August 25 , 2005
COURT MUST WEIGH EVIDENCE BEFORE DISMISSING SUIT BY WOODWARD'S KIN FORMER NORWICH MAN KILLED BY POLICE AFTER WIELDING KNIFE AT CHURCH SERVICE IN VERMONT
New London Day
By Izaskun E. Larraneta, Day Staff Writer, Courts/Social Services
Robert “Woody” Woodward
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York ordered a lower court judge Tuesday to examine the evidence in the shooting death of Norwich native Robert “Woody” Woodward at the hands of police before flat-out dismissing a suit that claims his civil rights were violated.
On Dec. 2, 2001, Woodward interrupted a 10 a.m. Sunday service at the All Souls Unitarian Universalist Church in Brattleboro, Vt., wielding a 31/2-inch knife and speaking of political assassination and global warming. As congregation members rushed out of the room, Woodward begged them to stay and listen. Moments later two Brattleboro police officers demanded that he drop the knife, and when he didn't, the officers shot him seven times, including once in the back.
The appeals court said Vermont District Court Judge J. Garvan Murtha may have erred when he discounted the statements of four witnesses who said Woodward did not advance or make threatening moves toward police or bystanders.
“The district court discounted these witnesses' accounts for unconvincing reasons,” the three-judge panel said. “... There is no indication in the district court's current decision whether grounds for granting summary judgment would remain valid if the court had fully considered the content of the witness statements.”
The high court heard arguments in the case earlier this month, alleging that Murtha erroneously dismissed the lawsuit. The ruling does not put the case before a jury but it does ask Murtha to rethink his decision before he throws out the case again.
Woodward's family attorney, Joel T. Faxon of New Haven, believes the court's decision will ultimately lead to a jury trial.
“Let the citizens of Vermont decide if the killing of Robert Woodward was excessive,” said Faxon.
Woodward's father, Paul, said the family was happy with the ruling. All the family wants is for the case to be heard before a jury, he said.
“This really is the first positive development in the case, right from the beginning,” said Paul Woodward, who lives in Bozrah.
For months, Woody's supporters decried the actions of Vermont Attorney General William Sorrell, who exonerated the two officers, Marshall Holbrook and Terrance Parker, in the shooting.
Sorrell issued a report in April 2002 that called the shooting tragic but justified.
After reviewing testimony from nearly two dozen eyewitnesses taken by police in the days following the shooting, a group of friends calling themselves “Justice For Woody” released its own report in September 2002 that said Woodward never threatened anyone but himself in the moments leading to his death.
The report said Woodward was calming down before police arrived. Agitated by their arrival, he held the knife to his eye and did not point it at anyone else, it said.
The eyewitness testimony directly contradicts Sorrell's finding that the shooting was justified, and that Woodward was approaching the officers with the knife just before he was shot and killed.
Attorney William Ellis, who is representing the town of Brattleboro, said he remains confident that even after Murtha reviews the witness statements the case will again be dismissed.
He said there is undisputed evidence that Woodward entered the officers' “21-foot zone of danger,” a space where police treat a perpetrator as a risk to themselves and others.
Ellis said that given that fact it would be unfair to second-guess the officers who felt threatened.
Both Faxon and Ellis said they are uncertain what will happen next but expect a hearing to be held in the near future.
