Washington Courts

The presentation of evidence part of the trial came to an end just before noon today. This afternoon Judge Kathleen M. O’Connor took steps to ready the case for the next to final step, giving the case to the jury.

Judge O’Connor excused the jury when Attorney Kosnoff for the plaintiff told the court he would not be presenting any rebuttal witnesses. There is a story there and I tell it in a later post. The jury will return tomorrow.

This afternoon the judge with the attorneys took care of an number of items. There were some final motions which had to be dealt with. Next, all of the exhibits had to be put in order. This meant that the court wanted to be sure it had full agreement with counsel regarding the exhibits which were admitted during trial. Some items were not admitted and they were taken out of the exhibit books.

After this task was accomplished, judge and counsel worked through the jury instructions to be given to the jury tomorrow. This took the rest of the afternoon. Each side presents jury instructions for consideration and use. The court too will present instructions. The instructions tell the jury what must be done and what various presumptions and standards are. The court will send a copy of the final instructions to me and I put them up on this site.

Tomorrow morning, the judge will instruct the jury on the instructions and will give the jury a working copy of all of them..

Then counsel will make their closing arguments to the jury. This will take the rest of the morning. The jury should begin its deliberations in the afternoon. The jury members have not discussed the case amongst themselves. They will begin that task when the jury is given the case for deliberations.

Tomorrow, Monday, the attorneys for Morning Star Boys Ranch will finish their case.  They will put Kenneth Putnam on the stand. He will be the main witness, they also have two others.

Mr. Kosnoff and Dan Fasy will put on some rebuttal witnesses and the case will come to an end either in the afternoon or on Tuesday.

On Tuesday, if time allows, the attorneys will present final argument to the jury.  The jury will begin deliberations probably on Wednesday.

This weekend Judge Kathleen M. O’Connor has been working on the jury instructions.  Both sides have presented instructions.  The instructions selected will be given to the jury prior to the time it begins deliberations.

Generally, attorney Tim Kosnoff appears respectful of the judge, jurors and opposing counsel. He even appears respectful of witnesses, or at least some of them. But, beneath the surface one must wonder whether Mr. Kosnoff might have a mean streak – a character of disdain and arrogance for witnesses and others whom he dislikes, who contradict his purposes. One must also wonder whether — when he shows this aspect of his personality, his lawyer way of being — he might be trying to manipulate the jury or some of the jurors, into thinking ill of the witness he is addressing.

His cross-examination of Father Weitensteiner Thursday morning (Feb. 4, 2010) seemed to me to be an obvious effort to show to the jury Mr. Kosnoff thought Father Weitensteiner was a bad man, that the whole of Morning Star Boys Ranch was bad.

Here is what he did: Toward the end of his cross-examination he asked Father Weitensteiner what the name of Morning Star Boys Ranch was when it was started. Father Weitensteiner said “Spokane Boys Ranch.”

Mr. Kosnoff found his hook. He said something to the effect that there was something wrong if the name of the corporation was Spokane Boys Ranch and they used the name of Morning Star Boys Ranch.

When did you start that he said? Father Weitensteiner said “right from the beginning the ranch was also known as Morning Star Boys Ranch.” He said “we used Morning Star from day one.”

Mr. Kosnoff went on. He asked something about where the term Morning Star can be found in the bible.  I knew he was up to something.

Father Joe was caught off guard for a moment. Kosnoff had his hook.

It comes from the book of Isaiah doesn’t it? He pointed out, staring at Father Weitensteiner and looking over toward the jurors.

Father Weitensteiner immediately responded that he knows the term from the Book of Revelations.

Kosnoff stopped at that point.

But, his effort to demean, to diminish, to disdain. Father Weitensteiner, and the whole of Morning Star Boys Ranch, might have been understood by some. At least, perhaps he hoped, people who heard of his reference to the Book of Isaiah would cause them to read the Book of Isaiah.  Or, maybe remember how the term Morning Star was used in the book.

Kosnoff had done some biblical research and he thought he would be able to use it, to manipulate the minds of jurors a bit.

The term “Morning Star” is pretty much found in two places in the Bible. In the Book of Isaiah where it  means evil, the devil, Lucifer – bad stuff.

And, it is used in the Book of Revelations where it means Jesus Christ. Revelation 22:16. Where it means hope, new birth, re-creation.

At Father Joe’s response, Mr. Kosnoff said “no further questions.”

