Writer’s Refusal to Testify in Belushi Case Questioned

The judge in the John Belushi murder case raised questions Thursday about whether a free-lance writer who interviewed defendant Cathy Evelyn Smith qualifies as a privileged journalist who could refuse to testify in the case.

Municipal Judge Brian Crahan said he will rule Tuesday on whether Christopher Van Ness should be compelled to testify about information gathered during the interview with Smith. If he is ordered to testify and continues to refuse, Van Ness could be jailed for contempt.

Van Ness claims that the information the prosecution seeks is available elsewhere and that he is protected by the California Shield Law, which says that journalists need not testify in certain cases.

“There is no question of the newsman’s privilege existing,” Crahan said during legal arguments by Van Ness’ attorney. “The question is: Who is a newsman, when can it be invoked, and when is it waived?”

The prosecution claims it needs Van Ness’ testimony and his tapes to prove its allegations that Smith killed Belushi more than three years ago by injecting him with an overdose of cocaine and heroin.

Outside court, attorneys said the dispute will probably delay indefinitely the preliminary hearing scheduled for Smith on June 17. They said that no matter what the judge rules Tuesday, one side or the other will appeal.

Drug Overdose

Belushi, star of the “Saturday Night Live” television show and such movies as “Animal House” and “The Blues Brothers,” was found dead in his bungalow March 5, 1982, at the Chateau Marmont Hotel. The coroner ruled he died from an overdose of heroin and cocaine.

Smith, a former backup singer for rock groups, was indicted on charges of second-degree murder and furnishing Belushi with the drugs after the National Enquirer published an interview with her in 1982 that was headlined “Hollywood Drug Queen Confesses--I Killed John Belushi.”

After her indictment, Smith, a Canadian, fought extradition until this year.

The Enquirer and its reporter, Anthony Brenna, also have resisted subpoenas in the Smith case. Crahan said he will hear arguments on that aspect of the matter Tuesday, as well as ruling on Van Ness.

Deputy Dist. Atty. Michael Montagna argued Thursday that the privilege does not extend to criminal matters, in which all citizens have a duty to testify. He also claimed that Van Ness, a free-lancer, was not covered by the law, and was more an entrepreneur than a journalist.

Disclosure Alleged

He also said Van Ness had already disclosed much of the information while trying to sell the interview to various outlets, including the National Enquirer.

“He’s disclosed all over the place,” Montagna said. “He’s waived any privilege. Everybody knows what was said. He just refuses to testify about it in court.”

“He is now refusing to testify by his own whim and caprice to frustrate justice,” the prosector said.

Van Ness’ attorney, Clinton Bailey, argued that his client is a journalist with 20 years of experience and sought to put him back on the witness stand to outline his credentials. The judge refused to hear more testimony.

Bailey said Van Ness never has disclosed in public the information that he has and suggested that other sources, including the Enquirer, have more material than Van Ness has.