Woman fights City Hall over right to petition

Lawsuit claimed retaliation
Others besides Carey picked up on the lesson. No one talked about reopening the firehouse anymore, said Jim McCarthy, a longtime city councilman and Heights tavern owner. Bar patrons told him they didn't dare speak out.

So it was decided: Welkey would file an appeal with Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court, while Pollick would sue Leighton and the city in federal court.

Leighton, the suit claimed, retaliated against Carey for exercising her First Amendment freedoms of speech, association, and petition. He abused his power by using the legal system to silence dissent, "stifling her efforts to speak out against the mayor's administration."

Carey demanded a jury trial. She wanted the mayor to learn a lesson of his own.

As the legal wrangling began, Wilkes-Barre received a sad reminder of what got this prolonged dispute started.

A fire broke out in the Heights.

Although it wasn't clear that a functioning East Station would have made a difference, the blaze claimed three homes.

Good news about legal bill
The legal cases dragged on. In January 2007, Carey got good news when Commonwealth Court overturned Conahan's order as unjustified. She was off the hook financially.

And finally, on a chilly November day in 2008, a jury took up the activist's federal case in Scranton.

It was only 20 miles from the Heights, but Carey had come a much greater distance. She had started this journey as a middle-aged professional, church leader and mother of four. She became an activist. Now, as she mounted the witness stand, she was a First Amendment champion.

"I'm here because I tried to do something good for my area, my community, and I was punished by the mayor," Carey began her testimony.

Unburdening herself, she talked about the importance of the East Station. About the Citizens for Safety, the endless council meetings, the petition drive. About that horrible day in Conahan's courtroom. And, finally, about the mayor's public comments about her.

"I just felt absolutely beaten by them," Carey said. "They already had their 11,056-dollar judgment, and it's more salt into the wound. Call her a fraud and call her a liar and deceiver and illegal. And that was not for just my eyes to see" — but the whole town.

Then it was the mayor's turn to testify.

Duty-bound to protect city charter
Leighton, who had won re-election in 2007, told jurors he was duty-bound to protect the city charter from a legally suspect attempt to change it.

"That is why sanctions were given to Ms. Carey, because the petitioners circulated that petition in a fraudulent manner," Leighton said.

Why had he written the letter to the editor? Carey's attorney, Pollick, asked.

"I had to defend the actions of what took place in the city of Wilkes-Barre and let the people know that I was protecting the city charter," Leighton said.

"And you don't have remorse for writing a letter to the editor on a citizen sitting here today, correct?"

"There's no reason to have remorse," Leighton replied. "Everything that's in my letter is true."

In her closing argument, Pollick depicted a mayor who couldn't tolerate dissent.

To Leighton's attorney, Mark Bufalino, the case was about a citizen's dishonest attempt to change city government.

As the jury of four men and four women begin deliberating, Carey paced the courthouse corridor, went outside to smoke, then paced some more. The jurors were out 4 1/2 hours before reaching a decision. U.S. District Judge Thomas I. Vanaskie studied the verdict slip, then read each question.

Did Leighton retaliate against Carey by seeking attorneys' fees?

Yes.

Did he retaliate by writing a letter to the editor and making other public statements?

Yes.

Were his actions spurred by "evil motive or intent," and did they display "reckless or callous indifference" to Carey's First Amendment rights?

Yes.

Then came the award: $2,000 for lost earnings, $15,000 for emotional distress, and $50,000 in punitive damages — a total of $67,000, or more than six times the amount the city had sought from her.

'A win for the community'
Tears rolled down her face as she mouthed "thank you" to the jurors, many of whom smiled back.

"This is a win for the community," she told reporters afterward. "Now no one has to be afraid of speaking up."

Weeks later, sitting at her kitchen table, she wonders if that's really true.

"I don't know if anybody wants to rush in there and test the waters again. I'm certainly gun-shy about it," she says. "I feel very bad saying that. I wish it wasn't so. I only hope eventually this verdict will change that thinking, not only for me but for other people."

Carey hasn't received the money. The city has filed an appeal. Attorneys for the parties are discussing a settlement. Still, she says, no one can take away the jury's verdict.

The East Station, meanwhile, remains shuttered. A few weeks ago, the city sold the building for $20,000.

More from msnbc.com Thanksgiving is about odd family dynamics Elkhart Project: Money pours in, pet adoptions increase Swine flu fears for hajj pilgrims First Read: Pardon my turkey, and other trivia 570,000 pager messages from 9/11 released   Silver Lining: Tales of struggle and hope On Twitter: Breaking news updates | Weird and wild

MORE FROM LIFE

Life Section Front

Macy’s parade to skip Broadway for 1st time Man dies after day stuck upside-down in cave Economy keeps Americans home for Thanksgiving Time to obsess about white Christmas Military families united by tragedies Salvation Army kettles now take plastic NYT: Penny-pinching holiday fliers start early NYT: Medical debt spurs more bankruptcies Newsweek: The history of America’s beloved turkey ‘Recession gave me a new opportunity’ Life Section Front   Add Life headlines to your news reader: