Candidate Karlin Lashes Out at Criticism Over Sentence

Joyce A. Karlin--stepping out of her role as a Superior Court judge to play the candidate--on Wednesday lashed out at politicians who, she says, have exploited her controversial decision to give probation to a Korean-born grocer convicted of killing a black girl.

In her first round of interviews since a furor erupted over the sentence she gave to grocer Soon Ja Du, Karlin said her only regret has been the loss of her privacy. The judge also took a swipe at Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Ira Reiner for his use of a legal maneuver that was intended to prevent her from hearing any criminal cases after the Du ruling.

“It’s inappropriate,” she said, “and in effect I think he was trying to prevent me from developing a track record (leading up to the June 2) election.”

Wednesday’s interviews--Karlin took the day off from her judicial duties to conduct a series of back-to-back discussions with newspaper and television reporters--were designed to unveil the judge as a candidate. The half-hour sessions were held in the Los Angeles offices of Cerrell Associates Inc., the political consulting firm that Karlin has hired to manage her campaign during what is expected to be a hotly contested election in June.

The judge was a reluctant and somewhat nervous subject. “I’d just rather be on the bench, doing my thing,” she said, letting down her guard for a moment. But for the most part, her remarks were cautious.

Even her appearance was carefully orchestrated by her handlers, right down to a new hairstyle in which her usually curly blond locks were swept back off her face. The new coiffure was supposed to bring a look of greater maturity to the youthful-looking 41-year-old jurist--who has been on the bench for just five months and has been criticized as lacking the experience to handle the Du case.

Explained Cerrell: “We want to make sure that people understand she’s not some kid who just popped out of law school.”

During Wednesday’s interview, Karlin touched on a range of topics--her new assignment as a Juvenile Court judge (“I love it”); her husband William Fahey’s campaign for the 36th Congressional District seat (if he wins, they will have a bi-coastal relationship); and the publicity she has received since she made the Du decision (even her local butcher now recognizes her).

But as she has in the past, she steadfastly avoided talking about her reasons for the Du sentence, saying judicial ethics prevent her from doing so while an appeal of the sentence is pending. But Karlin, a former federal prosecutor who has won high praise for her work in helping to convict child pornographers and corrupt DEA agents, made it clear that she believes her judgment was proper.

Karlin’s critics have complained that her sentence sent the wrong message to the black community. They have repeatedly compared the case to one in which a man was sent to jail for beating his dog, saying the case demonstrates that the decision in the Du case was unjust.

Karlin, however, called such remarks “dangerous rhetoric” and said the Du case must not be compared to any other, but rather should be evaluated on its own.

“My decision . . . wasn’t intended to send a message, and if people stop reading between the lines and read what it was that I actually said, they will see that there wasn’t a message there at all,” Karlin said. “I did what I was supposed to do as a sentencing judge, and that is to consider the individual defendant in the context of the crime that she was convicted of.”

As to why people should vote for her, Karlin said she possesses the characteristics of a good judge, among them “the inner strength not to be swayed by public opinion.” She also said she is confident she will prevail at the ballot box in June.

But political analysts say Karlin, who has been the target of a recall campaign and heated protests from the black community, faces an uphill battle. She has three opponents in the race: Thomasina Reed, a lawyer and the vice president of the Inglewood school board; Robert S. Henry, a deputy attorney general; and Donald Barnett, a Century City lawyer. Reed has been endorsed by the committee that is trying to recall Karlin; she did not return a reporter’s phone call seeking comment Wednesday.

“She’s been beaten up for so long in the press that she needs to do something about that,” said consultant Parke Skelton, who is managing the campaign of district attorney candidate Gil Garcetti. “I think what she needs to do is use her contacts in the legal community to vouch for her competence, and she needs to explain her decision.”

Karlin must win by a majority in the June primary in order to win the election outright. If no candidate garners more than 50% of the vote, the top two contenders will face each other in a runoff.

According to Cerrell, the Karlin campaign is likely to be low key and comparatively low budget--he estimated she will have to raise more than $100,000, a sum he described as minuscule compared to what is spent in other countywide elections. The political marketing of a judge is a delicate business, Cerrell noted, and Karlin is expected to stress positive themes, such as the need for an independent judiciary.

Other analysts say Karlin will have to appeal largely to white voters, because she has lost the black vote. “I believe the African-American community is going to be very stimulated by this one election,” said Rick Taylor, who oftern serves as a consultant for minority candidates. “I do not believe she will do very well south of the Santa Monica Freeway,” Taylor said.

Karlin, however, disagreed. “I don’t accept that I’ve lost the support of the black community,” she said, adding that she has received phone calls and letters of support from blacks. However, she acknowledged, “I’ve certainly lost the support of people who don’t know me.”

Although Karlin says she understands the anger that is directed at her in the black community, she attributed it to “a misconception of the (Du) case from the way it has been portrayed by politicians and the media.” In an apparent reference to Reiner, she complained that some politicians up for election “saw an opportunity to get their names in the paper and to create an issue, and I think that they exploited the case for their own political purposes.”

The judge would not name names, but simply smiled when asked about Reiner. The district attorney, who is up for reelection in June, has been especially critical of Karlin in the aftermath of her decision to give Du a 10-year suspended sentence, with five years of probation, 400 hours of community service and a $500 fine.

“They can explain it any way they want,” said Reiner, who is appealing the sentence, “but a $500 fine isn’t justice and that’s really what this is all about.”

The highly publicized Du case, in which the grocer was convicted of voluntary manslaughter in the shooting death of 15-year-old Latasha Harlins, turned on a graphic videotape that showed the grocer and the teen-ager struggling over a $1.79 bottle of orange juice. Du had accused the girl of trying to steal the juice, but witnesses said Latasha was about to pay for the item.

The tape shows Du grabbing Latasha’s sweater as the girl, who had put the orange juice in her backpack, approached the counter. Then Latasha is seen hitting Du in the face four times, knocking Du to the floor behind the counter.

The tape then shows Du throwing a stool at Latasha and getting a handgun from behind the counter. On the tape, Du is then seen shooting the girl in the back of the head.

In a legal brief filed Tuesday, lawyers for Karlin focused heavily on the fight that preceded the shooting, saying Latasha had committed a “swift and violent attack” on Du. The brief reiterated Karlin’s previously stated reasons for granting Du probation, among them that Du was a first-time offender, that the gun in the case had been altered to make the trigger fire more easily and that Du lived in fear because her store had been repeatedly robbed.

In Wednesday’s interview, Karlin said the legal papers reflect her feelings about the case.

“The brief accurately reflects all aspects of the case,” she said, “and I think that if the public understands the case for what it really was, then there would not be quite the uproar that there is.”