looked back to Judge O’Connor and said that Father Joe had paid $2,000 cash to Clarke for his silence, that Clarke had procured boys for Father Joe, that Father Joe and a lawyer, a man by the name of Daley, had met with Mr. Clarke to review his testimony and that there was another person who witnessed the delivery of an envelop by Father Joe to Mr. Clarke.
The courtroom was stunned, at least those of us in the courtroom who did not know what was coming, were stunned. One suspects others knew. During the week, there have been other lawyers in the audience in the courtroom who have clients who are also bringing cases against Morning Star. Julie Twyford was also there. She is the attorney for Michael Clarke.
Mr. King was surprised and objected to Mr. Clarke being called.
Judge O’Connor kept her composure. She decided that Mr. Clarke would come to court on Monday January 25 and that he would be examined by the attorneys out of the presence of the jury. She also said she may want to have the testimony of the lawyer who met with Mr. Clarke with Father Joe.
The case has taken on a completely different character; there is something afoot which is not going to be very pretty. In fact, what was said involves serious criminal liability. The question is going to be, whose criminal liability?
Tags: Clarke, O'Connor, Weitensteiner
-
This is essentially the very same article as was published the previous day (3 posts back (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=29941&p=359443#p359441)), save for a grammatical polishing or two. However, it has a different title and a whole new set of comments, so here it is again:
-------------- • -------------- • -------------- • --------------
The Spokesman-Review
Sex procurement alleged in boys' ranch trial (http://http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/jan/22/sex-procurement-alleged/)
Judge to rule whether witness can testify
January 22, 2010 in City
Kevin Graman
An unexpected witness may testify that former Morning Star Boys' Ranch director Joseph Weitensteiner had him procure boys for sex and then gave the witness money years later to keep it quiet, according to a motion Thursday in the first sex-abuse trial against the ranch.
The dramatic revelation in the lawsuit by Kenneth Putnam came outside the presence of the Superior Court jury when Judge Kathleen O'Connor demanded to know why Putnam's attorney had called an unscheduled witness three weeks into proceedings.
That witness is Michael Clarke, a former boys' ranch resident who is currently an inmate at the Airway Heights Corrections Center on a conviction of first-degree theft.
Putnam's attorney told the judge Clarke informed him Friday that in 2006 Weitensteiner allegedly paid Clarke $2,000 in exchange for Clarke not revealing that he groomed and procured other Morning Star boys to have sex with Weitensteiner. Clarke told the attorney, Tim Kosnoff, that those encounters took place in a nearby farmhouse, owned by the ranch, where Weitensteiner lived in the late 1970s.
Under questioning by Kosnoff on Wednesday, Weitensteiner denied giving money to Clarke, but said he had presided at Clarke's wedding. On Thursday, Weitensteiner denied that Clarke had procured boys for him. But the reason for those questions wasn't revealed until later Thursday.
Morning Star's attorney, Jim King, protested the admissibility of Clarke's testimony and the potential new line of evidence, saying it was a violation of trial management and "a whole different trial."
If Kosnoff wants to present such a case, "let him take it to the prosecutor," King told O'Connor. "We don't think Clarke has any place in this trial."
Kosnoff told the judge "nothing could be more central to this case" than Clarke's expected testimony. He said he can produce a witness who saw Weitensteiner hand Clarke an unsealed envelope containing the cash.
O'Connor ruled that Clarke would appear before her Monday morning and she would hear what he has to say, without the jury present, before ruling on the admissibility of his testimony.
In other testimony Thursday:
• Weitensteiner denied grooming Stephanie Miller for sexual contact. Miller, a transsexual who was born Carl Smith, is a former resident of the ranch who has filed a separate lawsuit against Morning Star claiming to have been sexually abused there.
• Under questioning by Kosnoff, Weitensteiner had difficulty recalling whether the ranch had a written policy regarding allegations of abuse.
• Putnam, 34, testified that he had been molested by Weitensteiner and a counselor named Doyle Gillum, who is now deceased.
Putnam said Gillum came into his bedroom late at night and fondled him while he was under the influence of medication given to him by the ranch to control his bed-wetting.
He said he reported the incident to a supervisor, but that a week later Gillum again entered his room at night and began molesting him until Putnam slapped the counselor. Gillum "punched me so hard in the chest I couldn't breathe," Putnam said.