Inside, I think he was snickering. Or, maybe he figured out Father Weitensteiner is a good man and that he knew the bible truth better than he, and obviously more innocently.

In trying to use this cynical little trick,  Mr. Kosnoff appeared to be on the sleazy side of things.

In the hallway outside of the courtroom yesterday (February 3, 2010) I talked with two people - one who had been observing the trial every day, and one, a former radio talk show co-talker who was observing that day.

The radio talker was of the opinion that men engaged in sex with boys and seemed to believe that if a person said a man had come out and said a man had sex with him when he was a boy it was probably true. She was a bit in disbelief when I said the evidence in the case, at least as far as I had understood it, did not establish that Kenny Putman had been sexually in contact with anyone at Morning Star Boys Ranch.

She seemed to be a bit uncomfortable with my observations so I changed the subject and we talked of various pleasantries – of Mark Fuhrman becoming a counter-terrorist specialist for Fox News and that soon he would be heading off to Israel. That will be interesting, I said. (And I meant it.)

The other person I talked with said he had “at least 200 cases” of confirmed priest sexual abuse. He must be part of some sort of group against priests or the Catholic Church or someone. I have seen this man before and remember he was in the courtroom one time when I observed a hearing in the Spokane Diocese bankruptcy appeal before District Court Judge Justin Quackenbush. See this Spokesman - Review piece.

We also talked about the circumstances of man-boy sex abuse. He said it always occurred in private. I said hetero sex also takes place in private.

His point was that if people thought that such things took place in public from time to time a person who had been sexually abused would never be able to prove his case. Consequently, if the boy, now a man, said that ssex took place 20 -50 years ago it was probably (was he thinking “must be”) true?

I did not go into his argument. I did not tell him that such events may take place in private but that the private trysts would have to be established, could be established by evidence that man and boy actually were together alone in a private place. For example, that people saw them go into a private place.

I wanted to tell him that men and men and men and boys engage in something on a regular basis in High Bridge Park and its environs every day in good weather in Spokane. How does one know this? Because one can observe while he is walking his dogs that men and boys regularly leave their cars individually and walk deep into the park near Latah Creek and into the bushes, the same general bushes. Thus, the tryst could easily be established. What goes on at the time of the tryst may be “secret” but the meeting would not be.

I wanted to tell him these things but did not. I sensed it would be a waste of time. I left the man and the conversation with a shudder rising in my being. A shudder because his prejudices seem like they might be the hidden reason why people could easily get away with false claims of man-boy sexual abuse. I wondered how many false claims had been approved and paid in the Spokane Diocese Bankruptcy.

There is no evidence in this case that establishes Kenny Putnam was ever alone with Father Joe Weitensteiner or Doyle Gillum. There is no evidence, other than his statements, that he ever had sexual contact with anyone at Morning Star Boys Ranch.

There is something deeply wrong with Kenny Putman but it has to do with the treatment he received from his mother and father, not the treatment he received at Morning Star Boys Ranch. This deeply troubled young man is not being helped by the bringing of this action. And, he will not be helped even if he prevails.

Pete Whipple is about 5′10, healthy, with a pleasant smile. He is attentive, if you stand next to him you will sense he is attentive to you.

Mr. Whipple came to Spokane to testify at the trial from Williams Port, Pa. He and his wife are working to organize a new church in Williams Port, a nondenominational Christian church. That is what he does – he works as a person who starts churches. He is married. He and his wife have raised five children who now range in age from 22 to 31.

Mr. Whipple was at Morning Star Boys Ranch from September 1967 to June of 1977. His brother M.J. Whipple was with him.  How did they come to be at the ranch and for so long?

Their father was the cook at the ranch. They lived in a house on the property. Their mother was gone, he has not seen her since the time he was four. Their mother and father were divorced.

One day, their father simply left, left the boys in the house and never returned. Father Joe came over and told them they should come over and live at the ranch with the other boys. They did, and they stayed. Father Joe and the ranch became their father.

But, it seems as though Pete Whipple also became a father to himself. He excelled at the ranch and though he did not say it, it became apparent as I listened to his testimony that he had “identified” with the purposes of the ranch and the person and character of Father Joe Weitensteiner.

After graduating from the ranch and with the blessing and emotional and material assistance (an old car the ranch had) he attended Northwest College in Kirkland, Washington. In 1978 he moved to New Jersey and by correspondence took courses a Berean School of the Bible in Missouri. He graduated in 1981 and has been involved in the ministry ever since.

