Judge Limits Fine Against Times Reporter

Backing down from a threat to impose daily $1,500 fines on a Times reporter until he divulges where he got confidential Los Angeles Police Department records, the judge overseeing the Rodney G. King beating case said Friday that he will demand only a single $1,500 sanction.

Superior Court Judge Bernard J. Kamins ordered reporter Richard A. Serrano to pay the fine by June 10, saying that he believes Serrano is a witness to criminal violations surrounding the release of confidential documents and thus is not covered by the California shield law that allows journalists to protect their sources.

But Kamins said that overnight he rethought his intention to impose a daily fine, adding: “I do not want to be in a tangle with the press.”

Shelby Coffey III, editor and executive vice president of The Times, applauded Kamins’ turnaround, but said the newspaper still objects to the reduced penalty.

“We still object to the one-time fine of $1,500,” Coffey said late Friday. “We think the ruling is legally incorrect. We think it sets a dangerous precedent and should not become the law in these cases.”

While Serrano’s hearing was in progress on the 11th floor of the Criminal Courts building, King--whose March 3 videotaped beating by police sparked national outrage--visited prosecutors in the district attorney’s special investigations office six floors above.

Deputy Dist. Atty. Alan Yochelson said the victim and his attorney, Steve Lerman, met with him and Deputy Dist. Atty. Terry White for about an hour.

“We did not discuss the case,” Yochelson said. “We simply got together to introduce ourselves and to answer any questions Mr. King might have about our handling of the case.” White and Yochelson are prosecuting the four Police Department officers indicted in the beating. The trial is scheduled to begin June 19.

Yochelson said neither prosecutor is involved in decisions about the latest twist in the case--an incident earlier this week in which King allegedly drove his car at an undercover vice officer as he was about to be stopped for consorting with a transvestite prostitute in Hollywood.

A spokesman for the district attorney’s office said no decision has been made on whether to file felony assault charges against King in Tuesday’s incident. State prison officials are also studying whether King, a convicted robber, violated terms of his parole and should be returned to prison.

Police investigators from the Northeast Division were still preparing their case against the Altadena man late Friday and will present it to prosecutors downtown Monday, according to Police Cmdr. Rick Dinse. A separate deputy district attorney will evaluate the case and a decision will be made by John Lynch, director of central operations, and then probably by Dist. Atty. Ira Reiner.

As prosecutors grappled with what to do about King, Kamins wrestled with how to stop leaks of confidential material that he fears could jeopardize the officers’ trial.

Kamins said he had asked the state attorney general’s office to investigate the unauthorized release of sealed documents, but a spokesman for Atty. Gen. Dan Lungren in Sacramento said no written request had been received.

On May 21, The Times published excerpts from a 314-page Police Department Internal Affairs investigative report on the King case, prompting the judge to subpoena the reporter.

On Thursday, Kamins imposed a $1,500-a-day fine on Serrano until the reporter divulges the name of his source.

At Friday’s hearing, the judge said he had reflected on the issue and was persuaded by Times attorneys’ arguments that multiple punishments for a single offense are illegal.

Saying that he has respect for Serrano, the judge defended his decision to impose a one-time sanction for refusing to answer questions posed by the court, even though Serrano is protected under the reporters’ shield law from being held in contempt.

Kamins said that he believes he acted appropriately in trying to plug information leaks, but added that he wants to get on with the trial and not fight with the press or become involved in political controversies surrounding the case.

“I think it’s a conscious diversion from the issues at hand in the Rodney King case,” Kamins said of leaks in the case. “I think it’s a calculated effort by someone (in) the case to divert the court’s and media’s attention away from the true issue at hand. The true issue is whether or not those police officers are guilty or not guilty of the crimes that are charged.”

Attorney Rex Heinke, who represents The Times, told reporters after the hearing that Kamins’ about-face Friday signals an important change in Kamins’ thinking, but leaves unresolved the question of whether a judge can skirt the shield law. California voters made the law part of the state Constitution in 1980.

“If the press can be hauled into court every time someone is not supposed to disclose something and be forced to disclose who is their confidential source, then the shield law has no meaning whatsoever,” Heinke said.

Times Editor Coffey said late Friday:

“The Times and Mr. Serrano are pleased that today Judge Kamins has decided to rescind his earlier ruling. . . . The continuing fine was tantamount to holding Mr. Serrano in contempt, despite the protections for journalists who refuse to identify sources under the U.S. and California constitutions.”

Coffey added that the newspaper opposes any fine at all.

“Mr. Serrano has done nothing wrong and has, in fact, conducted himself in accordance with the highest standards of journalism. We have sought and received a stay of that (one-time $1,500) fine. The judge has said he would be receptive to further stays. We are now considering our options for next steps in consultation with our attorneys.”