Grand Jury Makeup Fair, Official Says : Courts: Defense attorneys in the Stuart Tay case are arguing that the panel’s selection process discriminates against Asians.

A county counsel Thursday defended the grand jury selection process, currently under fire by defense attorneys in the Stuart Tay murder case, who claim the system discriminates against minorities.

Defense attorneys representing four youths, three of them Asian, indicted in the New Year’s Eve slaying have requested volumes of documentation that they believe will bolster their contention that Asians and other minorities are systematically excluded from the grand jury.

The attorneys are preparing to ask that the indictments be thrown out.

But after a brief hearing Thursday in Orange County Superior Court, Deputy County Counsel Edward N. Duran said he believes the 19-member grand jury panels fully represent the county’s racial composition.

“It’s very reflective of all minorities, given the stiff requirements of the grand jury,” said Duran, noting that members must volunteer for a full year, often working five days a week for a $25 daily stipend.

Defense attorneys for the four youths--Robert Chien-Nan Chan, 18; Kirn Young Kim, 17; Abraham Acosta, 16, and Mun Bong Kang, 17--are arguing in a joint motion that the racial makeup of the grand jury effectively violated their clients’ constitutional rights. A fifth youth, Charles Bae Choe, 17, has pleaded guilty and is expected to testify against the others.

The dispute is somewhat academic. If indictments are overturned, prosecutors could refile charges in the Tay case and bring out the same information in court hearings, Duran said.

The vast majority of criminal cases do not go before the grand jury. But if defense attorneys in the Tay case succeed in overturning the indictments, dozens of other indictments could potentially be jeopardized, Duran said.

Duran said he anticipates challenges from other minority groups, and is working to show that the grand jury sufficiently represents all of them.

Superior Court Judge Donald E. Smallwood, who is expected to decide the indictment issue in upcoming weeks, indicated Thursday that he would allow defense attorneys to pursue the issue, despite Duran’s argument that much of the requested documentation is irrelevant and in some cases, confidential.

Duran also questioned whether Asians represent a cohesive group that has faced discrimination, and defense attorneys must meet the burden of proof before they can request that indictments be quashed.

Marshall M. Schulman, who represents Chan and is the lead attorney on the motion, said outside of court that he felt Duran was “insensitive” to Asians.

According to calculations by the defense attorneys, only one Asian has served on the grand jury in 10 years. Attorneys representing several Asian men accused of participating in an auto insurance fraud ring have also joined the motions.

Duran said outside of court that determining who is considered “Asian” is difficult because of discrepancies on who meets that definition. For example, Duran said, there are questions as to whether Samoans and Pacific Islanders are also considered Asian.

Schulman said that Latinos from many different countries are still generally grouped as Hispanics.