He was at Morning Star when Billy Knapton was there. He describes Billy Knapton as the “poster child” for the ranch and may have been at the ranch longer than he and his brother.

Billy Knapton in his testimony said that he and some other boys had to stay out of school because they were sick and that during that time he and the other boys were made to hold iris flowers in their butt cracks and that pictures were taken. He said the picture was on Father Joe’s desk and that everyone knew about what had happened.

Pete Whipple said he was there, he and some other boys along with Billy Knapton had been quarantined. He said that the incident never happened. That there were no pictures. That there was no picture on Father Joe’s desk.

Mr. Whipple testified as to trips with Father Joe and others at the ranch. Of camping. Of Thanksgiving dinners at the home of Father Joe’s mother in Spokane with other boys.

He was asked about whether he ever saw Father Joe lose his temper. Six or eight times maybe. He said Father Joe became a bit upset with him when one day he was not wearing his cassock and had jeans and a cowboy hat on. Father Joe disapproving said “its Father Joe.” His upset was always tied to disrespectful behavior or disruptive behavior of the boys.

He said he never saw Father Joe strike a boy.

When asked about “hacks” he said there were times but the hacks were no different from what was true of the public schools at the time, of Ferris High School or Sacajawea Junior High. As to the hacks the boys never took their clothes off. He said he had received a hack from time to time for bad behavior – over ten years, maybe six times.

When he went to college, Father Joe put a 1965 Plymouth in his name for transportation and a start. Over the years Father Joe continued his generosity by making money gifts to him and his family and especially his ministerial work

He said he saw Billy Knapton when he came back to the ranch for a time in 1970 - 71. He had a concern about Knapton because he was trying to sell bags of airplane glue.

He saw Billy in the mid. 70’s and he “wasn’t doing well.”

At the ranch and with the care and kindness of Father Joe, Pete Whipple was able to be the father of the man he has become.

Years ago, Spencer Hampton was in trouble. He pled guilty to a crime, a business financial crime, and went to federal prison. He spent seven months at Leavenworth Camp at Leavenworth in Kansas. When he was released on probation and he was obligated to perform 3,000 of community service. He began working at Morning Star Boys Ranch in 1984. He continues to work at the ranch today.

Mr. Hampton is about 70. He has two adult children, spent four years in the Air Force and has an honorable discharge, the trouble he got into was related to his work in a mortgage brokerage effort in the Omaha area.

At Morning Star he worked on maintenance and grounds keeping. As time passed and as he became more acquainted with the work of Morning Star he found his calling, he enjoyed the work and goals of the ranch. He trained, learned what had to be done to help the boys and keep records and protect the boys from themselves when they were having difficulty. He worked with Doyle Gillum, was trained by Reese Hall, was supervised by Lyle O’Neal and Father Joe Weitensteiner, and others.

He became and still is a Shift Supervisor – he is with the boys all the time and supervises and keeps records of the work of the staff workers who are in constant contact with the boys.

He testified to his knowledge of Doyle Gillum, Father Joe and others at the ranch. Questions were asked as to whether he had any knowledge of sexually inappropriate contact, words, etc. The answers were always a clear calm “no.” He was asked whether he ever saw or heard of Father Joe striking a boy  “no,” striking Kenny Putnam “no,” “hacking a boy” “no.”

He remembered Kenny Putnam. He described Kenny as an assaultive, vulgar, disruptive, “particularly angry young man.” He said Kenny liked being with the horses that he could express himself around the horses.

He spent a great deal of time with Kenny. Kenny would act out and had to be kept from hurting himself, others and property. He talked about the progress of restraint and the reasons for it. The progress of discipline or restraint consisted of kneeling, time outs, chores, and if necessary when the boy was out of control actual physical restraint.

This physical restraint is more in the nature of a person being behind the boy and embracing him, having him lean forward, or sit down and waiting as he held the boy for the boy to calm down and come back into his self-control.

He spoke of many difficulties Kenny Putnam had adjusting to the ranch, being with other boys.

He spoke of his constant efforts with Kenny, his care for Kenny and the work at the ranch.

He was forthright, content in his work and his life at the ranch. I had the sense that Spencer Hampton found redemption and a calling at the ranch. It was obvious that he had experienced grace and that he was doing what he could to pass that grace onto the boys he works with at the ranch.

