Reiner Defends Record in Debating Challengers

Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Ira Reiner debated his campaign challengers for the first time Thursday night, defending his performance on a wide range of fronts, from his alleged failure to prosecute police officers who allegedly use excessive force to his controversial attack on a judge who handled a racially charged trial.

The two-hour debate marked the first time that the eight-year incumbent district attorney has responded directly to criticism from his opponents. At the conclusion, Reiner unleashed his own complaints about challengers Gil Garcetti, Sterling Norris and Robert Tanenbaum. A fourth candidate, Howard Johnson, was not present.

Declaring that the debate had “shed more heat than light,” Reiner said: “There is a lot of experience at this table. They turned over most of their time to foolish invective.”

Indeed, the attacks were flying. At one point, Garcetti unfurled a huge mock-up of a $206,000 check--the amount Reiner owes to campaign contributor Mark Ross Weinberg, a former commodities broker who was recently convicted of defrauding clients. He called upon Reiner to pay back the money so that restitution could be made to Weinberg’s victims. Reiner did not respond.

At another point, Tanenbaum turned on Garcetti, who was once Reiner’s chief deputy, and asked: “Who would want to be chief assistant to the Genghis Khan of the criminal justice system?”

Yet the debate, sponsored by the Mexican-American Bar Assn., also touched on a variety of substantive issues, among them the use of jailhouse informants in criminal cases, the “deadbeat dad” program for collecting child-support payments, and whether there should be a special prosecutor for cases involving excessive force by police.

The discussion became especially heated when the candidates addressed Reiner’s handling of the controversial decision by Superior Court Judge Joyce A. Karlin to sentence a Korean-born grocer to probation in the killing of a black girl.

After the sentence, Reiner declared that he would prevent Karlin from hearing any criminal cases through the use of a so-called blanket affidavit in which prosecutors automatically seek to remove her. The legal maneuver generated an outcry from lawyers and judges.

Garcetti branded the move “an abuse of power . . . for political purposes.” Tanenbaum, a Beverly Hills lawyer and former New York City prosecutor, said Reiner had “pandered to the black community.” And Norris, a veteran county prosecutor, called it “a crucifixion.”

But Reiner came back with a pointed and vehement defense.

“No one has ever accused me of keeping my opinions to myself, and I don’t,” he said. “As the district attorney, I have a duty to speak out for justice and I did. . . . That was an appropriate action.”