Updated at 3:47 p.m.
A Vermont judge has thrown out a jury verdict convicting a Barre man of sexually assaulting a woman, citing comments a court officer made to the jurors.
That officer, Cpl. Mark Belisle of the Windsor County Sheriff’s Department, has since been placed on paid administrative leave.
A jury returned the guilty verdict against Kasey Giorgio, 31, late last month following a two-day trial in Washington County Superior criminal court in Barre.
After a closed-door hearing last week, Judge John Pacht issued a four-page ruling made public Tuesday morning that threw out the conviction but did not name the court officer involved. However, Amy Davis, an attorney for Giorgio, confirmed in an email later Tuesday morning that the officer is Belisle.
Belisle, reached by phone Tuesday morning, declined to comment.
Washington County State’s Attorney Michelle Donnelly, whose office prosecuted the case, said Tuesday afternoon that Giorgio was entitled to a fair trial and due to the “irregularities in this one,” he didn’t get that.
Donnelly added that she would continue to pursue the case against Giorgio.
Pacht, in the ruling, wrote that a juror called the court on March 8 and spoke to the court operations manager, reporting that the court officer in charge of the jury had made a comment that “troubled” her.
“The juror said that the officer informed members of the jury that Mr. Giorgio was incarcerated,” Pacht wrote. “This prompted a response by at least one juror regarding repeat offenders. She also said, according to the Court Operations Manager, that the officer informed members of the jury that he would always believe a police officer.”
A closed-door hearing attended by attorneys in the case was held March 11, the judge wrote, where the court officer was questioned about the comments attributed to him by the juror.
“The officer’s initial response was that he did not remember making the comments, further stating that he did not think he would make those comments, understanding that they were not proper,” Pacht wrote. “The court lacked confidence in the clarity of the officer’s recollection of events.”
According to Pacht’s ruling, the juror who had contacted the court with her concerns also was called to testify during a closed-door hearing March 13, and the juror provided “greater context and detail” to the comments she had first made to the court operations manager.
“She noted she was uncomfortable bringing this up but was clear in what she heard,” Pacht wrote. “She stated that the comments she heard were made on day one of the trial when the jurors were returning from lunch. Many of them were in the jury room with the court officer.”
The court officer, the juror testified, in talking to jurors said that Giorgio “was incarcerated anyway” and then the court officer said, “oh, I probably shouldn’t have said that,” the judge’s ruling stated.
“This led to a juror — not the one who testified — saying something to the effect that ‘he told us they must be a repeat offender,’” Pacht wrote. “It was not clear to the juror who the ‘he’ was in that statement. The court questioned the juror further on anything she could recall about the conversation preceding the officer’s statement that he was in custody ‘anyway,’ concerned about what the officer was responding to from the jury. The juror could not recall.”
The judge added, “The juror further testified that prior to hearing this conversation, she had not known that Mr. Giorgio was incarcerated.”
Giorgio had been held without bail pending the trial.
Also, Pacht wrote, “The juror further testified that the officer said that he would likely not be picked for a jury because he would believe police officers over other witnesses. This statement was also said to the jurors as they returned from lunch the first day of the trial.”
The judge wrote that after last week’s closed-door hearing, he considered whether to call more jurors to testify but asked the attorneys in the case their thoughts first.
“Both the defendant and the state forcefully argued that a motion for a new trial be granted,” Pacht wrote. “Their reasoning is sound. The court goes through great lengths to try and assure that a jury is unaware when a defendant is incarcerated on a pretrial basis.”
In this case, the judge wrote, “It appears there was at least some back-and-forth communication with the jury that painted Mr. Giorgio in a negative light as a repeat offender.”
During trial, according to Pacht’s ruling, there was no evidence presented regarding Giorgio’s criminal history.
“Given that evidence at trial largely consisted of the complainant testifying regarding the assault and the defendant arguing that sexual encounter was mutual,” Pacht wrote, “the court concludes that introduction of this extraneous information to the jury was not only irregular, but had the capacity to affect the jury’s verdict.”
The charge stems from February 2021 when a woman in Barre reported she had been sexually assaulted. The woman reported that Giorgio had followed and harrassed her as she was walking home from a friend’s house and then he raped her, according to court filings.
She was eventually able to break free, charging documents stated, run and yell for help, and a bystander called the police, charging documents stated.
Giorgio denied assaulting the woman, claiming the sex was consensual, the filings stated.
Windsor County Sheriff Ryan Palmer confirmed Monday that Belisle was placed on paid administrative leave last week pending the outcome of an outside investigation.
Palmer termed the placement on Belisle on administrative leave a personnel matter and, as a result, he said he could not provide further details to ensure the “fairness” of the investigation.
The Windsor County Sheriff’s Department helps provide security at the Barre courthouse in Washington County.
Davis, Giorgio’s attorney, told VTDigger, “I am hopeful the State will issue a Brady letter regarding Officer Belisle’s blatant misconduct here.”
Prosecutors write Brady letters to inform defense attorneys of possible credibility and integrity issues with police officers. Being named in such a letter can end an officer’s career, as a prosecutor may choose to never take their cases or put them on the witness stand.
In a statement emailed Tuesday morning, Davis called Belisle’s alleged conduct “shocking and unconscionable,” and credited the courage of the juror in coming forward.
“We sincerely hope this is a one-time incident with this officer, but I believe all parties, the State and defense, will be extra vigilant in ensuring that those entrusted with maintaining the integrity of the process are held to the highest of standards,” Davis said.
Donnelly, the prosecutor, said Tuesday afternoon she was awaiting the outcome of the Windsor County Sheriff’s Department investigation into Belisle’s conduct before deciding whether to issue a Brady letter.
Giorgio remains held in custody without bail awaiting the new trial.