The attorneys for Kenny Putnam would like the jury to think that Morning Star did not do enough to help Kenny Putnam in school. Mr. Putnam testified that he had a tutor by the name of Buck Rogers. He laughed when he said the name as if to say Buck was a joke. He said that Mr. Rogers did not do very much to help him, if anything, and as best he could remember all Mr. Rogers did was to let him play a computer game called The Oregon Trail. At the time I thought, “that really sounds bad.”The first witness yesterday, February 2, 2010, was Buck Rogers also known as Forbes W. Watson Rogers. Mr. Rogers was born in 1936. He graduated from the University of Oregon in 1960, he has a Masters Degree from Southern Oregon College, and he has a PhD from Gonzaga University in Educational Leadership.

He has been a teacher for many years. He also worked in Ashland, Oregon with the Shakespeare organization in that city. In the 80s he came back to Spokane and Gonzaga University to get his PhD.

He became a tutor in District 81. This work took him to Morning Star Boys Ranch where he took over the tutorial educational responsibilities at the ranch.

He has vivid memories of Kenny Putnam. He detailed all of the efforts that he and other staff at the ranch engaged in to help Kenny. It was difficult to help Kenny because he had such difficulty remaining in control. He spoke of efforts to work with Bob Waite (sp) at Sacajawea Junior High School where they had a special program for boys with difficulties like those Kenny was suffering from. He spoke of how difficult it was for Kenny to adjust to a school environment and how frustrating it was trying to come up with ways to help him.

He spoke at length about how distraught Kenney would be after he spent weekend visitations at the home of his mother and his aunt. He said that when Kenny came back from a home visit he would be “pretty wound up.”

His testimony about the sadness, rejection, and anger Kenny felt, displayed after visits with his mother is repeated in the testimony of other witnesses. The distinct impression one has is that Kenny was living an ongoing deep pain at having been so brutally rejected by his mother and father when he was just a baby, a little boy and that he deeply wanted experience love from his mother.

As far as the computer game is concerned, The Oregon Trail, Mr. Rogers said the game, even though an educational game, was a “popsicle” for the boys he tutored, for Kenny. After boys completed their school work for the afternoon, they would be allowed to use the computers and to play The Oregon Trail computer game.

Buck Rogers was certainly not the person Kenny Putnam attempted to describe in his testimony. He was a man, who at the time, did everything he was hired and trained to do for Kenny and yet he did more. It was obvious that he cared for Kenny and tried, along with others, to find ways to help Kenny grow and adjust to himself.

Buck Rogers radiated a goodness, an essential goodness. As I listened to his testimony yesterday, and as I reread my notes of his testimony and reflected, it seemed to me (it seems to me) the plaintiff and his attorneys (or is it the attorneys and their plaintiff client) are attempting to paint a picture of general evil at Morning Star Boys Ranch. A picture that all of the people at Morning Star Boys Ranch shared a dark secret of an evil and neglectful spirit. It seems as if they are trying to say that there is some sort of authority out there and that the authority is not good.

From the testimony of the witnesses for the defense, from the obvious personal characteristics the witnesses emanated from their beings, the picture emerges of a people all working together in goodwill to do what they could do as human beings to help the boys who came to Morning Star boys Ranch – To help the boys become better human beings. The picture is of people who, to a man or woman, were dedicated to helping others.

Buck Rogers is clearly one of those good hearted people.

On Monday, February 1, 2010, the attorneys for Morning Star Boys Ranch put on a host of witnesses. Bob Sestero did most of the direct examination. This was the day the jury and the court observers got a good chance to see this young man in action. He was good. His questions were well prepared and organized. He handled himself well when a rough spot came up and when it was necessary to rephrase a question so that it would be put more appropriately, he was able to do so. He was well-mannered and respectful of all including defense counsel, Tim Kosnoff and Dan Fasy.

The witnesses came on in fairly rapid succession. Nothing was rushed, but no time was wasted on questions which might touch on testimony, though interesting and good was irrelevant. One can see from this real first day of the defense that they are going to use their time well and to the purpose. The defense must be finished by this coming Thursday.

Now, the witnesses and the testimony:

David R. Tucker is 37, married, living with his wife and their five children, ages 3 - 15, self-employed, working as a cell tower contractor and wireless communication maintenance contractor.

He went to Morning Star for about 16 months during 1988 to 1989. He and plaintiff Kenny Putnam were in a receiving home together before they were both placed at Morning Star. At the ranch, they were together daily. He describes Putnam then as not shy, aggressive, rough, mouthing off, antagonistic.