• He also testified that Weitensteiner molested him on the priest's 27-foot powerboat on Lake Coeur d'Alene where the priest took him and another boy in the early 1980s.
While Putnam, who was 10 or 11 years old at the time, was lying down seasick, he said, Weitensteiner pulled down his shorts and touched him until the boy kicked Weitensteiner in the face, jumped overboard and swam to another boat. The other boater returned Putnam to Weitensteiner, who said the boy was mentally ill.
That night Weitensteiner took the boys back to his home at St. Patrick's Parish, where he was pastor, and again molested him, Putnam testified. Putnam recounted that Weitensteiner told him, "Nobody is ever going to believe you. Look who you are, an orphan. Nobody ever comes for you."
• He said Weitensteiner later fondled him again when he forced the boy onto his lap behind the wheel of the priest's car. Putnam was later taken from Morning Star Boys' Ranch and placed in a foster home in Chattaroy.
• King declined to cross-examine either Weitensteiner or Putnam. Both will be called as witnesses when the defense presents its case, probably next week.
························································································
Comments for the above article:
Stephen Eugster on January 22 at 3:58 a.m.
For more about the trial and this development see
http://www.washcourts.com/?p=166 (http://www.washcourts.com/?p=166)[/list]
Stephen Eugster on January 22 at 8:10 a.m.
If the Clarke Allegations are untrue then someone, perhaps along with others, is attempting a massive shakedown of Morning Star Boys Ranch.
True or not true, the Clarke Allegations make it incumbent upon Spokane Prosecuting Attorney Steve Tucker to act - to at least call for a Special Inquiry Judge to mount an investigation. See RCW Ch. 10.27. Perhaps a grand jury should be empanelled.
What the allegations could relate to is a criminal endeavor involving a lot of people. Judge Kathleen O'Connor's taking testimony of Micheal Clarke this coming Monday, January 25, 2010, is not going to be enough to get at the truth and the magnitude of what must be taking place. Any way one looks at the Clarke Allegations and the timing of the allegations, or the matters contained in the allegations, someone (perhaps in concert with others with others) is engaging in significant criminal activity. The truth must be found out. It cannot be found out in the limited context of a hearing on Monday or later testimony in a personal injury action.
twoandthree on January 22 at 3:36 p.m.
I'm going to start logging my postings and repost them when the S-R removes them.
Ryan's looking for job security.
© Copyright 2010, The Spokesman-Review
-
This is essentially the very same article as was published the previous day (3 posts back (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=29941&p=359443#p359441)), save for a grammatical polishing or two. However, it has a different title and a whole new set of comments, so here it is again:
-------------- • -------------- • -------------- • --------------
The Spokesman-Review
Sex procurement alleged in boys' ranch trial (http://http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/jan/22/sex-procurement-alleged/)
Judge to rule whether witness can testify
January 22, 2010 in City
Kevin Graman
An unexpected witness may testify that former Morning Star Boys' Ranch director Joseph Weitensteiner had him procure boys for sex and then gave the witness money years later to keep it quiet, according to a motion Thursday in the first sex-abuse trial against the ranch.
The dramatic revelation in the lawsuit by Kenneth Putnam came outside the presence of the Superior Court jury when Judge Kathleen O'Connor demanded to know why Putnam's attorney had called an unscheduled witness three weeks into proceedings.
That witness is Michael Clarke, a former boys' ranch resident who is currently an inmate at the Airway Heights Corrections Center on a conviction of first-degree theft.
Putnam's attorney told the judge Clarke informed him Friday that in 2006 Weitensteiner allegedly paid Clarke $2,000 in exchange for Clarke not revealing that he groomed and procured other Morning Star boys to have sex with Weitensteiner. Clarke told the attorney, Tim Kosnoff, that those encounters took place in a nearby farmhouse, owned by the ranch, where Weitensteiner lived in the late 1970s.
Under questioning by Kosnoff on Wednesday, Weitensteiner denied giving money to Clarke, but said he had presided at Clarke's wedding. On Thursday, Weitensteiner denied that Clarke had procured boys for him. But the reason for those questions wasn't revealed until later Thursday.
Morning Star's attorney, Jim King, protested the admissibility of Clarke's testimony and the potential new line of evidence, saying it was a violation of trial management and "a whole different trial."
If Kosnoff wants to present such a case, "let him take it to the prosecutor," King told O'Connor. "We don't think Clarke has any place in this trial."
