D.A. Lets Go of Fuhrman Perjury Probe : Simpson case: Garcetti turns investigation over to state attorney general, saying his office’s role poses possible conflict of interest.

Dist. Atty. Gil Garcetti, saying he feared “the appearance of a conflict of interest,” on Monday turned over to the state attorney general’s office the responsibility of determining whether to charge former LAPD Detective Mark Fuhrman with perjury at O.J. Simpson’s double murder trial.

Garcetti said his office could not handle the investigation because members of his staff have taken a public position on the perjury question that undermines a criminal charge. He also cited the high level of emotion in his office about the Simpson case.

To prove perjury, Garcetti noted, the law requires not only that a witness be shown to have knowingly lied, but that the lie be proven “material” to the case.

In the Simpson trial, Garcetti’s prosecutors argued strenuously that any lies Fuhrman may have told under oath were insignificant in deciding Simpson’s guilt or innocence in the murders of his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend Ronald Lyle Goldman.

In his allegedly perjured testimony, Fuhrman denied that he had used a racial slur that denigrates black people during the last decade. He was later flatly contradicted by four defense witnesses, including an aspiring screenwriter who brought to court tape recordings of Fuhrman using the slur at least 41 times and bragging about illegal and unethical conduct.

A main thrust of Simpson’s defense was that Fuhrman is a white “genocidal racist” who could have framed a black man like O.J. Simpson.

Prosecutors downplayed the significance of that issue. Simpson was acquitted of all charges against him last month.

Fuhrman retired from the Police Department in the middle of the trial and now lives in Idaho. He is the subject of a separate federal civil rights investigation into whether he and others committed illegal acts while in the LAPD.

Community activists and some politicians have for months petitioned Garcetti to file perjury charges against Fuhrman.

But at a press conference Monday morning, Garcetti said it would be inappropriate for his office to do so.

“We’ve said [Fuhrman’s slur testimony] wasn’t a material issue,” Garcetti said. If his office opted now to prosecute Fuhrman, “we’re going to have several of our [prosecuting] deputies testifying for the defense” and being cross-examined by their own colleagues.

Moreover, internal memos prepared for Garcetti cited “pronounced” and “intense emotional involvement” of many members of the district attorney’s office in the Simpson case, with some factions convinced that Fuhrman doomed the prosecution case.

The memos note the strong language used in the closing arguments of Deputy Dist. Attys. Marcia Clark and Christopher A. Darden, in which they reviled the former detective.

In her closing argument, Clark described Fuhrman as someone who was not fit to live on planet Earth. Darden called his taped language “nasty, hateful, lowdown.”

One staff memo to Garcetti concluded that because of such attitudes, “the impartiality of this office has already been compromised.”

The memos outline Garcetti’s legal options and constraints. They were sent to Atty. Gen. Dan Lungren last week with a letter from Garcetti asking to be relieved of the decision on the perjury charge.

Matt Ross, a spokesman for Lungren’s office, confirmed that Lungren had accepted the case on Monday.

Ross said it is not uncommon for local prosecutors to refer cases to the attorney general when there is a real or perceived conflict of interest.

Under the arrangement, the attorney general’s office will investigate the allegations of perjury against Fuhrman and prosecute him if charges are filed.

Fuhrman’s lawyer, Rick Towne, said he is happy Lungren’s office, not Garcetti’s, will make the filing decision.

State Sen. Diane Watson, who has demanded that Fuhrman be prosecuted for lying under oath, was also pleased.

“We’re going to stay on the attorney general to make sure his investigation is thorough,” she said. “We can’t just sweep this under the rug.”

Criminal defense lawyer Harland W. Braun, a former prosecutor, said Garcetti had little choice in turning the case over to someone else.

The district attorney’s office “vouched for Fuhrman,” Braun said, noting that the prosecution’s staunch defense of Fuhrman ended only when the tapes with the racial slurs were made public in August.

Braun contended that the slurs are significant because they show Fuhrman’s bias against black people in general.

“Of course [Fuhrman’s slur testimony] is material,” he said. “If it wasn’t material it wouldn’t have been admitted into trial.”