ON DEC. 8, the Rhode Island Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case brought by The Providence Journal to access the completed jury questionnaires from the trial of the Derderian brothers that never occurred. Superior Court Judge Francis P. Darigan had presided over the case.

From the Nov. 26 article “Journal asks high court to make Station jury questionnaires public”:

“Even though they carried the disclaimer that the answers were not confidential, and ‘may be included in the public record,’ Judge Darigan denied The Journal’s request to see them, hence the appeal to the Supreme Court. Although the press and the public have ‘the presumptive right’ to see jury questionnaires, Darigan cited ‘uniquely compelling situations’ in sealing them in the Station-fire case.”

So much was “unique” in the application of justice and law to the Station nightclub fire. Or more precisely, it was deemed unique for highly questionable reasons by certain state officials, in particular, Atty. Gen. Patrick Lynch, who is charged with enforcing our laws.

In fact, the terrible incident was deemed too unusual to prosecute West Warwick Fire Inspector Denis LaRocque, or to even let the case against the owners of the business, Michael and Jeffrey Derderian, go to trial. In the latter instance, Mr. LaRocque would almost certainly have revealed the extent of his own role when called by the Derderian defense team to testify, and thereby also exposed the favoritism and injustice that permeated Patrick Lynch’s decision to shield him.

We need to note here that, prima facie, “unique” violates the most precious quality of justice: equality. There cannot be justice for all if some are exempt.

The “unique” status of this case is being carried out — or, at least, attempts are being made to carry it out — fully and to the end. Once again, an exception must be made. One aspect of a case arising out of the Station fire must be set aside from the law. Documents that are in the public domain must be kept secret. Our laws apply . . . almost across the board. Almost equally.

The problem, in addition to the unacceptable proposition of exempting one person and one case from equal application of the law, is that one exception almost invariably begets another. So it is here. The unique poison of this case has begun to spread to other cases. From the article again:

“It is important for the Supreme Court to set guidelines, said Journal lawyer Kristin E. Rodgers, citing a case that followed Darigan’s ruling, in which Superior Court Judge Edward C. Clifton destroyed questionnaires used to select a jury in the sexual-assault trial of a longtime East Providence councilman.”

So the misguided ruling by Judge Darigan to shield the Station-fire jury questionnaires has become the guideline to withhold from the public jury questionnaires in another case.

The uniqueness of the handling of the Station-fire case is not nice. It’s not like a mother or a teacher telling a child that he or she is “special.” It is rank and noxious, evocative of what passed for justice in a banana republic or of a time before the Magna Carta, when who you knew took precedence over equal application of the law.

Set against the great injustice of the decision to hold Denis LaRocque legally harmless in this case, involving 100 deaths and 200 injuries at the Station nightclub on Feb. 20, 2003 — six years ago today — this is a smaller matter. It is, nevertheless, important. For the sake of the victims of the Station fire, and to stem the spread of this foul uniqueness to other cases, these jury questionnaires must be released.

Monique Chartier is a contributor to the blog Anchor Rising (anchorrising.com).