Kosnoff told the judge "nothing could be more central to this case" than Clarke's expected testimony. He said he can produce a witness who saw Weitensteiner hand Clarke an unsealed envelope containing the cash.
O'Connor ruled that Clarke would appear before her Monday morning and she would hear what he has to say, without the jury present, before ruling on the admissibility of his testimony.
In other testimony Thursday:
• Weitensteiner denied grooming Stephanie Miller for sexual contact. Miller, a transsexual who was born Carl Smith, is a former resident of the ranch who has filed a separate lawsuit against Morning Star claiming to have been sexually abused there.
• Under questioning by Kosnoff, Weitensteiner had difficulty recalling whether the ranch had a written policy regarding allegations of abuse.
• Putnam, 34, testified that he had been molested by Weitensteiner and a counselor named Doyle Gillum, who is now deceased.
Putnam said Gillum came into his bedroom late at night and fondled him while he was under the influence of medication given to him by the ranch to control his bed-wetting.
He said he reported the incident to a supervisor, but that a week later Gillum again entered his room at night and began molesting him until Putnam slapped the counselor. Gillum "punched me so hard in the chest I couldn't breathe," Putnam said.
• He also testified that Weitensteiner molested him on the priest's 27-foot powerboat on Lake Coeur d'Alene where the priest took him and another boy in the early 1980s.
While Putnam, who was 10 or 11 years old at the time, was lying down seasick, he said, Weitensteiner pulled down his shorts and touched him until the boy kicked Weitensteiner in the face, jumped overboard and swam to another boat. The other boater returned Putnam to Weitensteiner, who said the boy was mentally ill.
That night Weitensteiner took the boys back to his home at St. Patrick's Parish, where he was pastor, and again molested him, Putnam testified. Putnam recounted that Weitensteiner told him, "Nobody is ever going to believe you. Look who you are, an orphan. Nobody ever comes for you."
• He said Weitensteiner later fondled him again when he forced the boy onto his lap behind the wheel of the priest's car. Putnam was later taken from Morning Star Boys' Ranch and placed in a foster home in Chattaroy.
• King declined to cross-examine either Weitensteiner or Putnam. Both will be called as witnesses when the defense presents its case, probably next week.
························································································
Comments for the above article:
Stephen Eugster on January 22 at 3:58 a.m.
For more about the trial and this development see
http://www.washcourts.com/?p=166 (http://www.washcourts.com/?p=166)[/list]
Stephen Eugster on January 22 at 8:10 a.m.
If the Clarke Allegations are untrue then someone, perhaps along with others, is attempting a massive shakedown of Morning Star Boys Ranch.
True or not true, the Clarke Allegations make it incumbent upon Spokane Prosecuting Attorney Steve Tucker to act - to at least call for a Special Inquiry Judge to mount an investigation. See RCW Ch. 10.27. Perhaps a grand jury should be empanelled.
What the allegations could relate to is a criminal endeavor involving a lot of people. Judge Kathleen O'Connor's taking testimony of Micheal Clarke this coming Monday, January 25, 2010, is not going to be enough to get at the truth and the magnitude of what must be taking place. Any way one looks at the Clarke Allegations and the timing of the allegations, or the matters contained in the allegations, someone (perhaps in concert with others with others) is engaging in significant criminal activity. The truth must be found out. It cannot be found out in the limited context of a hearing on Monday or later testimony in a personal injury action.
twoandthree on January 22 at 3:36 p.m.
I'm going to start logging my postings and repost them when the S-R removes them.
Ryan's looking for job security.
© Copyright 2010, The Spokesman-Review
-
This is essentially the very same article as was published the previous day (3 posts back (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=29941&p=359443#p359441)), save for a grammatical polishing or two. However, it has a different title and a whole new set of comments, so here it is again:
-------------- • -------------- • -------------- • --------------
The Spokesman-Review
Sex procurement alleged in boys' ranch trial (http://http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/jan/22/sex-procurement-alleged/)
Judge to rule whether witness can testify
January 22, 2010 in City
Kevin Graman
An unexpected witness may testify that former Morning Star Boys' Ranch director Joseph Weitensteiner had him procure boys for sex and then gave the witness money years later to keep it quiet, according to a motion Thursday in the first sex-abuse trial against the ranch.
The dramatic revelation in the lawsuit by Kenneth Putnam came outside the presence of the Superior Court jury when Judge Kathleen O'Connor demanded to know why Putnam's attorney had called an unscheduled witness three weeks into proceedings.
