The jurors in a lawsuit brought against American Airlines by a former flight attendant began their deliberations Monday afternoon after hearing closing arguments from lawyers on both sides.
Kimberly Goesling, who worked as a flight attendant for the Fort Worth-based airline for more than 30 years before her December retirement, claims she was sexually assaulted by celebrity chef Mark Sargeant on a work trip to Germany in 2018. In her lawsuit, she also says American Airlines retaliated against her after she reported the assault and removed her from her top position, as well as special projects.
Among the 13 questions the jury has to answer in their deliberations, which began just before 1 p.m. Monday in a Tarrant County courtroom, are if Sargeant assaulted Goesling, if former American Airlines manager Brett Hooyerink was acting as a vice principal for the company on the trip and if the airline participated in Goesling’s assault through Hooyerink, who Sargeant testified drank with him and encouraged him to pursue Goesling.
Goesling’s lawyers are asking for more than $25.6 million to cover medical costs and damages.
Goesling’s lawyer Robert Miller told the jury the assault was “inevitable” and that the evidence that includes text messages from Sargeant to Goesling suggest that beyond a reasonable doubt.
Where the defense has argued Goesling was inconsistent in her story, Miller maintained his client stayed consistent.
Miller said testimonies show Hooyerink was the person employees reported to on the business trip to Germany, and that he was also the one who set the agenda.
Texts Sargeant sent to Goesling after the assault show he told her he was encouraged to go up to her room by people he was with, later revealed to be Hooyerink and another employee, Ashley Kerber, the attorney said. Miller played clips from Sargeant’s testimony where the chef said that he had no interest in Goesling before Hooyerink and Kerber said Goesling was interested in him, and the encouragement was what put the idea to go to Goesling’s room in his head.
Participation or assisting in the assault didn’t mean that Hooyerink had to be in the room when it happened, Miller said.
Miller said there was also evidence that Hooyerink was the one who gave Goesling’s room number to Sargeant because Hooyerink had booked the rooms, was staying in the room next to Goesling and the two had checked in to the hotel at the same time.
Miller said that when Hooyerink had been asked if he’d encouraged Sargeant, he originally said he couldn’t rule it out before later denying it.
Miller argued the assault was the proximate cause of damages.
“This is real,” Miller said. “(Goesling is) going to have to live with this for the rest of her life.”
The defense, Miller argued, has spent its time trying to attack Goesling, asking toward the end of his closing, “Is that the right way to treat a victim?”
American Airlines lawyer Shauna Wright said that despite the airline taking action to investigate the incident and terminate Sargeant, they still found themselves in court for Goesling’s case.
Wright argued that the case wasn’t about seeking justice — it was about Goesling seeking money, and that if Goesling didn’t want anything like this to happen again, Wright said there would be a police report and she would be going after Sargeant instead. She said Goesling failed to meet her burden of proof to prove the airline was responsible.
Wright spent the majority of her closing defending the airline’s questioning during the case, and said that the airline wouldn’t have asked impolite questions had the lawsuit not been filed.
While the airline didn’t want to place blame on Goesling for the delay in her report of the assault, Wright said the delay left holes for direct evidence that could’ve been brought in the form of a 911 call, video of the hotel hallway or front desk, or a rape exam.
Wright said it was “telling” that Goesling called a lawyer prior to contacting American about her assault.
The jury, Wright said, was charged with determining Goesling’s credibility, which could be dispelled through Goesling’s answers to questions and discrepancies in her story.
Wright said everyone agrees Sargeant messed up and violated airline policies, but that Goesling wasn’t entitled to assistance to meet her burden. Wright said the jury couldn’t help Goesling get to the finish line.
Sympathy and compassion were expected, Wright said, but the jury couldn’t let that play a part in its decision.
Wright argued Goesling’s claim of assault grew from when the complaint was filed to when it was seen in court for the purpose of growing closer to American’s money.
Wright also said there was no evidence Hooyerink was acting as a vice principal since he didn’t have the ability to hire or fire employees and sat in a cubicle instead of an office as a Level 5 employee. The scale goes between 1 and 15.
Where Miller argued Hooyerink wouldn’t need to be in the room to participate in the assault, Wright argued he would. She said that to blame American, Goesling would need to leap.
Wright also disputed Goesling’s claims to PTSD after the assault and that there wasn’t evidence to suggest she needed money for care.
If Sargeant did in fact assault Goesling, Wright said, he should suffer consequences. Wright thinks Sargeant should be in prison and that there’s still time.
At the end of the day, Wright said, American couldn’t be blamed for Sargeant’s actions, and if the jury required American to pay for his actions, it would be a miscarriage of justice.
“If you feel she’s almost to the finish line, almost isn’t enough,” Wright told the jury.
Miller argued that American Airlines officials were the ones who were all about the money, and said it was all they understood.
