Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform > News Items

MORNING STAR BOYS' RANCH abuse trials (2010-2011)

<< < (2/4) > >>

Ursus:
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.
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 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.

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.

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.?

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

Ursus:
The Spokesman-Review
Lawyers lay out cases in Morning Star trial
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.
Please see http://www.washcourts.com/?p=149.[/list]


© Copyright 2010, The Spokesman-Review

Ursus:
Washington Courts
Courts of Washington and Idaho

Morning Star Boys Ranch — Putnam Case, Day 1
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.


‹·›

Ursus:
The Spokesman-Review
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.[/list]


© Copyright 2010, The Spokesman-Review

Ursus:
Washington Courts
Courts of Washington and Idaho

Morning Star — Day 2, Limitation on Meaning of Testimony
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.


‹·›

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page