That witness is Michael Clarke, a former boys' ranch resident who is currently an inmate at the Airway Heights Corrections Center on a conviction of first-degree theft.
Putnam's attorney told the judge Clarke informed him Friday that in 2006 Weitensteiner allegedly paid Clarke $2,000 in exchange for Clarke not revealing that he groomed and procured other Morning Star boys to have sex with Weitensteiner. Clarke told the attorney, Tim Kosnoff, that those encounters took place in a nearby farmhouse, owned by the ranch, where Weitensteiner lived in the late 1970s.
Under questioning by Kosnoff on Wednesday, Weitensteiner denied giving money to Clarke, but said he had presided at Clarke's wedding. On Thursday, Weitensteiner denied that Clarke had procured boys for him. But the reason for those questions wasn't revealed until later Thursday.
Morning Star's attorney, Jim King, protested the admissibility of Clarke's testimony and the potential new line of evidence, saying it was a violation of trial management and "a whole different trial."
If Kosnoff wants to present such a case, "let him take it to the prosecutor," King told O'Connor. "We don't think Clarke has any place in this trial."
Kosnoff told the judge "nothing could be more central to this case" than Clarke's expected testimony. He said he can produce a witness who saw Weitensteiner hand Clarke an unsealed envelope containing the cash.
O'Connor ruled that Clarke would appear before her Monday morning and she would hear what he has to say, without the jury present, before ruling on the admissibility of his testimony.
In other testimony Thursday:
• Weitensteiner denied grooming Stephanie Miller for sexual contact. Miller, a transsexual who was born Carl Smith, is a former resident of the ranch who has filed a separate lawsuit against Morning Star claiming to have been sexually abused there.
• Under questioning by Kosnoff, Weitensteiner had difficulty recalling whether the ranch had a written policy regarding allegations of abuse.
• Putnam, 34, testified that he had been molested by Weitensteiner and a counselor named Doyle Gillum, who is now deceased.
Putnam said Gillum came into his bedroom late at night and fondled him while he was under the influence of medication given to him by the ranch to control his bed-wetting.
He said he reported the incident to a supervisor, but that a week later Gillum again entered his room at night and began molesting him until Putnam slapped the counselor. Gillum "punched me so hard in the chest I couldn't breathe," Putnam said.
• He also testified that Weitensteiner molested him on the priest's 27-foot powerboat on Lake Coeur d'Alene where the priest took him and another boy in the early 1980s.
While Putnam, who was 10 or 11 years old at the time, was lying down seasick, he said, Weitensteiner pulled down his shorts and touched him until the boy kicked Weitensteiner in the face, jumped overboard and swam to another boat. The other boater returned Putnam to Weitensteiner, who said the boy was mentally ill.
That night Weitensteiner took the boys back to his home at St. Patrick's Parish, where he was pastor, and again molested him, Putnam testified. Putnam recounted that Weitensteiner told him, "Nobody is ever going to believe you. Look who you are, an orphan. Nobody ever comes for you."
• He said Weitensteiner later fondled him again when he forced the boy onto his lap behind the wheel of the priest's car. Putnam was later taken from Morning Star Boys' Ranch and placed in a foster home in Chattaroy.
• King declined to cross-examine either Weitensteiner or Putnam. Both will be called as witnesses when the defense presents its case, probably next week.
························································································
Comments for the above article:
Stephen Eugster on January 22 at 3:58 a.m.
For more about the trial and this development see
http://www.washcourts.com/?p=166 (http://www.washcourts.com/?p=166)[/list]
Stephen Eugster on January 22 at 8:10 a.m.
If the Clarke Allegations are untrue then someone, perhaps along with others, is attempting a massive shakedown of Morning Star Boys Ranch.
True or not true, the Clarke Allegations make it incumbent upon Spokane Prosecuting Attorney Steve Tucker to act - to at least call for a Special Inquiry Judge to mount an investigation. See RCW Ch. 10.27. Perhaps a grand jury should be empanelled.
What the allegations could relate to is a criminal endeavor involving a lot of people. Judge Kathleen O'Connor's taking testimony of Micheal Clarke this coming Monday, January 25, 2010, is not going to be enough to get at the truth and the magnitude of what must be taking place. Any way one looks at the Clarke Allegations and the timing of the allegations, or the matters contained in the allegations, someone (perhaps in concert with others with others) is engaging in significant criminal activity. The truth must be found out. It cannot be found out in the limited context of a hearing on Monday or later testimony in a personal injury action.
twoandthree on January 22 at 3:36 p.m.
