Legal Obstacles Thwart Progress of Starr Inquiry

As pressure mounts on independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr to expedite his sex and cover-up investigation of President Clinton, a daunting reality stands in his path.

On no fewer than four fronts, Starr is facing legal obstacles that already have delayed him--and may stall conclusion of the investigation for months longer.

Starr now confronts difficult choices that force him to weigh the costs of further delay against the potential evidentiary benefits of fighting for certain documents and testimony from reluctant witnesses.

In the wake of the dismissal of the Paula Corbin Jones sexual harassment case, Starr touched on the predicament in public remarks Thursday.

“We do recognize that there is a very keen and powerful interest in bringing all these matters to resolution as quickly as possible,” said Starr, who met with reporters in the driveway of his suburban McLean, Va., home.

He added: “Let me say it would be very helpful if all witnesses who were summoned before the grand jury would simply answer the questions. . . . We don’t control the clock. It’s out of our hands so frequently.

“But the real issue is . . . were there crimes committed? We hope, for the sake of the nation, that we would conclude that no crimes were committed.”

Whether it is the White House’s use of executive privilege to restrict the questioning of presidential aides or a local bookstore’s refusal to hand over credit card receipts, Starr is facing fierce and sometimes unexpected resistance.

For instance, an aide to Starr last week reached what appeared to be an agreement with a bookstore to get receipts of purchases made by former White House intern Monica S. Lewinsky, whose relationship with Clinton is at the root of Starr’s investigation. Prosecutors are hoping to verify details, such as purported book purchases, mentioned by Lewinsky in secretly recorded conversations with Linda Tripp, a key witness in the case.

But the bookstore agreement collapsed this week. Kramerbooks, with the urging of national book groups, filed a court challenge to Starr’s subpoena. Another book outlet, Barnes & Noble, also announced that it would fight a subpoena from Starr.

“If the 1st Amendment means anything, it means we have the right to purchase books without fear that government will inquire into our reading habits,” said Avin Mark Domnitz of the American Booksellers Foundation.

On some of these battlefronts, Starr must decide whether to press his position to the utmost--and endure hearings, rulings and appeals stretching over months or longer--or negotiate for less, quicker.

Starr said Thursday that his office exists to search for “facts, facts, facts” and not to worry about the political art of “spin.”

“We don’t deal in politics,” Starr said. “We work in the realm of facts and law, and not public relations.”

But White House strategists are well aware that the beleaguered Starr, who polls show is one of America’s least popular public figures, runs the risk of delivering an investigative conclusion long after Congress or the American people are interested in hearing it.

On the issue of executive privilege, the choices are also vexing for Starr.

President Clinton has asserted executive privilege to block prosecutors from questioning his most trusted staff confidant, Deputy Counsel Bruce R. Lindsey, about conversations that the two may have had concerning Lewinsky.

Sidney Blumenthal, another White House aide, has cited the privilege to block prosecutors from questioning him about some of his conversations with First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Based on legal precedents, particularly those from the Watergate era, Starr would seem to stand a strong chance of prevailing if he engages in an appellate-court fight with the White House over executive privilege.

However, it well could be a pyrrhic victory.

Winning in either the Circuit Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court would take Starr months, at minimum. And, based on Lindsey’s circumspect testimony in other Clinton controversies, there is no basis to assume that, if compelled to answer Starr’s outstanding questions, he would provide information the least bit damaging to the president.

Among the other disputes that slow the pace of Starr’s investigation:

Immunity: The trial-level judge overseeing aspects of the case has not yet ruled on whether Lewinsky should receive immunity based on an offer Starr’s prosecutors supposedly made to her in January. Her lawyers insist that they had what should be considered a binding agreement. Starr contends that no deal was reached.

Both sides submitted briefs and on March 5 argued the matter before Chief U.S. District Judge Norma Holloway Johnson. Until she rules, further negotiations on the matter are stymied.

Secret Service: More than 11 weeks into his investigation, Starr has been unable to question certain agents who patrol the White House or to review related documents. Starr so far has chosen negotiation over a frontal legal challenge, which would pit his office against officials of the Justice Department.

Lawyer notes: Judge Johnson this week handed Starr a victory, ruling that Lewinsky’s first lawyer in Washington, Francis D. Carter, must turn over certain notes or files on his dealings with her. However, the ruling did not come without a rebuke.

In one sentence of her 19-page ruling, Johnson raised the possibility that she might ask the Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility to examine whether Starr’s office acted properly in approaching Lewinsky on Jan. 16 without first contacting her lawyer.

Consequently, Starr decided Thursday to prepare a new motion asking the judge to make a formal finding that there was no misconduct associated with prosecutors’ approach to Lewinsky, according to people familiar with the matter.

“Ken Starr is a human being,” said Henry E. Hudson, a Republican former U.S. attorney in northern Virginia. “I’m sure he’d like to get the heat off him as soon as possible.”

Times staff writer Ronald J. Ostrow contributed to this story.

* A CALL TO QUIT . . . White House aides demand an end to presidential probe. A18

* . . . A VOW TO PRESS ON: Kenneth W. Starr promises to continue inquiry. A20