Sounds like the jury took pity on the city of Bangor.

Tom Sawyer will have a better lawyer.

This is really too bad. The true question on this issue was, "did the aircraft lose value because of this incident?". Anyone that knows ANYTHING about aviation would have known that a blue water spill greatly depreciates the value of an aircraft. For example, would you buy a car that was involved in a flood? No, and if so only at a greatly reduced cost. It's sad that the jury chose pity for the city's irresponsibility over true justice. Lets all hope that next time they don't dump 100 gallons of jet fuel in the body of the aircraft and kill someone. It's a pity that the jurors couldn't look past the "wealthy man in a private jet persona". Isn't it the American dream to have the ability to come from nothing and build yourself into whatever you like? I guess this isn't the United States that our grandparents knew anymore.

Get a grip avknowledge... Lets say someone runs a red light and smashes into your car. You are going to get your car repaired and nothing more. Think about it.

Rags to riches is still the American dream. Unfortunately the American Dream is slipping away as the difference between the haves and have-nots has widened since the days of our grandparents. When a CEO can make multi-millions annually while cutting worker benefits and sending jobs overseas, there is something wrong with the system.

avknowledge,

Is it possible that they simply did not prove their case and jury came to a reasonable decision?

"I'm sorry" may suffice when you wreck someones car, but an airplane worth tens of millions of dollars? Really? Yes, I would agree the American dream is slipping away.

I've got a problem with the City of Bangor's attorney not going straight to Porltand or Boston in change of venue. Not sure if Boston would be allowed, but it would've been smarter than defeating the whole purpose of diversity jurisdiction by having Federal trial in Bangor with Bangor taxpayers sitting on the bench and possibly sitting on the jury. Isn't there a conflict there? Duh?

Whoops, I meant the aircraft owner's attorney moving for change of venue.

With a simple understanding of the Federal Court system, you'd know why the case was heard where it was. No doubt there will be an appeal and the case will be heard elsewhere and be overturned.

Bangorean,

The jury didn't come from Bangor. Many of the jurors were from MDI and Northern Maine.

You're closing in on chersully, DUH!

The "I'm sorry" had been made much of, and of course merely an apology isn't nearly enough when we damage someone's property. But many posters seem to have completely forgotten that the city also paid the repairs that cost over $100K. It seems to me (and apparently the jury) that the plane owner was overreaching in asking for additional damages. Blue water does damage things like insulation and carpeting, but these were all replaced at the city's expense. Exposure to blue water does not damage aluminum, just clean it off and it's as good as new.

The rumored $12M "offer" wasn't a binding offer so couldn't be used to prove that the jet was ever worth that much. Ask anybody who has sold anything over the last few years and I doubt they'll tell you that they got as much as they once hoped they might get.

It seems to me that justice was done here.

I guess you wouldn't get the concept of a trial being held in the tax jurisdiction where the participants sitting on the bench or jury might have a bit of a conflict, but hey, blame Chersully, I guess. Not quite sure what that's about, double DUH! There may have been a manipulation here that, as someone stated, might get the result overturned on appeal. Not that I give a flying fark on a rolling donut one way or the other,

Maybe if the trial was conducted by another Federal Judge from elsewhere, the result would have been different, I would say. When there is a cabal from any local area, the cabal sticks together. This is not to say Judge Woodcock made any unfair decisions in this matter, either. Personally felt, the Indiana firm should have been re-compensated for the additional federal aviation inspection it assumed (ate). I agree with Bangorian and some others in their assessment.

However, jurisdiction played an important role here. Neutrality of jurisdiction is more appropriate to this case - especially when the incident happened in the City of Bangor, on City of Bangor property, by a City of Bangor employee. To hold the trial/decision in Bangor brought scowls of interest to others in wondering why this trial was held in Bangor. The Good Ole Boy network at it's best.

. . . which is precisely the reason for diversity jurisdiction. But hey, whadda I know?? And my questions were rhetorical, not accusatory.

Don't you know, it is always different, for the government. The flooded car example is great, lets see how the city pursues it next claim, against a citizen.

