CHICAGO – One wrong word from U.S. District Judge Staci Yandle spoiled a trial over Reginald Pittman’s nearly successful suicide in Madison County jail, Seventh Circuit judges ruled on Aug. 14.
They vacated a verdict against Pittman’s guardian Robin Hamilton, finding Yandle misstated the law by adding “consciously” to a jury instruction.
Circuit Judge Amy Barrett wrote, “This error likely confused or misled the jury.”
Yandle held trial in 2018, a year after Seventh Circuit judges vacated a verdict from a trial she held in 2015.
Hamilton sued the county, former sheriff Robert Hertz, and jail employees in 2008, claiming they should have prevented Pittman from harming himself.
Pittman has lived in a vegetative state for 13 years.
Former district judge David Herndon granted summary judgment to defendants in 2011, finding they didn’t recklessly or intentionally disregard a known risk.
Seventh Circuit judges reversed him in 2014, finding Hamilton could pursue claims against the county, Hertz, Eaton, and Werner.
Their opinion stated that from 2005 to 2010, there were three suicides in the jail and 36 attempts with injury.
They ruled that when an inmate asks for crisis intervention and the condition might be beyond an officer’s capacity to assess, the officer has an obligation to refer the individual to the person charged with making the assessment.
They remanded the case to Herndon, who set trial in 2015.
Before trial, Yandle joined the court and the clerk assigned the case to her.
Trial lasted eight days and ended with a verdict for the county.
Seventh Circuit judges vacated the verdict in 2017, finding Yandle improperly excluded a video interview of inmate Bradley Banovz.
“The district judge brushed aside all the reasons why the video should have been allowed in evidence, and excluded it without giving any reason why it should be excluded,” Circuit Judge Richard Posner wrote.
He wrote that the case being close, the error was not harmless.
Circuit Judge Daniel Manion dissented, finding Banovz testified and his essentially identical video wouldn’t have changed any minds.
The second trial lasted five days.
Yandle told jurors they needed to make four findings to sustain Hamilton’s claim.
She said they had to find a strong likelihood that Pittman would harm himself, they had to find defendants were aware of the likelihood or strongly suspected it, they had to find defendants “consciously failed to take reasonable measures” to prevent Pittman from harming himself and they had to find Pittman would have suffered less harm if defendants hadn’t disregarded the risk.
Jurors rendered a verdict for the county, and Hamilton appealed.
Seventh Circuit judges found Yandle should have asked jurors whether the actions of defendants were objectively reasonable.
“By using the word ‘consciously,’ the instruction erroneously introduced a subjective element into the inquiry,” Barrett wrote.
“Whether the defendants’ failure to take reasonable measures was the result of a conscious decision is irrelevant.
“They are liable if their actions, or lack thereof, were objectively unreasonable.”
She wrote that defendants argued they were unaware of the risk Pittman posed to himself, weren’t familiar with prevention policies, weren’t able to identify risks, and couldn’t remember whether they had been trained on handling suicidal inmates.
“In other words, the defendants argued and presented evidence to show that they did not consciously fail to take reasonable measures to prevent Pittman’s suicide attempt,” Barrett wrote.
She wrote that Yandle likely steered the jury toward a subjective standard.
Circuit judges Diane Wood and Michael Scudder concurred.
Ross Anderson and William Daniel of East St. Louis represent Pittman.
John Gilbert of Edwardsville, Timothy Sansone of St. Louis, and Ashley Walker from the office of attorney general Kwame Raoul represent Madison County.