Detention center suit on T’bonne agenda

A thorny lawsuit concerning the sexual abuse of an underage girl at a juvenile detention center is getting a once-over from Terrebonne Parish officials, who scheduled a discussion on it in closed session Wednesday.

Parish Attorney Courtney Alcock requested the discussion on the matter of Mary Doe v. Terrebonne Parish, according to records at the parish clerk’s office, although the specific nature of what might be talked about is under wraps.

A series of stories in the Tri-Parish Times and resulting re-telling in national blogs dealing with social issues have related how attorneys for Terrebonne included as part of their defense an allegation that the victim of sexual abuse at the hands of a guard, Angelo Vickers, contributed to her victimization.

Vickers, also named as a defendant in the civil suit, pleaded guilty in February 2011 to one count of molestation of a juvenile, and continues serving a 7-year prison sentence. He was arrested in 2009.

The girl, admitted to the center when she was 14-years-old, said she had sex with Vickers in the main control room, in an area out of range of surveillance cameras, in exchange for candy, phone privileges and other benefits.

In testimony during a civil trial before District Judge George Larke and in briefs filed on behalf of the parish, officials have maintained that the girl was not only a willing participant but helped coordinate the trysts.

The position, as presented in briefs, suggests that any award Larke might give the woman, now 20-years-old, should be mitigated because of her alleged willing participation.

Children’s advocates say it is impossible for a 14-year-old to consent to sex, particularly in a place where she is imprisoned.

Carolyn McNabb, a Houma attorney and long-time child advocate, beseeched assistant parish attorney Kip Crighton to ask Larke that victim-blaming references be stricken from the briefs.

McNabb plans to ask the parish council to do the same thing when she speaks before them Wednesday night. Another community activist, former parish cemeteries administrator Lucretia McBride, who was incensed by the published reports of the parish position, is listed as a speaker on the matter as well.

Although the reason for Alcock’s request to meet with council members about the case is not stated, there are strong hints that she may be seeking direction from them on how the matter should be handled.

Legal ethicists say that in a case where attorneys represent a local government it is appropriate and understandable for officials to steer how a case is handled to keep it within the confines of a community’s beliefs and philosophy.

The concept that protection of children must come first is among the reasons why McNabb and McBride said they wished to speak.

If parish officials are indeed considering whether a change in stance is required, then they are performing a task that government ethics experts say is appropriate, and proof positive of the difficult decisions local governments must make.

JoAnne Spears, ethics program director at the Institute for Local Government in Sacramento, which advises officials in that state on ethics considerations, said that any such discussion will see council members weighing two important responsibilities.

As stated in prior interviews by legal ethicists, Spears said the attorneys for the parish must weigh their actions based on the expectation that they vigorously defend their client.

“The community is trying to figure out which values should prevail,” said Spears, after being told of the agenda item and the discussions articles have raised. “At least one consideration is safeguarding the resources of the parish, concern about having to pay a judgment. That is one value. The other value is the one of fairness to the person who has been victimized by the guard.”