U.S. Atty.’s Office Investigates Ex-Gynecologist : Inquiry: Ivan C. Namihas escaped state criminal charges in more than 100 sexual abuse complaints. Federal prosecutors are exploring possible mail fraud angle. Former physician denied any wrongdoing.

Federal prosecutors have launched a criminal investigation of Ivan C. Namihas, the Tustin gynecologist who escaped state criminal charges in connection with more than 100 sexual abuse complaints by his patients.

The U.S. attorney’s office in Santa Ana is using a novel approach in its investigation: exploring the possibility that Namihas ran afoul of federal mail fraud statutes when he sent medical bills to the patients he has been accused of sexually molesting, according to those familiar with the probe.

Federal officials would not comment publicly about the investigation but have generally outlined their strategy in numerous contacts with private attorneys, as well as state and local prosecutors.

Federal statutes make it illegal for anyone to obtain money through the U.S. mail with “false or fraudulent pretenses, representations or promises. . . . “

Conviction of each felony is punishable by up to five years in federal prison and up to a $250,000 fine. The felonies are subject to five-year statutes of limitations.

Both the Orange County district attorney’s office and that of the state attorney general have decided against pressing sexual abuse charges against Namihas because many of the alleged abuses date back to the late 1970s and early 1980s, and cannot be prosecuted because of a one-year statute of limitations on such crimes.

The district attorney’s office announced in May, 1992, that it would not prosecute. In a letter to one of the victim’s attorneys last month, the state attorney general’s office endorsed that decision.

Moreover, state and local prosecutors concluded there was a lack of corroborative evidence, that some victims were unwilling to testify against Namihas, and that their case had been weakened because most of the alleged victims did not lodge formal complaints at the time of the incidents.

Namihas, who has complained that he was indicted and convicted by the news media before he could defend himself, could not be reached for comment. In the past, he has denied wrongdoing. Timothy Cory, the Las Vegas attorney who filed his recent bankruptcy petition, did not return calls for comment.

The former gynecologist was accused by the California Medical Board of sexually abusing 69 of his patients over the past decade. He lost his license to practice medicine 14 months ago, after the board conducted a half-hour administrative hearing that the gynecologist did not attend.

Although the board based its decision on the sworn statements of 69 of his patients, some 160 women in all called the board to complain after the board announced the filing of a complaint against Namihas, 60, for alleged sexual abuse of a small number of clients between 1968 and 1986.

The resulting flood of calls from his other patients produced scores of complaints about instances in which the Brazilian-born Namihas had allegedly kissed, fondled or otherwise sexually abused them during pelvic examinations.

Some also charged that they had been subjected to unnecessary surgery.

In one civil malpractice case that was coming to trial as the scandal unfolded, Namihas agreed to an out-of-court settlement with Stacy Crumpler. The 21-year-old Huntington Beach woman had charged that Namihas performed unnecessary surgery on her simply to frighten her. The settlement--the terms of which both parties agreed not to disclose--was approved last week in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Nevada, where Namihas now lives. He filed for bankruptcy protection under Chapter 11 in May, 1992.

While the settlement was pending, an assistant U.S. attorney contacted Crumpler’s Santa Ana attorney, John A. Rosenbaum, to inquire about subpoenaing the former gynecologist’s bank records and depositions taken as part of his client’s malpractice suit.

“I was asked for the depositions from our case, and financial information we have from (Namihas), including his bills,” Rosenbaum said last week. “I expect to have subpoenas served on me anytime.”

Federal prosecutors have also notified the state attorney general’s office that they are contemplating possible mail fraud charges against Namihas, according to Tom Lazar, a deputy attorney general in San Diego who represented Namihas’ patients before the California Medical Board.

Lazar said Jonathan Shapiro, the assistant U.S. attorney who contacted both Rosenbaum and Lazar, asked for documents related to the medical board hearing but declined to say exactly what was requested. Shapiro would not comment.

But law enforcement sources familiar with the probe said federal authorities will focus on medical bills Namihas sent to patients and will apply federal statutes that prohibit “frauds and swindles.”

If a federal case against Namihas is pursued, prosecutors are expected to argue that Namihas billed for professional medical services in instances where he sexually abused women.

The medical board revoked Namihas’ license in June, 1992, after preparing for a 14-week hearing on allegations lodged against him. The day before the hearing was to begin, Namihas attempted to voluntarily surrender his license, but the board rejected his offer, Lazar said.

When Namihas did not appear to defend himself, the board took only half an hour to find him guilty of all 69 counts against him and strip him of his medical license. In a letter to the board, Namihas said he had decided not to attend the hearing because “the media has unmercifully indicted, prosecuted, convicted and professionally executed me before a hearing could be held.”

Deputy Dist. Atty. Jan Charles Sturla, who headed the Orange County district attorney’s probe, said his investigators and the Tustin police interviewed 91 of Namihas’ former patients and other witnesses.

“Basically it was determined that a one-year statute of limitations was applicable to most of the charges,” Sturla said last week. “That left but one case that fell within that one-year period and would have meant that that particular count--a battery count--would be tried alone. Even in that case, we felt there was insufficient evidence.”

The state attorney general’s office also declined to prosecute, despite a written request in February by Los Angeles attorney Gloria Allred, who at the time represented one of Namihas’ former employees who has filed a civil lawsuit against Namihas.

Atty. Gen. Daniel E. Lungren turned down Allred’s request three weeks ago, upholding the decision by the Orange County district attorney’s office not to file charges.

Lungren said the district attorney’s office acted properly after determining there was a lack of evidence to support some of the allegations and a statute of limitations problem, as well as an “unwillingness by victims to cooperate with the prosecution.”

“While I understand the outrage felt by your client and the other women who believe they were victimized by Dr. Namihas, those sentiments do not justify the extraordinary measure of the attorney general’s intervention in this matter,” Lungren wrote.

“The fact that Dr. Namihas’ license to practice medicine has been revoked, denying him the opportunity to perpetuate the type of acts of concern to your client and his former patients, is a significant guarantee of public safety and some retribution for the doctor’s misconduct,” he concluded.

Allred said she is not satisfied with Lungren’s response and unhappy over his refusal to meet with her personally. But she said she is encouraged that the U.S. attorney’s office has taken an interest in the case. Although she has not been contacted by federal investigators, Allred said she has heard talk of a new investigation.

“If that’s the case, I’m happy, although it’s no substitute for the attorney general getting involved,” she said last week. The incidents involving Namihas, she said, “have been a major, unprecedented scandal.”