Some of these discussions gradually become quite amusing when someone throws out an idea and that idea gradually takes on a life of its own, though it has little to do with the actual facts in the story. Here we have a party that basically is dissatisfied with how they were compensated for damages done to their plane. They have no complaints about the quality of the repairs, but they feel they are due more money anyway and attempt to justiy it by mentioning someone who was supposedly interested in paying a higher price than it eventually sold for. A jury listens to all the evidence and facts of the case and finds otherwise. Rather than respecting this decision, and acknowledging that the jury was privy to many more details than those of us who know only what we read in a short BDN news story, the jury is promptly labeled a cabal and part of the good ole boy network, completely ignoring there has been NO evidence presented that ANY juror was biased, was a "boy," or part of a cabal. I get this visual of a 65 year old grandmother juror from rural Aroostook County, who sat on this jury, logging onto her computer and reading all this nonsense about her being a "good ole boy" (who knew?!) and biased for the City of Bangor. Maybe in some alternate reality.

Jeffrey, first something happened to the Internet hookup from where I'am and through into Maine somehow. My old handle is showing up. It will be fixed by tomorrow morning early, though. Give it 24 hours or more.

The 'cabal', Jeffrey, is certainly in the Good Old Boy Net, and Judge Woodcock seems to be included in this...NOT in the jury. Where are you reading from? Don't mimisinterprethe comments! You have a tendency to do this every time you comment!

Jeffrey, I think you ought to learn something about acronyms and what is being said in certain ways. Apparently you are either 10 years old or someone who has not been anyplace or done anything. Should the comment have said..."Good Old Man Network", just to satisfy your immature range of thought?

We are dealing with someone who apparently has dyslexia, here, folks! And it is not the jury or Judge Woodcock.

I'm content to let readers judge for themselves which of us has trouble understanding the issues we discuss, and which of us is immature too, for that matter.

You, and a few others, were blaming a jury verdict that you disagree with on a cabal or good old boy network. Other have pointed out here that the jury wasn't even from Bangor and weren't boys either but that doesn't seem to make much impact on your "thought" process. It's the jury that is responsible for the verdict that you won't accept, not Judge Woodcock, so even IF the judge is part of a good old boy network or cabal, the judge didn't overrule the jury's decision, so what difference does that make? I know this whole conspiracy theory is much easier on your ego than to just accept that you were wrong in your prediction of how this case would turn out, but do you REALLY think that Judge Woodcock cares whether the city of Bangor has to pay some entity a few hundred thousand dollars enough to compromise his integrity? I seriously doubt that. Judge Woodcock is a respected and honest man and the jury has spoken, it's time to accept that and move on. Unless you have some actual evidence (besides that they came to a different conclusion than you did after reading a news story), I don't think it's right to be questioning the integrity of the judge or jury, or accusing them of being part of good old boy network that puts its own bias ahead of the law and facts of the case.

BTW, before attempting to belittle me for not being sophisticated enough to understand acronyms, you really should familiarize yourself with what an acronym is......the only acronym I can find in this whole discussion was from a poster who mentioned "MDI," that's Mount Desert Island, and of course "BTW" at the beginning of this sentence, LOL.

I hate to say it, but, if many of the jurors were from the county; what are the chances that after hearing a case for days, closing arguments on Friday afternoon and the possibility of having to come all the way back on Monday had an affect on at least some of jurors to finish up and go home.

From what i understand the $12M was a handshake deal that happened just days before the blue water accident and the formal proposal had not been completed. Last time i checked that's the way most of us do business in Maine, verbal / handshake then something written if it's really needed. Knowing what i know about mechanical and electrical components, that blue water which is corrosive is going to find it's way into places where it can't be cleaned and will cause corrosion that will reduce the life of the aircraft and i doubt that they only cleaned it for $100k, i am willing to bet that a lot of that money went into replacing carpet, padding, trim, wiring, etc, etc that was damaged.

