Refugee May Face Prison; Judge Chastises His Lawyer

A Superior Court judge said Friday that he may send a local Vietnamese refugee to state prison for his involvement in a political assassination attempt. And, in a fierce reprimand, the judge lambasted the defendant’s attorney for having publicly suggested otherwise.

Be Tu Van Tran, 33, who admitted having shot a fellow refugee for expressing views that Tran interpreted as being pro-Communist, must now be committed to the state probation system for a 90-day examination to determine whether he poses any continuing danger to society.

In putting off Tran’s sentencing until that analysis is completed, Judge Robert R. Fitzgerald lashed out at defense attorney Robert Weinberg of Irvine for his public comments on Tran’s fate.

After Tran entered what amounted to a guilty plea last month, the lawyer told reporters that he was confident from his discussions with the judge that his client would have to spend only a few months of incarceration, rather than the nine years he could face for an attempted-murder conviction.

In court Friday, Fitzgerald called Weinberg’s quoted comments a “gross error” and said he was “appalled” that the lawyer would prejudge the case by disclosing confidential in-chamber proceedings.

Asserting that he has made no promises, Fitzgerald underscored the severity of Tran’s plea by warning that the case “may end up in substantial prison time.”

In an interview after the hearing, Weinberg expressed regret over the comments that sparked Fitzgerald’s reprimand, saying: “I’ve done myself and my client a terrible disservice.”

Weinberg added: “I can understand why (Fitzgerald) got so upset at me. . . . My intuition should have been kept to myself.”

The unusual reprimand by Fitzgerald was yet another twist in an emotionally charged case that began in 1986, when Westminster businessman Tran Khanh Van suggested in a Los Angeles Times Magazine article that the United States normalize relations with Vietnam.

Shortly after those comments appeared, Van was shot twice in an attack outside his Westminster real estate office. Be Tu Van Tran admitted in a disputed statement to police that he shot Van because he was infuriated by what he saw as the fellow refugee’s sympathies toward the Communist regime in Vietnam.

Tran’s defense team has tried to show that the one-time English teacher in Vietnam, who left his entire family behind in the war-torn region, did not actually shoot Van but took responsibility for the crime only as a “badge of honor” in the fight against communism.

In 1986, a jury in the case could not reach a verdict in a trial that drew the attention of members of the Vietnamese community, many of whom saw Tran as a hero for his stand against communism. A second trial that was to have begun last month was averted when Tran effectively admitted guilt in what is known as a “slow plea.”

In his remarks from the bench Friday, Judge Fitzgerald said he would wait to see the evaluation of state probation personnel before deciding on an appropriate sentence for Tran.

But in assessing the case, the judge did assert that every citizen “has a right to be free from fear” of reprisals for expressing controversial views.

Deputy Dist. Atty. Christopher J. Evans went further in urging that Tran be sent to prison.

In papers filed with the court, the prosecutor called the assassination attempt “the prototype nightmare of a free-world society. In short, Van Khan Tran was gunned down because of what people thought he believed.”