Rhode Island news
Still no verdict in state's lead-paint case
The jury, which on Thursday told the judge it was deadlocked, has continued its deliberations and plans to resume Monday.
01:00 AM EST on Saturday, February 18, 2006
PROVIDENCE -- A jury that said it was deadlocked at noon on Thursday continued deliberating all day yesterday and made plans to return Monday for more decision-making on the state's historic lead-paint lawsuit against four major corporations. The continued deliberations appear to favor the state's case, but no one really knows what is going on, because the jurors are instructed not to talk about the case with anyone. It was another surprising day for a jury that kept a courtroom full of nervous lawyers guessing about what would happen next. Few strayed any farther than the hall outside. After the jury announced the deadlock on Thursday, paint-company lawyers adked Judge Michael A. Silverstein to declare a mistrial. But Silverstein asked the jury foreman if he thought it might be worthwhile for the jury to continue deliberating. The foreman led the jury back into deliberations, polled the jurors and reported to Silverstein that they wanted to keep talking. Some lawyers were certain the jury would fall into another deadlock by day's end. But it didn't. The jury deliberated until 4 p.m. before asking to go home. It resumed deliberations at 9:30 a.m. yesterday. At 1 p.m., the jury sent out another note on yellow legal paper. Another deadlock? No. The jury was looking ahead to even more deliberations, and it wanted to alert the judge that one juror had a conflict on Monday morning. Silverstein quickly decided to have the jury reconvene at 12:30 p.m. on Monday, if necessary. The jury continued deliberations until shortly after 3 p.m. yesterday, when it asked to be excused because one juror had a doctor's appointment. The jury has been asked to decide on three questions: Is the presence of lead paint in Rhode Island a public nuisance? Are defendants NL Industries, Sherwin Williams, Millennium Holdings and Atlantic Richfield liable? And should they be required to clean up the paints used on an estimated 240,000 houses in Rhode Island? The longer the jury deliberates, the more it seems that it is working its way through the three questions, lawyers said. plord@projo.com/ (401) 277-8036
| Visit the new tent city in Providence, it's got its rules | |
| Getting down with G-O-D; RPM voices at Burnside Park | |
| North Providence fire truck gets lunchtime workout |
More top stories
Most Viewed Yesterday
Pedroia misses game to be with pregnant wife
Imprisoned for murder, ex-Providence police officer will still collect disability pension
Providence woman slain, boyfriend arrested in N.Y.
Most active surveys
Should the R.I. Tea Party have been dumped from Bristol's Fourth of July parade?
What would you do about the two tent cities in Providence?
React to proposed toll changes on the Pell, Mount Hope bridges
Is Narragansett's policy of using 'orange stickers' to mark party houses unconstitutional?
Most e-mailed in the last 24 hours
Reader Reaction









You must be logged in to contribute. Log in | Register Now!
You are logged in as screenname | Log Out
You are logged in, but do not have a "screen" name. Create a Screen Name