He talked about outings with Father Joe and others at the ranch. He talked about Doyle Gillum and how often he was in contact with him – daily. As to each of Father Joe and Gillum he testified that neither had done anything inappropriate, said anything inappropriate, were anything other than caring men doing their work as people trying to help boys and young men on their feet.

He testified that Father Joe had never tried to isolate a boy, had never been isolated with a boy, was always with more than one boy.

Jeffrey Benz, by deposition:

Mr. Benz’ deposition was taken in British Columbia, Canada, in Surrey with his girlfriend, his child and his girlfriend’s mother. His deposition had a certain frankness to it which was interesting. He said he had nothing to do with Morning Star and that he did not care one way or another about the litigation. He just wanted to live his life in Canada.

He is 33. He was at Morning Star at the same time as Kenny Putnam. He said he and Putnam were buddies at the ranch, that they hung out together. He talked about going on ski trips with other boys and Father Joe. How they would go to the parish house, Father Joe had an apartment in Hillyard at St. Patrick’s and then head off for skiing early the next morning. He said Father Joe had a small apartment with a living room, kitchen, bedroom and bathroom. The boys camped out in the living room in their sleeping bags. He never saw father Joe alone with a boy. In answer to several questions concerning whether Father Joe was inappropriate in word or deed in any way, he consistently said no.

He talked of boating trips with Father Joe and other boys. Kenny Putnam was there with him on one occasion. He said Father Joe and Kenny Putnam were never alone. He described a situation where he and Putnam had been acting up and that it was necessary for Father Joe to discipline to have them cut it out. Some anger was expressed. Father Joe told them to sit down. At that point Putnam jumped out of the boat and into the lake. He said that Putnam had not come out of the cutty cabin before this happened.

He said that Putnam was angry that day at Father Joe and that he said, “I am going to get that guy someday.”

He said he remained friends with Putnam, that they had never had a falling out. He said that Putnam had never said anything to him about being approached or touched sexually by Father Joe or anyone else.

Dan Fasy read the questions of cross-examination of the deposition. Benz testified that his stepmother’s father was Reese Hall, the friend of Father Joe’s who was involved in the ranch and had a boat at the same lake and (dock) as did Father Joe.

Hoa Le

During the plaintiff’s case, evidence came in that Doyle Gillum and Hoa Le had shared an apartment near Morning Star for a while before Le went off to Tacoma for college. Le was a resident of the ranch and the ranch sponsored the apartment.

Mr. Le is Vietnamese. He and his mother and sister were “boat people” who were able to find their way to the United States. They came to Spokane from Stockton, California with his family in 1986.

Le is married, 39 or so, has two children who live with him and his wife and their mother. He has a Bachelor’s degree in social work from Eastern Washington University, has worked for the Social Security Administration, Hayden Homes, The Arc of Spokane, and now Fairwood Assisted Living. He has a “lay ministry” certificate from Whitworth.

He was at Morning Star during 1988 through 1994.

He talked about Father Joe and Doyle Gillum and testified there was nothing of a sexual nature in their contact with the boys at the ranch, no rumors, just normalcy.

He spoke of Kenny Putnam and testified they spent much time together at Morning Star because the kids were all together many times for meals and recreation. Putnam was not shy, was aggressive, liked to provoke things, would try to draw others into the conflicts he was having, had to be restrained.

Gillum was a staff person he came to know as a friend. Gillum would play basketball with the boys, take them on horseback rides with the ranch horses. There was nothing inappropriate about Gillum.

Le was an usual member at the ranch, Richard Holcomb, another witness testified. He had been successful in school and was successful in his relations with others. The ranch wanted to encourage his growth.

For the last few months of his stay, he shared an apartment with Doyle Gillum at the ranch. Each had his own room. They were hardly together because Le was helping at a local grade school and going to high school at the same time. He said the ranch wanted him to grow up more and learn to live on his own.

He went to Tacoma in an old station wagon the ranch had given to him.

Doyle Gillum was a good friend and a good person.

As an observer, I was left with the clear impression that Mr. Le found in Gillum an elder brother he had respect for and wanted to emulate. And, he has. Mr. Le is a tribute to the short, sincere and giving life of Doyle Gillum.

John D. Lyons

Mr. Lyons is single, but engaged to be married. He is about 36. He was at Morning Star from November 1987 through May 1989. He was there when Kenny Putnam was there.

From February 1994 through April 1999, he was in the United States military. He was a sergeant having reached the grade of E-4. He was honorably discharged.

He now works for American Behavioral Health System as a Facility Monitor.

