Vermont Superior Court Newport
The Vermont Superior Court building in Newport. File photo by Mike Dougherty/VTDigger

State judiciary officials have said that the ongoing ban on Orleans County jury trials is because an engineerโ€™s assessment found the courtโ€™s HVAC insufficient to reopen amid the current state of the pandemic.

Now, a defense attorney and the countyโ€™s top prosecutor are pointing to the same report as evidence that jury trials should resume. 

Their assertion marks the latest volley from the unusual allies โ€” defense attorney David Sleigh, and Stateโ€™s Attorney Jennifer Barrett โ€” against the court system. In July, Sleigh filed motions to dismiss about 30 cases, arguing that the state had been โ€œdeliberately indifferent to my clientsโ€™ rights to a speedy trial.โ€ With Barrettโ€™s support, he unsuccessfully tried to depose top court officials to ask why they still havenโ€™t resumed normal court operations. 

A top court official said the duoโ€™s interpretation of the engineerโ€™s assessment ignores key logistical caveats. 

Sleigh and Barrett obtained a copy of the engineerโ€™s report Thursday, which Sleigh shared with VTDigger. 

The report, signed by Daniel Dupras of Engineering Services of Vermont and provided to the court in August, says, โ€œ[I]t is my opinion that the HVAC system is confirmed to be sufficient,โ€ provided the court follows a list of other protocols, including masking and capacity restrictions. 

โ€œI was totally baffled because the engineering studies are in direct contravention to what the judiciary has said about the buildings on their website and in their directives,โ€ Sleigh said.

Chief Superior Judge Brian Grearson said itโ€™s more complicated than that, however: One of the reportโ€™s requirements to reopen was that the third-floor courtroom must be used for both the trial and for jury deliberations. 

This part, Grearson said, is what doesnโ€™t work. 

Court proceedings are carefully choreographed so that jurors donโ€™t see incarcerated defendants enter the courtroom, as watching a defendant walk in under heavy security might sway the verdict. The Orleans courthouse has a specialized entrance for incarcerated defendants, and the jury generally enters the courtroom after the defendant is already seated.

If thereโ€™s no other place for the jury to wait outside, Grearson said, the Orleans court canโ€™t hold jury trials for incarcerated defendants. 

Another complicating factor, according to Grearson: Courts are to prioritize scheduling trials for incarcerated defendants before defendants who are out in their community. He said these trial requirements, with the engineering requirements, donโ€™t work well within the physical space. 

โ€œThe report is one piece of the puzzle of reopening the court,โ€ Grearson said. โ€œItโ€™s a big piece obviously โ€” we couldnโ€™t do anything until we had those โ€” but itโ€™s a matter of taking that report and seeing what can be done in an individual courthouse.โ€

Grearson said the court is considering ways to hold Orleans jury trials in Caledonia or Lamoille courthouses, but that takes time to implement. Itโ€™s also a bigger ask for public defenders and other attorneys to spread their caseloads among multiple locations. 

Sleigh, Barrett and Grearson discussed these complications at a meeting Thursday. Yet both Sleigh and Barrett ask why the court canโ€™t hold trials for non-incarcerated defendants in the meantime. 

โ€œIf we have the capability to be doing some jury trials, thereโ€™s no reason why we couldnโ€™t be doing them,โ€ Barrett said in an interview. โ€œSo itโ€™s interesting, because weโ€™re in a unique situation where the defense and the state is both advocating to resume jury trials, and the court has just not been transparent with their information, and they havenโ€™t been transparent with their explanation of why we havenโ€™t done so.โ€

Sleigh and Barrett both said long-term delays on criminal trials are bad for their cases, and the integrity of the judicial process. 

Sleigh said the past year-and-a-half has been โ€œa disasterโ€ for his clients awaiting trial. While theyโ€™re waiting, the charges affect their ability to apply for jobs or to travel, or generally go about their lives.

โ€œThere’s some truth to the maxim that justice delayed is justice denied,โ€ Sleigh said. โ€œI mean, at some point, people just throw their hands up, give up, plead the things they didnโ€™t do, just to get it over with.โ€

Barrett said that for prosecuting attorneys, long waiting periods makes it more difficult to track down witnesses and have them appear in court. 

โ€œThe integrity of the stateโ€™s cases are sometimes more challenging as the time passes,โ€ Barrett said. โ€œNot to mention, thereโ€™s a victimโ€™s right to a speedy trial, and theyโ€™re all lacking that as well.โ€

Barrett said the order of which cases go to trial first is ultimately up to the courts, and can be rearranged. 

โ€œI think fundamentally, the court has lacked all transparency with us,โ€ Barrett said. โ€œSo itโ€™s hard for us to provide an intelligent explanation of when, and how, we resume jury trials when weโ€™re not being brought in as part of the equation, or not being explained as to why.โ€