I'm going to start logging my postings and repost them when the S-R removes them.
Ryan's looking for job security.
© Copyright 2010, The Spokesman-Review
-
Washington Courts
Courts of Washington and Idaho
Morning Star — The Clarke Allegations, Random Thoughts (http://http://www.washcourts.com/?p=173)
Posted on January 22, 2010, 6:21 am, by Steve Eugster, under Morning Star Boys Ranch.
My guess is that it is going to be some time before I understand what is, or may be, going on regarding the so-called Michael Clarke allegations yesterday – that he procured boys for Father Joe and was paid $2,000 by Father Joe to keep silent. Some random bits:
- Tim Kosnoff, plaintiff Putnam's attorney, did not list Clarke as a witness in his case.
- Kosnoff found out about the allegations last Friday, January 15, 2010, after a week of jury selection.
- Kosnoff has been working on this case and related Morning Star claim cases for years.
- There were at least 5 to 6 other lawyers in the courtroom during the week, from time to time, who have clients who have claims against Morning Star and appeared to me to be aligned with Kosnoff. That is, Kosnoff in a way may also be working or assisting in the cases for their clients.
- Clarke's lawyer, Julie Twyford, has been in the courtroom the last two days – Wednesday and Thursday, January 20 and 21.
- Kosnoff and the other lawyers are there, are in this case and the other cases, for personal reasons, their personal reasons, money being, I would suppose, the primary motivator.
- Kosnoff has put on a weak case thus far.
- He has not developed the depth of the evidence he said he was going to present.
- He seems to want to throw things up on the wall with the hope they will stick in the minds of the jurors and will affect them so that they will have enough hooks to hang their hat of money for Putnam if that is what they are inclined to do.
- For instance, out of the blue, when he was examining Weitensteiner he asked whether Father Joe knew the meaning of the word "narcissist." One could hear an unspoken "huh?" from the courtroom observers, at least some of us.
- The sexual contacts described or better said, attempted, by the so-called perpetrator abusers seem to have a similar context: The perpetrator is being aggressive, forceful, tactless, and the person being abused is rejecting, aggressive, not wanting the contact, not ever having indicated in any way he wanted the contact. This is not how it really works. Seems the situations described are more than likely fantasy because between men and boys or older boys and boys things just do not work the way the witnesses, especially Putnam, are describing them.
- At the end of his opening statement, Kosnoff put up a picture on the screen in front of the jury which said something to the effect that Putnam had been abused by "Doyle Putnam" and Father Joe.
- At the time I thought the use of the term Doyle Putnam was really just an innocent slip. Before he had said the person's name was Doyle Gillum (sp), who is a man now dead.
- Then during Putnam's testimony yesterday, he said that the name of his absent, child abandoning, and neglecting father is Doyle Putnam and that his older brother's name is Doyle Putnam.
- Now I wonder whether Kosnoff's use of "Doyle Putnam" in his opening argument could be pregnant with meaning. I wonder whether this case is about Kenny Putnam playing out an Oedipus Complex of emotions of anger directed to the father who never cared for him and a mother who was almost as careless and worthless and also a great disappointment. For a young man, the worst disappointment in life is to realize his father is not really a father. The anger and disappointment stays with a boy into his manhood and permeates his whole being.
- The Clark allegations are explosive.
- If they are untrue one wonders who else is involved in them, and the timing of their disclosure.
- One can only reasonably suspect there is some terrible wrongdoing here. But what is the wrongdoing and who are the wrongdoers?
- I come back to the weakness of the Putnam case and the claim against Morning Star.
- Putnam is off the stand now and will not be recalled by Kosnoff.
- Putnam has not testified to his damages. Things can happen to a person which should not have happened and someone might be responsible. But to get money, one has to prove damages – one must develop facts which show injury and somehow the injury must be quantified. The jury does not have the power to just throw money to a person from another because the latter did wrong.
- So what is this case, in actual fact, all about?
- Why do the Clarke allegations surface now?
- I do not recall any damages as having been actually established.
Tags: Clarke, Doyle Putnam, Gillum, Kosnoff, Twyford, Weitensteiner