Court Proceedings Replay 1988 Election Campaign : Trial: Supervisor Mike Antonovich and former board member Baxter Ward again argue their opposing positions on the issues of the ‘80s.

The proceedings in San Fernando Superior Court on Thursday resembled more a political debate than a trial--a 1988 political debate.

Even the judge and one of the participants, Los Angeles County Supervisor Mike Antonovich, agreed.

It was the climactic day of a trial that pitted Antonovich against former Supervisor Baxter Ward. At issue was whether Ward destroyed or got rid of the supervisorial office’s files when Antonovich defeated him in 1980--an issue in their rematch election in 1988, which Ward also lost.

With Antonovich on the witness stand being cross-examined by Ward, who acted as his own attorney, the two men often interrupted each other in mid-sentence, raising their voices at each other as they once again argued contrary positions on 1980s political issues from rail service to Prop. 13.

Ward again contended--over Antonovich’s protests--that he had supported Prop. 13 before it passed. Antonovich again assailed the brief commuter rail service that Ward championed.

“The last time I heard this I had a full head of hair,” joked balding Judge David M. Schacter.

Schacter later said that he felt like a moderator in a political debate and that he was going to limit discussion on each campaign issue to three minutes.

“I feel like I’m in the movie ‘Back to the Future,’ ” the judge quipped.

The trial was brought on by Ward. He sued Antonovich, charging that Antonovich defamed him by alleging in their 1988 campaign that Ward had gotten rid of the office’s records before Antonovich moved into the office in 1980. The unauthorized removal or destruction of public records is a felony criminal offense, but Ward has never been charged with such a crime.

Ward contends that the allegation cost him the 1988 election, and is seeking unspecified monetary damages.

Whether the charge was political rhetoric or defamation will now be decided by a jury, which is scheduled to begin deliberating today.

Antonovich testified Thursday that when he took over Ward’s former office in 1980, most of the file cabinets were empty. He said that since Ward was the last person to occupy the office, he concluded that Ward removed the files, or directed someone to do so.

Antonovich said he never considered it to be a criminal matter, but felt it was a legitimate campaign issue because it showed Ward’s contempt for constituents after he was defeated in 1980.

“This is not a rape or a murder,” Antonovich told Ward. “This is an issue of ethics and not a criminal crime. I’m not interested in trying to send you to jail. It was a political issue.”

But Ward contends that Antonovich knew or could have easily found out that Ward did not remove the files, and that Antonovich recklessly and with malice continued making the charge throughout the last days of the 1988 campaign.

Ward produced county records discovered in 1989 that show 177 boxes containing his files were moved into storage in 1981--a year after he left office--and were routinely destroyed in 1986. However, the records do not indicate who ordered the boxes stored in 1981.

The Saturday before the 1988 election, Ward said he received an anonymous phone call telling him that one of his boxes was in a trash bin in the county building. Ward retrieved the box, contending that it proved that Antonovich’s charge was false.

However, Antonovich said the box could have been planted by Ward or one of his supporters.