2 Camarena Case Attorneys Threatened With Contempt : Murder trial: The judge questions one defense lawyer about contact with court reporter and accuses the other of withholding information on a mistrial motion.

A federal judge Tuesday threatened to hold two defense lawyers in the Enrique Camarena murder case in contempt of court after indicating that one may have had improper contact with a court stenographer and the other refused to answer questions about the sources for a mistrial motion he had filed.

The move by U.S. District Judge Edward Rafeedie precipitated a heated argument between the judge and defense attorneys Martin R. Stolar of New York and Edward Medvene of Los Angeles.

Although the trial ended Monday, Rafeedie summoned the attorneys to a special hearing Tuesday afternoon. At the start, he told them, “I have called you here to discuss some disquieting things that occurred in the trial, particularly in the last few days.”

He asked Stolar why he was “entertaining the court reporter poolside while the jury was out.”

Stolar immediately challenged Rafeedie on whether he had the authority to ask such questions. The judge retorted: “The court is carrying out its administrative responsibilities to preserve the system and the jury trial.”

Stolar said that court reporter Julie Churchill came to his West Hollywood hotel last week after his client had been convicted. He said there was nothing inappropriate about her visit. Churchill, Stolar said, brought him a transcript of trial testimony by a witness who was expected to testify again against his client, Juan Ramon Matta Ballesteros.

Court reporters, besides compiling official records of court proceedings, run private businesses selling transcripts.

Stolar said that he was at the hotel pool when Churchill arrived and out of common courtesy asked her if she wanted a cup of coffee.

“She had a Coke,” he told the judge. Later, outside the courtroom, Stolar said Churchill had been at the hotel for 15 or 20 minutes.

Rafeedie terminated Churchill from the case Monday, according to statements made in court, but she remains an employee of the federal court system. Attempts to reach her for comment were unsuccessful.

Rafeedie ordered Stolar to be in court Friday afternoon to tell him if he had had any other contact with Churchill during the trial.

Outside the courtroom, Stolar said, “This is the most unusual proceeding I’ve been involved in in 20 years as a lawyer. The judge has no basis for making these kinds of inquiries.”

Stolar repeated an assertion he had made during the hearing: “The court is trying to shoot the messenger,” a reference to Churchill, who told the judge last week that jurors had newspapers in the jury room.

The judge also accused attorney Medvene of failing to provide information that the judge felt he was entitled to know.

The judge’s action stemmed from a motion filed by Medvene last Friday seeking a mistrial on grounds of alleged juror misconduct.

Medvene’s motion asserted that jurors had discussed a newspaper article on one of the verdicts in the case, even though the judge had instructed the jury on several occasions to not read any news accounts of the high-profile trial of four men accused of involvement in the February, 1985, slaying of Drug Enforcement Administration agent Camarena in Guadalajara, Mexico.

Medvene filed his motion one day after the judge had convened a closed-door hearing and questioned the jurors individually about whether they had read or discussed news account of the case, after Churchill had told Rafeedie that she had seen a newspaper in the jury room a day earlier when she had been rereading testimony to the jurors.

Medvene’s motion also asserted that he had been informed that U.S. marshals had improperly asked jurors about when they might reach a verdict in the case. The motion also alleged that government officials, possibly including the DEA and the U.S. attorney’s office, had knowledge of the movements of jurors during the trial and deliberations.

Rafeedie said he was disturbed because it seemed to him that defense lawyers knew before he did about a newspaper being in the jury room.

Medvene said that he did not know about the incident before the judge did. He declined to reveal where his information came from, other than repeating statements he made in his motion that none of it came from Rafeedie’s court staff. The attorney said he would consult one of the sources to see if he could get approval to tell the judge.

The give-and-take between Medvene and the judge was so stormy that at one point the judge warned the attorney: “Keep your voice down!”

Medvene responded: “I will, but I don’t want it insinuated that I did something wrong.”

Medvene told the judge he should be focusing his attention on the issues raised in his mistrial motion, rather than the source of information. He stressed that a transcript of the hearing that the judge had held indicated that the jurors had improperly discussed media coverage of the case.

At one point, Medvene read the following passage from a transcript of the hearing the judge held with the jurors:

“Is it your impression,” the judge asked jury forewoman Peggy Dolan, “that the jurors have lived up to the instructions that the court has given not to read about the case?”

Dolan responded: “That’s a difficult question. I’ll tell you the truth: I believe that some people have read different articles.” However, she later said she did not think the discussion the jury had on Friday about a newspaper article affected deliberations.

Later in the hearing, defense attorney Gregory Nicolaysen shed some light on how he learned of the newspaper incident. He said Churchill had told a court interpreter, Cynthia Parker, who then brought it to his attention Wednesday night.

At that point, the jury had concluded deliberations on all defendants except for Nicolaysen’s client. Nicolaysen then called Churchill and discussed the incident with her and told the court reporter she should tell the judge about the newspaper. Churchill then informed the judge.

Other defense lawyers, including Medvene and Stolar, said they did not find out about the hearing until Thursday night, several hours after it had been held.