Old Foes Face Each Other Again : Law: The Ely case is reuniting--on opposite sides of the fence--a deputy district attorney and two defense lawyers.

Brows arch, eyes roll and barbs dart across the courtroom at the preliminary hearing in the conspiracy-embezzlement case of Tom and Ingrid Ely.

The three lawyers in the case have crossed swords before, notably on high-profile murder cases.

But while the technical nature of the Ely case doesn’t provoke the passions of a murder trial, the lawyers have enough history together to get each other’s backs up.

On Aug. 14, Ventura Community College District Trustee James T. (Tom) Ely and his wife were arrested on charges that they bilked the district of more than $15,000 in improper trip expenses. They are charged with two counts each of conspiracy to commit grand theft, and Tom Ely faces eight counts of embezzlement and 19 counts of making a false claim.

Their preliminary hearing, which began last Wednesday, has brought old foes together again:

* Deputy Dist. Atty. Carol Nelson, a career prosecutor who got her law degree in 1977 and joined the Ventura County district attorney’s office in 1979. She has focused on sex crimes and murders.

* James M. Farley, 56, who is representing Tom Ely, has been a criminal defense attorney since he got his law degree in 1966. He began practicing in Ventura in 1970 and is a founding partner in Criminal Defense Associates, a group of lawyers appointed by the court to defend poor people when the public defender’s office cannot.

* Willard Wiksell, 39, who represents Ingrid Ely, got his law degree in 1975 and has practiced in Ventura ever since. He co-founded Criminal Defense Associates in 1981 with Farley and another lawyer, who has since left the partnership.

During a break in the hearing Monday, Nelson recalled the last time she faced Farley and Wiksell, in the murder case involving Linda Axel.

Axel was convicted in September, 1989, of fatally stabbing George White, an elderly worker at the Top Hat lunch stand in Ventura, and was sentenced to 25 years to life after pleading guilty.

The guilty plea came after the defense attorneys unsuccessfully tried to prevent Nelson from introducing DNA evidence that linked Axel to the murder. It was the first case in Ventura County to introduce DNA testing as evidence.

And they remember the murder trial of Tommy Marks, who was convicted in February, 1989, in the shotgun slaying of his ex-wife, Judy McGarrah, and was sentenced to life without parole. Both sides consider it a victory: Nelson because she got the conviction, and Farley and Wiksell because they persuaded the jury to recommend a life sentence rather than the death penalty.

Farley remembers enjoying the case, partly because Marks “was a nice guy.”

“He was pleasant to talk to, there was no phoniness about him at all,” Farley said during a break in the proceeding Monday. “He said, ‘Yeah, I shot her, that’s it.’ ”

“No,” Nelson objected from the prosecution table. “He blew her head off. Come on, how can you say anybody who could do that is a nice guy?”

Farley snorted slightly. “Jealousy was the motivation,” he said, because McGarrah had divorced Marks and remarried shortly before the shooting.

Nelson rolled her eyes. “He wasn’t jealous, come on,” she said. “You have to love somebody to be jealous.”

“He loved her,” Farley insisted.

Nelson retorted, “Oh come on, gaaaagg !” and turned away.

Farley gave a faint bemused smile. “As I was saying . . .”

So far during the preliminary hearing, most of the static has crackled between Farley and Nelson, usually in the form of subtle sarcasm directed at each other’s work.

Farley is fond of verbal jabs and has questioned an investigator’s measurement of car trips that Tom Ely charged to the district. “So it was just sort of a drive-by measurement?” he said.

And while Nelson was asking a question, he mimicked her gestures, just out of the judge’s view.

Nelson prefers rolling her eyes and coming back with witticisms just under her breath when Farley makes an argument.

Wiksell is more reserved than either, saving his jests for moments when exchanges between Farley and Nelson prompt Judge Thomas J. Hutchins to laugh.

Farley said of Nelson: “Personality-wise, I think she tends toward the vindictive and the vicious, as far as being a prosecutor. I think she gets a scenario in her mind as to what the facts are, irrespective of what they say.”

Asked what she thinks of Farley, Nelson paused a few seconds, grinning as she chose her words: “Jim gives speeches. Every time he opens his mouth, he gives a speech. He’s a politician. . . . I really enjoy trying cases with Jim. He’s a neat guy who has a style that’s from another era.”

Wiksell and Nelson are a bit warmer toward each other.

Wiksell called Nelson “a professional. I think she’s always prepared. I think that she brings a lot of enthusiasm and vigor to the courtroom. Sometimes I think she gets a little bit overzealous, but that is not a criticism. She knows her job and she does it well.”

And Nelson said, “I think Bill is extremely effective in front of a jury. He probably is the most effective defense attorney when it comes to finding what is the weakness in the prosecution’s case, and then he does not try to discredit the prosecution, but just this particular weakness.”

The three lawyers are expected to make their closing arguments today.