Jury Urged Not to Turn Young Into Scapegoat

A defense lawyer for former legislator Bruce E. Young said Friday that the former Norwalk assemblyman is “verbose and arrogant,” but urged a federal jury not to conclude from Young’s own performance as a witness that he is also dishonest.

The unusual comments, made in closing arguments by attorney George Walker at Young’s political corruption trial in Los Angeles federal court, were prompted by three days of testimony by Young that triggered a prosecution attack on his credibility as a witness.

Walker also urged jurors not to use Young “as a sacrificial lamb” for any problems that they may perceive to exist among state lawmakers in Sacramento.

“If there’s a problem, don’t use Bruce Young as a sacrificial lamb,” said attorney George Walker in closing defense arguments at Young’s political corruption trial in Los Angeles federal court.

“If you feel something is wrong, eliminate outside consulting jobs for legislators or tighten up the rules,” Walker added.

Walker’s closing argument came a month after the opening of Young’s trial on 28 counts of mail fraud in connection with his alleged failure to report business dealings with convicted political corrupter W. Patrick Moriarty and two cable television companies.

Young is also accused of mail fraud violations in connection with the alleged laundering of campaign funds from Moriarty to Democratic candidates for the Assembly in 1982.

After a closing prosecution argument by Chief Assistant U.S. Atty. Richard E. Drooyan, which sharply attacked Young’s credibility as a witness, Walker began his argument by apologizing to the jury for Young’s performance on the witness stand.

“I’m going to be harsh on Mr. Young,” Walker said. “Mr. Young is verbose. He has the kind of arrogance that makes the hair on the back of my neck stand up sometimes.

“I did chastise him,” Walker added, recalling admonitions to Young during his testimony to pay attention to his questioning and stop looking at the prosecution table.

“I had a right to be angry and stop him (from continuing) this thing he had going with the prosecution table,” Walker said. “He’s got this thing going with them and I’m trying to run a case.”

Walker added that his experiences representing Young in the political corruption case personally soured him on the state political scene in Sacramento.

“I know now because of what I’ve learned in this case I’d never be up there. I couldn’t take it,” said Walker, a leading San Francisco lawyer.

Walker, however, said his criticisms of Young and Sacramento politics did not mean that Young is guilty of corruption.

“It doesn’t mean he wasn’t telling the truth,” Walker said. “We’re talking about the facts needed to sustain 28 felony convictions against Mr. Young. We’re not talking about a rambling witness.”

Just as Drooyan and Chief Assistant Orange County Dist. Atty. Michael R. Capizzi focused their closing arguments on Young’s credibility, Walker turned the focus of his closing argument on the believability of the key prosecution witness--Moriarty.

Noting that Moriarty is serving a seven-year prison term on corruption charges, Walker told the jury that Moriarty lied on the witness stand in an effort to win release from prison.

Moriarty, at a hearing set before U.S. District Judge William Rea in March, is expected to ask for early release from prison because of his cooperation with government officials in the continuing political corruption probe.

In attacking Moriarty’s credibility, Walker claimed that Moriarty lied about a 1983 letter, that he said he wrote at Young’s request, falsifying the date of a $50,000 investment by Young in a condominium project.

“Moriarty lied and changed his story two weeks before this trial--two weeks before the key to the cell door opens for him,” said Walker.

Walker also argued that Young had acted in good faith in business relationships with Moriarty, owner of the largest fireworks company in the United States, and with the cable TV firms during a time in which he was championing legislation to benefit the fireworks and cable television industries.

“If there were violations of any state law, I can tell you 100 legislative counsels would have been in here to talk about it,” Walker said. “What they want to do is take a man who has not violated any state law and persuade you to use your own yardstick in some fashion or manner to determine if he did something wrong.”

After closing arguments, U.S. District Judge Dickran Tevrizian read the jury 77 pages of instructions, telling them that the government does not need to prove any violations of state law to convict Young on the mail fraud counts.

The jury begins deliberations Monday.