The life of the aircraft hasn't been reduced and that is not even a claim by the aircraft owner. "Blue water" is just tap water with a blue dye and supposedly pleasant odor added to it so the mixture left by everyone who used the bathroom before you isn't quite so nasty seeming as it's filtered and used over and over to flush the toilet many times throughout the flight. It's not corrosive. It becomes somewhat corrosive when lots of urine is added to it during a long flight, but the mixture that's pumped into the airplane lavs is not corrosive at all.

I suppose you're right that it's possible that some jurors were in a hurry to get home on a Friday afternoon and to not have to drive back into Bangor on Monday, but couldn't you say that same thing about every jury that reaches a verdict on Friday? Are all those verdicts suspect and should they be thrown out? Everyone I know who has served on a jury has taken that responsibility very seriously and did their best to reach the verdict that is best supported by the evidence they heard during the trial. If there was ANY evidence of misconduct by a single juror, I'd be all in favor of a retrial, but just the fact that they happened to reach their verdict on Friday afternoon doesn't qualify as jury misconduct.

Jeffrey, I guess I'm going to report you to the BDN staff. It's never been done by me, but you just don't get it somehow, plus you are twisting the stories and comments I print like a bad lawyer does with defending a stupid client.

The emphasis was NOT on the jury verdict...it was on the people who made the decision to conduct the trial in Bangor, Jeffrey-Boy!

You know nothing of what you are saying, and it runs much deeper than the rhetorical statements you are making, as I know Woodcock and how some people in the Ciy of Bangor operate. I have great connections to the place. You made the first acronuym comments ago, Jeff...and you still do not understand the references. Blue water IS corrosive, Jeffery-Boy...I was a USAF pilot at one time, and nobody knows better about aircraft than the pilots who flew the aircraft. More of your inappropriate uncommon sense at work. Read what 'windmainer' is telling us. There was no 'misconduct' on any jurors part, Jeffrey-Boy...if there were any, a mistrial would have been declared, or the jury foreman would have been asked to correct the matter. Who ever mentioned "Mistrials" or "Jury Misconduct", anyway? Maybe these kinds of statements you are making is and can create problems in here. Jeffrey...you really need to read more into the directness of the articles and comments...you are flying off into outer space in your comments and causing others to get off-track, also. Maybe we will keep you, to kick around like the red-headed stepchild in the family.

Why are some of you so upset that the jury got it right? And why do I get the impression that if the jury had ruled in favor of the plaintiff, the same people would be bellyaching about that?

OH NO, Santini's going to report me to teacher, LOL!!! Seriously though, please feel free to report me to the BDN staff if you so wish. If they read down through all the comments, I'm confident they'll see who is making sense and who is not, and who is conducting himself in a civil manner and who is resorting to name calling and hollow threats.

I think the legal process worked like it's supposed to and I accept the verdict of the jury. If you have actual evidence about how that is not true, it would make for an interesting comment for further discussion, but just basing your attempted smearing of those involved based solely on your unsubstantiated claim to "know how Woodcock and some people in the city of Bangor work" because you claim that you "have great connections to the place" is almost laughable, even on an anonymous comment forum like this. Have you ever stopped to consider that most of the other posters here also have a very good idea about this place, especially since most of us choose to make this our home?

Your comment about "nobody knows better about aircraft than the pilots who flew the aircraft," is also not quite right because both current aircraft mechanics and current pilots DO know better. If you also had a background in civil aviation, you'd probably realize that many things differ from what the USAF did many years ago. If you aren't up to date about the mixture used in civil aviation lavs and are curious about that, I suggest that you google it or just call any FBO or ramp services subcontractor and ask them. You say you were a USAF pilot. I graduated in class 81-03 at Vance AFB and have been flying various military and commercial jets all around the world since that time. What UPT class were you in and at what base did you receive your training?

Bottom line, there is nothing to prove that they did in fact have a deal to sell the Plane for 12M. A handshake deal is worth the paper it is written on. Who is to say the reason they offered less was because of the spill? Maybe they just offered less because they decided they just did not want to pay $12M, or did they actually offer 12M in the first place?

I agree with boogyman. Unless the airplane owners can prove they had a valid sales agreement for $12 million AND that the subsequent lower offer was because of the accident at BIA, they've got nothing.