Race To The Bottom is reporting "the jury is about to return with the verdict."

The jurors asked: "Judge, we are feeling uncomfortable about the damages portion. Would you be able to meet with us to talk about what is required and other things regarding money? And is $0 an option?

Naves replied: "I cannot meet with you. Please re-read the instructions concerning damages if you find for the plaintiff but find no damages (you will have to) find in the sum of $1."

The jurors then had another question: "If all but one jury member can agree on a dollar amount for Question 4, can that person be replaced by another juror?"

Naves told them that wasn't possible, (Question 4 on the jury form deals with compensating Churchill for past non-economic damages and past economic loss.)

Update: John Aguilar's near-liveblogging concurs, and adds

The way the verdict form is organized, [Churchill co-counsel Robert Bruce] said, the jury wouldn't get to the question of damages unless it had already ruled that Churchill was unlawfully terminated from his post as professor.

*All* of the fabricated facts are still unaccounted for. Churchill's defense is that when he said that Army officers passed out blankets, he really meant the local Indian agent, not the Army. When he said that Army doctors violated quarantine, he really meant a fur trader doing home remedies, not Army doctors. When he said blankets came from a military infirmary in St. Louis, he really meant that a fur trader brought them from Baltimore. And when he said Mandan Indians at Fort Clark, he didn't really mean the Mandans, he meant all of the Plains tribes to the north of Fort Clark.

In other words, Churchill no longer defends any of the fabricated elements of his published tale. The Army, the Mandans, and Fort Clark have all disappeared from his latest conspiracy theory. If he can bamboozle an intelligent law professor with such nonsense, then I think he probably bamboozled the jury too.

Lane called just about everyone a liar during his closing argument. Former Gov. Bill Owens: "He's a liar." The university regents: "lying liars." The university's claims of a fair and unbiased process involving faculty who were actually predisposed not to fire a colleague: lies, lies, lies.

Of O'Rourke:

O'Rourke was more than halfway through his closing argument on behalf of the University of Colorado when I finally heard him utter the word "lie" — and it wasn't even in reference to Professor Ward Churchill.

He never called Churchill a "liar." He never called Churchill's witnesses "liars." He came to the fight of his professional life on his best behavior, all good manners and high decorum[....]

Now that we're all agreed that the government can make hiring and firing decisions based on infusions of taxpayer money, I can think of a lot more government beneficiaries who are badly in need of firing.

Just off the top of my head, how about Barney Frank, Chris Dodd and everybody at the Department of Education?

How about firing all the former Weathermen, like Bill Ayers, Bernardine Dohrn and Mark Rudd, whose university salaries are subsidized by the taxpayer?

Nearly every university in the country accepts government money. Is there any industry in America more in need of some "restructuring" than academia? What's Berkeley's "business plan" to stop turning out graduates who hate America?

[...]

When is the government going to get around to firing 99 percent of public school superintendents? They're clearly turning out an inferior product -- i.e., America's public school graduates -- as compared to some of the foreign models now available.

In New York City, spending on public schools increased by more than 300 percent between 1982 and 2001, coming in at $11,474 per pupil annually -- compared to about $5,000 for private schools.

But in 2003, a New York court ruled that graduates of New York City's public schools did not have the skills to be "capable of voting and serving on a jury." (Worse, some kids coming out of New York high schools are so stupid they don't even know how to get out of jury duty.)