Smoker Jury Explains Verdict

M I A M I, July 15, 2000 -- The jurors who slammed the

tobacco industry with a $145 billion judgment for injuring

Florida smokers said they did it to punish the cigarette makers

for lying about the dangers of smoking for decades, a newspaper reported today.

“You can’t just say you’re sorry after 50 years,” GaryChwast, 30, told the Miami Herald.

“This case was not about (choosing to smoke.) It’s about ifyou know you’re making a defective product, and these companiesknew that,” he said. “You don’t try to hide that for 50years.”

Strong Message; What Effect?

The four men and two women who served on the Miami-DadeCircuit Court panel for two years on Friday returned the largestpunitive damage award in U.S. history.

The $145 billion judgment against the industry for injuringhundreds of thousands of smokers included $73.96 billion againsta subsidiary of Marlboro-maker Philip Morris Cos. Inc., thebiggest U.S. cigarette company.

But the judgment, in a class-action lawsuit filed in 1994,was likely to have little immediate effect on the companies,which make most of the 20 billion packs of cigarettes consumedeach year in the United States, because appeals could takeyears.

In earlier phases of the trial, the six jurors decided thatthe cigarette companies were liable for the lung cancer and some20 other ailments among an estimated 500,000 or moreunidentified smokers in Florida and awarded $12.7 million incompensatory damage to three class representatives.

“We all thought we needed to send a strong message based onthe evidence,” jury foreman Leighton Finegan told the Herald.“The message was sent.”

Juror: Companies Insulted Us

Chwast, a postal worker, said the lawyers representing thetobacco companies were insulting, offering no credible evidencethat the firms could not afford such a judgment. The companiesclaimed at trial that a large verdict could bankrupt them.

“I’m not an idiot. The CEOs are making millions. Why arethey making so much if the companies don’t have the money? Whatare you not telling me? It offends me,” he said.

The jurors took just over four hours to reach the verdict,but Finegan defended the swift judgment.

“There was no sense of animosity toward any one company.But in light of the evidence presented to us that showed for thepast 50 years these companies have lied, hidden information andburned documents, that makes me angry,” Finegan, an elementaryschool vice-principal, said.

“I hope it sends a strong message for all companies inAmerica that they can’t fraudulently represent anything to thepublic,” he said.