THE FIEDLER INDICTMENT : Fiedler and Clarke Silent After Hearing Tapes That Led to Charges

Rep. Bobbi Fiedler and her chief aide, Paul Clarke, huddled with lawyers Monday afternoon and listened to once-secret tapes that led to their indictment for allegedly trying to lure state Sen. Ed Davis out of the Republican U.S. Senate primary with a $100,000 campaign contribution.

By late Monday, Fiedler, who has insisted that the tapes will prove her innocence, was refusing to comment on what she had heard on the tapes so far. Clarke, who normally functions as Fiedler’s spokesman, also refused to comment.

“There will be no comment, no statement, no nothing today,” said Fiedler’s new defense attorney, Harland Braun. “There is just so much to do. . . . We may have to work through the night.”

Fiedler pollster Arnold Steinberg came out of Braun’s office and said that by 5 p.m., the group had listened to only three tapes and could not predict how long their review would last or when the tapes would be made public.

“There is a mountain of tapes,” he said. “The tapes raise a lot of questions but not about the conduct of Congresswoman Fiedler. After listening to what I have listened to so far, I have a smile on my face.”

But Steinberg would give no further details.

In recent days, Fiedler said she planned, with her lawyer’s approval, to make public the potentially explosive tapes, which were recorded by Davis campaign manager Martha Zilm at the behest of Los Angeles County prosecutors.

The Los Angeles County district attorney’s office, which undertook a two-month investigation of Davis’ allegation, released the tapes and grand jury transcripts to the defense Monday morning. Fiedler and Clarke listened to the tapes most of the afternoon in Braun’s Century City office.

Braun and UCLA law professor Daniel Lowenstein announced Monday that they will officially take over the defense of the three-term congresswoman and her aide.

Fiedler, 48, and Clarke, 39, are scheduled to be arraigned and enter a plea in criminal court in downtown Los Angeles on Friday.

They were indicted Jan. 23 by the Los Angeles County Grand Jury on charges that they offered Davis a $100,000 campaign contribution to induce him to quit the Senate race. Sources close to the case have said that the district attorney’s office recommended against indicting Fiedler but did recommend the indictment of Clarke, her longtime friend and adviser.

Political Career

The couple, who have been friends since Fiedler began her political career in the anti-busing movement in the 1970s, announced last week that they plan to marry “after the election.”

Fiedler, who lives in Northridge, and Davis, who lives in Valencia, represent overlapping parts of Los Angeles and Ventura counties in their current political offices. Davis entered the Republican Senate race in February, 1985. He has raised and spent almost $500,000 so far.

Although Davis says he had a $100,000 deficit last November, federal reports show that at the end of last year, his deficit was just $14,000.

Fiedler formally entered the Senate race Jan. 6 of this year. Combining money raised for her last House race with new contributions, she has put together about $700,000, and federal reports show that she had $458,000 on hand in December.

The Davis and Fiedler Senate campaigns have long been competitive for contributors and grass-roots support in the San Fernando Valley.

Davis, 69, contends that a Fiedler “emissary” told Zilm early last November that Fiedler would help pay off Davis’ debt if he got out of the race.

State Law

Davis said a lawyer told Zilm that was a felony under state law and it was eventually turned over to the Los Angeles County district attorney’s office. After agreeing to cooperate with investigators, Zilm had a number of conversations, some by telephone, some face-to-face, with Fielder advisers, according to sources close to the case. Zilm met with Fiedler once.

Braun said Monday that Fiedler thought Davis was already out of the Senate race when she offered any help.

“What happened was she had every indication he was contemplating withdrawing from the race, and obviously when someone is withdrawing from the race, you always look for that person to show that they will support you.

“As far as Bobbi was concerned, there was no quid pro quo. . . . It was perfectly lawful.”

Fiedler said in a television interview over the weekend that she got involved in the discussions with Davis’ campaign because she felt sorry for him. She also said she wanted his endorsement, but she later contradicted herself and said she did not think the senator’s endorsement was worth much.

Davis points to his nominal lead in early polls on the Senate race and contends that he has never considered getting out of the race.

Braun also said that under federal law, Fiedler’s campaign committee could not have given the Davis committee more than $1,000.

“So the deal the D.A.’s office claims was to be made is a legally impossible deal, and it could not have occurred secretly, because all of the distribution of monies (by the committees) are reported to the federal government,” Braun said.

Particularly crucial in the case is a taped conversation made during Zilm’s visit to Fiedler’s Northridge home on Jan. 12.

Braun said Fielder and Clarke were expecting to meet with Davis that morning and Fiedler was baking a coffee cake for the occasion.

But Zilm came instead, wired for sound, and after she left, prosecutors showed up and told Fiedler and Clarke of the investigation.

Both Democrats

Fiedler’s choice of new attorneys was somewhat surprising in that both are Democrats. Braun has been associated with Democratic Reps. Henry Waxman of Los Angeles and Howard Berman of Studio City. In addition, Lowenstein was appointed by former Gov. Edmund G. Brown Jr. to be the first chairman of the state Fair Political Practices Commission.

Lowenstein also wrote a UCLA Law Review article last year that focused in part on the state statute under which Fiedler and Clarke have been indicted.

He said Monday that the law has rarely, if ever, been used in a prosecution, even though it dates back to the 1890s.

What is more, he said, it should apply only to candidates who “put money in the pocket” of another candidate.

“In my view, a personal benefit has to be provided or offered to a candidate,” Lowenstein said. “Money in his pocket, for example. As far as I am aware, there is not even an allegation of that in this case.”

Fiedler’s refusal to make any comment on the tapes Monday afternoon contrasted sharply with her eagerness to talk over the last few days to Los Angeles electronic media outlets.

Braun had said Monday morning that he expected Fiedler to continue talking about the case in public and eventually on the witness stand.

“If you are a politician, you talk,” Braun said. “You owe it to the public.”