Court papers: AG held in contempt for comments in lead paint case
PROVIDENCE, R.I. --A judge fined Attorney General Patrick Lynch $5,000 and held him in civil contempt after he publicly accused former lead paint makers of twisting the facts during Rhode Island's landmark lawsuit against the companies, according to newly unsealed court documents.
In a ruling dated Dec. 6, Superior Court Judge Michael Silverstein said Lynch's remarks violated Rhode Island rules of professional conduct regulating what lawyers may say publicly about cases. The judge weeks earlier had issued a written ruling ordering Lynch to comply with those rules.
Lynch on Friday denied violating the court order as dozens of previously sealed documents from the civil trial were made publicly available for the first time.
"As much as I respect the court's diligence ... I disagree with the court's two findings of contempt and believe that, ultimately, when they are appealed and evaluated on their legal merits, the findings will be set aside," Lynch said in a written statement.
"I did not commit, and never would commit, any willful act to challenge any Court order concerning the limiting of statements that could affect pre-trial or trial publicity," he said.
The judge stayed the fine to allow for an appeal. The state filed an appeal shortly after the ruling that will be considered by the Rhode Island Supreme Court, said Deputy Attorney General Jim Lee.
A jury held three of the companies --
Lynch was also held in contempt a second time for comments made to reporters after the jury returned its verdict in February, though that sanction did not carry a fine, Lee said. A hearing is scheduled for later this month to discuss that second contempt order, he said.
The first contempt finding came after Lynch referred to the companies as "those who would spin and twist the facts" during comments made outside court, according to a Nov. 17 article in The Providence Journal. Lynch made the comment after Silverstein rejected mistrial motions filed by the four defendants a few weeks after the trial began.
After the Nov. 17 article, Millennium Holdings filed a motion to have Lynch held in contempt, arguing that Lynch's comments represented a "direct and unambiguous assault upon the very character and credibility of the defendants" and the words "spin" and "twist" were prejudicial.
The state argued against the fine, saying that the companies were focused on a "half sentence" in a newspaper article and that it was not even clear to whom Lynch was referring in his remark. The state also said Lynch was responding to an accusatory remark allegedly made by a spokesperson for the companies.
"I think the incredible thing that came out of today's unsealing is the extent these defendants went to to avoid the responsibility that the unanimous jury (found) was theirs," said Jack McConnell, a lawyer who is representing the state in the lead paint case.
