PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "Greg Anderson, Maya’s attorney, told Fox News Digital that he believes the most recent motion is “completely and utterly inappropriate.” Even if there were some way to make a connection — which there’s not in any way, shape or form. Going after a juror — and trying to make any connection at all to such a loathsome part of history is … inappropriate and contrary to everything that our rules of professional conduct stand for,” he said, adding that he thinks the defense should “withdraw that second supplement"...“I think they’re grasping at straws. They’ve been going through their various arguments … for a new trial and try to attack a juror,” Anderson said. “It’s all tied together with their desire for a do-over, and…I don’t want this to turn into a hoary cliché, but they just don’t get it. And they still don’t get it. They just don’t understand that the jury, in fact, the country, has rejected their conduct.”
STORY: "Maya Kowalski case: Hospital demands new trial citing juror’s note with alleged Nazi symbols," published by WFIN (Fox News) on December 11, 2023.
GIST: "The Maya Kowalski medical abuse case has taken another turn after Johns Hopkins All Children’s Hospital(JHAC) filed a motion for a new trial last week based on allegations that a juror in the trial, which concluded last month, wrote notes with suggestively placed Nazi symbols.
The motion comes after the defense filed a 140-page motion for a new trial on Nov. 24, after a Florida jury on Nov. 9 awarded more than $260 million in damages to the family of 17-year-old Kowalski, who alleged in a 2018 civil suit that the actions of staff at the St. Petersburg children’s hospital, where she was being treated for a rare chronic pain condition, ultimately drove her mother, Beata Kowalski, to suicide in 2017.
The hospital is arguing that Juror No. 1 printed Dr. Sally Smith’s name with “the letter ‘S’ is shaped in a manner identical to the symbol of the Nazi Schutzstaffel,” a paramilitary organization that operated under Adolf Hitler’s rule during World War II, while printing other words with “the letter ‘S’ throughout the note normally, with a curve in the spine,” signifying an apparent dislike for Smith.
“Printing the first letter of Dr. Smith’s first and last name in this manner makes clear Juror No. 1’s bias and prejudice against Dr. Smith (and thus Defendant), equating Dr. Smith with a notorious Nazi organization,” the defense stated in its most recent court filing.
Dr. Smith was the medical director for the Pinellas County Child Protection Team in 2016, when staff at JHAC reached out to her for help to determine whether Beata Kowalski was possibly exhibiting signs of Munchausen syndrome by proxy — a form of medical abuse — in Maya’s medical case.
Maya was admitted to the hospital when she was 10 years old for severe pain caused by her poorly understood chronic neurological condition called complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), which was previously diagnosed by another Florida doctor. Later in 2016, a court order removed Maya from the custody of her parents after staff accused Beata of medical abuse.
The case has made recent headlines after it inspired the popular documentary series “Take Care of Maya.”
On Nov. 9, the six-person jury found that JHAC had falsely imprisoned Maya, fraudulently billed her family and caused them severe emotional distress. The jury also determined that social worker Catherine Bedy had battered Maya, and Dr. Smith had medically neglected Maya.
Now, the defense is asking for a new trial based on its allegations that “[j]uror No. 1’s reference to Dr. Sally Smith with the use of Nazi symbolism demonstrates a clear bias, prejudice and prejudgment against her and thus Defendant in the above-styled cause, and demonstrates an additional basis upon which Defendant’s Motion for New Trial Based on Juror Misconduct, Motion for Juror Interview, Motion to Open Discovery Into Evidence of Juror Misconduct, and Emergency Motion to Preserve Evidence as well as a new trial generally, should be granted.”
Greg Anderson, Maya’s attorney, told Fox News Digital that he believes the most recent motion is “completely and utterly inappropriate.”
“Even if there were some way to make a connection — which there’s not in any way, shape or form. Going after a juror — and trying to make any connection at all to such a loathsome part of history is … inappropriate and contrary to everything that our rules of professional conduct stand for,” he said, adding that he thinks the defense should “withdraw that second supplement.”
There will be a hearing for a new trial in the case on Friday.
The defense also argued in court documents filed over the last two-and-a-half weeks that juror No. 1 engaged in other misconduct during the trial, in part because he “may have harbored ill feelings” toward the Florida Department of Children and Families (DCF). JHAC is arguing that the juror engaged in misconduct when he posted a statement about the trial on a public Facebook page named after the “Take Care of Maya” documentary, which the defense described as “sensationalized,” on Nov. 23, expressing opposition to JHAC’s motion for a new trial.
“I think they’re grasping at straws. They’ve been going through their various arguments … for a new trial and try to attack a juror,” Anderson said. “It’s all tied together with their desire for a do-over, and…I don’t want this to turn into a hoary cliché, but they just don’t get it. And they still don’t get it. They just don’t understand that the jury, in fact, the country, has rejected their conduct.”
The motion comes after the defense filed a 140-page motion for a new trial last month, arguing that there was a “massively tainted verdict” in Maya’s trial.
“The jury voted ‘yes’ on every possible method to award compensatory or punitive damages against [JHAC]. Under the leadership of Juror #1, the jury voted ‘yes’ despite the fact that, under the law instructed by the Court and the evidence presented during the trial, many of the claims were not proven or, at a minimum, the manifest weight of the evidence was contrary to a ‘yes’ vote on those claims,” the defense stated.
The November motion states that under Juror No. 1’s leadership and the plaintiff’s arguments, “counsel was overwhelmed by improper passion and prejudice and its belief that the Defendant’s employees had a specific intent to harm this child.”
The entire story can be read at:
maya-kowalski-case-hospital-demands-new-trial-citing-jurors-note-with-alleged-nazi-symbols
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog;
SEE BREAKDOWN OF SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG, AT THE LINK BELOW: HL
https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/47049136857587929
FINAL WORD: (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases): "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices.
Lawyer Radha Natarajan;
Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;
—————————————————————————————————
FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions. They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!
Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;
------------------------------------------------------------------
YET ANOTHER FINAL WORD:
David Hammond, one of Broadwater’s attorneys who sought his exoneration, told the Syracuse Post-Standard, “Sprinkle some junk science onto a faulty identification, and it’s the perfect recipe for a wrongful conviction.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
