Analysis of Judge Skinner’s Decision in A Civil Action

Jonathan Haar’s book, A Civil Action, examines a small town, Woburn, Massachusetts, whose children have become sick with cancer because of water contaminated with harmful chemicals. Once the families realize that the water caused the cancer, they begin to begin to search for those responsible for contaminating the water. The water is believed to be contaminated by two companies, Beatrice and W.R. Grace, who each dumped hazardous chemicals that polluted wells G and H. Jan Schlichtmann, a Boston based attorney, is selected by the town to prosecute the case against Beatrice and W.R. Grace. Schlichtmann’s plan for his case against the companies consists of presenting the court with families’ experiences with their sick children and then trying the companies. While Schlichtmann desires the trial to progress as he plans, Judge Skinner, the Judge residing over the case, has a different plan. Judge Skinner believes it is necessary to first find if the companies are guilty before the families are allowed present their stories to the court. The decision that Judge Skinner has made is one of the most important events in the case and affects the outcome greatly.

Judge Skinner’s or any Judge in any case, job in the Woburn case was to ensure a fair trial takes place. Had Skinner allowed Schlichtmann to present the families’ stories first, the jury would begin to pity the families. If the jury pities the families, then the prosecution has a distinct advantage and the defense will not have a fair trial. Another factor Judge Skinner must take into account is if the companies are actually the ones responsible for polluting the Wells G and H. Skinner realizes that the main goal of the trial is to try the companies to see if they are guilty of illegally polluting the Wells with hazardous chemicals. If the companies are not guilty of polluting the Well, then the families’ accounts are irrelevant. Had the companies been innocent and the jury heard the families’ accounts first, they might feel obligated to rule in the families favor, thus creating an unfair trial for the Beatrice and W.R. Grace companies.

In this context, the decision Judge Skinner made to only hear the families accounts if the companies were found guilty of polluting was the most ethical decision that could be made in this context. Although the families have gone through a great amount of pain and suffering, they should only be allowed to be heard if the companies were guilty of polluting the Wells. The families should be heard, by all means, if the companies are guilty of polluting the Wells. If the families are allowed to be heard before, the jury could favor the prosecuting families. The defending companies could then be found guilty for something that they did not do, and that would not be ethical.

One of the most important decisions made in the Woburn case is Judge Skinner’s decision to find if the companies are guilty of polluting Wells G and H before the families accounts of the their pain and suffering. Some believe that Skinner made the correct decision in not allowing the families to be heard first, while others believe it would have been fair to allow the families accounts to be heard first. While the debate of Skinner’s decision could go on for ages, I believe that judge Skinner clearly thought out each scenario and made the best choice. By allowing the jury to decide if the companies are actually guilty of polluting the Wells first, helps to assure that the jury will not be biased and that the trial is as fair to both the prosecution and defense.