He worked at Morning Star in 2007 as a janitor and while he was job hunting. He worked the graveyard shift as a janitor and also helped get breakfast ready for the boys.

He talked about Father Joe, Doyle Gillum, Mary Jentges, the social worker who testified earlier in the proceedings, outings on Father Joe’s boat with other kids, skiing trips – no overnights on the boat or skiing and always with other boys.

He talked at some length about Kenny Putnam. He described Putnam as an antagonist, as loud and aggressive, very verbal, always trying to create a bit of trouble, one who would step into a situation and disrupt it. He said he got along with Putnam as people want to do when they spend time together in similar conditions, like in the army.

He said he saw Kenny Putnam at Northwest Seed and Pet in north Spokane some time ago in the spring of 2006. They talked and exchanged pleasantries. He said he asked about the allegations appearing in the news about Morning Star Boys Ranch about the sex abuse cases. He said Putnam said, “I am going to get me some of that money.”

In cross examination by Dan Fasy, he went on to say that Putnam was “not a person he wanted to spend time with.”

Tricia Schmidt

Mrs. Schmidt is the widow of Doyle Gillum. She is married and has a child. She and her husband live in South Carolina. She teaches at a Christian grade school. Her husband works for the Federal Bureau of Prisons.

Tricia Schmidt gave the most poignant testimony of the trial. She loved Doyle Gillum and spoke of their meeting, their lives together, their hopes, their faith and Doyle’s untimely death in a train accident while on a hunting trip with a friend in outside of Omaha, Nebraska in 1994.

I will have more to say about Mrs. Schmidt and Doyle Gillum and her testimony.

Richard Holcomb – more on Mr. Holcomb later. He is a full-time professional in the business of providing services to boys like Lyons, Tucker, and Putnam. He told about the training and the work of the workers at Morning Star. He helped everyone understand how “restraint” was done, about the policies regarding restraint, of how everyone was trained to try to de-escalate the situation prior to restraint, and that restraint was in fact a way where an adult would essentially embrace the person from behind and keep him from harming himself and others and how the restraint would be released as the restrainer experienced the person calming down, relaxing.

Tricia Shanks

Mrs. Shanks said that she helped at the ranch, but that she was not a nurse at the ranch. Witness Paul Bagget had said that he reported sex abuse to a nurse by the name of Shanks. She said no and that she does not remember Paul Bagget.

William Beasley, by deposition. I am going to talk about Wm. Beasley later when I speak more of Tricia Schmidt. He was Doyle Gillum’s good friend.

The court will consider a simple motion for partial summary judgkment on Friday in the Thurston County Superior Court in Olympia.  Judge Richard D. Hicks will hear the motion.

The motion?  Simply whether the one person one vote applies to the election of judges to the Washington Court of Appeals.  If it does, how we elect judges to the Court of Appeals will dramatically change.  Here is the Reply Brief of the Plaintiff — there are usually three briefs on such summary judgment motions — opening brief, response brief and reply brief.  That’s it.

Friday should be an interesting day, one way or the other.  One of the reasons why the case has interest is that it is a case of “first impression.”  This means that no court in the State of Washington, or anywhere for that matter, has considered the issue.  The judge’s decision will be the first time the “mind of man, has been applied to the issue.”  My words.

Judge O’Connor is doing a fine job. She runs a good courtroom, she does so firmly but fairly. She is especially good with the jury. She is kind and considerate. She ensures the jury does not have to spend any more time than necessary waiting in the jury room. This means she limits the time which is needed to hear and decide matters outside of the presence of the jury. This morning, for example, some matters had to be decided before the jury came in. She moved the matters along and got the jury in within a half hour.

Today the jury was excused at 4:30 pm and she and the lawyers worked on various motions and housekeeping details until 5:30 pm. This was a bit unusual. Unusual because the judge usually has other matters in other cases which she has to attend to before the end of the day.

Timing is very important because the court cannot function, cannot do its work, without having a full compliment of staff – the bailiff, judicial assistant and court reporter. Each person has an important role and must be present when the court is at work.

Judge O’Connor works at home during the evening. A matter came up at the very end of the day and the judge asked that the attorney who was to present something would scan it and send it to her via email. She will spend a fair amount of time tonight reading the material and thinking and perhaps doing some research before she makes her decision. She will present her decision when court reconvenes tomorrow.

The judge is doing a good job, her efforts and her concerns and her ability to be businesslike and interested at every moment are a real credit to her and to the Spokane Superior Court.