Suicide’s Frozen Sperm Ordered Destroyed : Litigation: But a probate judge gives the man’s lover 60 days to appeal his ruling on the semen that he willed to her.

A probate judge on Wednesday ordered the destruction of a suicide victim’s frozen sperm, but gave his stunned and sobbing lover 60 days to appeal the ruling to a higher court.

The decision set the stage for a precedent-setting appellate showdown over the disposition of a dozen vials of sperm willed by William Kane of Malibu to his lover, Deborah Hecht, before his October, 1991, suicide.

Hecht, 37, wants access to the sperm--kept at a Westwood sperm bank--so she can fulfill what she says are Kane’s final wishes that she have his child. But her plans have been thwarted by probate lawyers and by Kane’s ex-wife and two adult children, who accuse Hecht of doing nothing to stop Kane from killing himself because she thought she stood to benefit financially from his death.

“Deborah Hecht knew for six weeks that he was going to commit suicide and did nothing to stop it, and now she claims she wants to have his child,” said Sandra McMahan Irwin, who is Kane’s ex-wife as well as the attorney representing their 19-year-old daughter, Katherine Kane, in the matter. “Something is very wrong here.”

Irwin and her daughter praised the decision by Los Angeles County Probate Judge Edward M. Ross as “wonderful,” even though Ross suggested that the ruling was little more than a way to move the matter to a higher court. He said any decision he made was bound to be appealed, given the lack of case law addressing the disposition of sperm belonging to a contested estate.

Under a request for action filed by Hecht’s attorney, Ross had four choices: Award the sperm to Hecht, award it to the children, order it destroyed or divide it among the parties.

“If I’m right, I’m right,” he said of his ruling. “If I’m wrong, I’m wrong.”

At Ross’ pronouncement, Hecht collapsed into tears and continued sobbing as her attorney, Marvin Rudnick, asked the judge to reconsider. At one point Rudnick angrily suggested that the court, by passing the matter on, was ducking the issue “like some prairie judge in Texas.”

Outside the courtroom, Rudnick promised to appeal on the grounds that a “private sexual act” between Hecht and Kane “is being undone by the court.”

“We’re very disheartened by the fact that the judge doesn’t even want to hear our argument,” Rudnick added. Ross ruled without allowing oral arguments. Hecht, still crying, said only, “I can’t go on like this forever. I don’t have any more money.”

Attorney Barbara Bailey, who is representing Kane’s son, William Everett Kane Jr., described the decision as a rejection of the concept that a dead man’s sperm is simply ordinary property. Rather, she said, it recognizes that the sperm is in a special category that opens new and important questions of law, ethics and public policy.

“The question is: Should a man be able to deposit sperm and father children after his death?” Bailey said.

The decision was a blow to Hecht, who at several points in the last year had seemed close to a settlement of Kane’s estate that would have left her with the sperm. In October, for example, an agreement was scuttled at the last minute when a former business partner of Kane, Barbara Kelley, showed up unexpectedly at a settlement hearing to stake her claim to a portion of Kane’s estate, worth an estimated $1 million.

But as the matter has garnered more media attention, Kane’s children and their attorneys seem to have taken an increasingly firm stand against Hecht getting the sperm. Last month, they filed a wrongful death suit against Hecht, in which they argued that she “assisted Bill in every way possible in carrying out the arrangements to end his life.”

Hecht continues to maintain that she did all she could to prevent Kane from killing himself, but that neither she nor his psychiatrist could lift the complicated and, by all accounts, brilliant lawyer and international businessman from a profound depression. Police have cleared Hecht of any criminal wrongdoing in his death in Las Vegas.

Meanwhile, the sperm remains legally under the custody of court-appointed estate administrator Robert Greene, who is represented by attorney Gary Ruttenberg. Ruttenberg promised “to take no action to destroy the sperm until the order is absolutely final.”

All sides now agree that the case has a legitimate chance of reaching the state Supreme Court or even the U.S. Supreme Court. But Hecht, who contends that her biological clock is rapidly running out, says time has become a factor.

Not so, said Ruttenberg, who said Hecht has plenty of options if she wants to become a mother.

“There’s artificial insemination using sperm other than (Kane’s),” he said. “She can get pregnant in the natural way. She can adopt. These are all different alternatives.”