Judge Finds Clinton in Contempt in Jones Case

A federal judge in Little Rock, Ark., found President Clinton in contempt of court Monday for lying about his affair with Monica S. Lewinsky, a move signaling that his troubles are not yet over in the sex-and-perjury scandal, even though he was acquitted two months ago in an impeachment trial in the Senate.

The civil order by U.S. District Judge Susan Webber Wright marks the first time that a U.S. president has been officially cited for contempt of court, and it could aid independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr, should he decide to pursue criminal prosecution of Clinton before or after he leaves the White House.

The judge, in a lengthy order reviewing Clinton’s “misleading statements” in his legal deposition in the Paula Corbin Jones sexual harassment case against him, said in often stern and harsh language:

“The record demonstrates by clear and convincing evidence that the president [gave] false, misleading and evasive answers that were designed to obstruct the judicial process.”

She added that Clinton had “undermined the integrity of the judicial system” and that she felt compelled to cite him with contempt to deter others from “emulating the president of the United States by willfully violating . . . orders of this and other courts.”

The order also is a stinging embarrassment for Clinton as he attempts to rehabilitate his presidency and directs a troubled U.S. military intervention in the Balkans.

The finding punctures White House insistence that the Lewinsky scandal primarily was the product of an overzealous prosecutor and politically motivated House Republicans. Wright’s handling of the Jones case, which she dismissed a year ago, has been considered even-handed and free of political influence.

But the concrete political implications of the ruling were uncertain Monday. Although the contempt citation could further taint the legacy of Clinton’s presidency, Republican congressional leaders may not be eager to revive Lewinsky-related political issues that also harmed the GOP’s public standing.

Wright gave Clinton 30 days to challenge her ruling. If he does so, the judge will convene full-blown hearings with witness testimony and the presentation of evidence that she said ultimately “might require referral of the matter to a prosecutor.”

The order directs the president to compensate Jones and her attorneys, as well as the judge and her clerk, for any expenses related to his “willful failure to obey this court.”

It also sends the matter to the Arkansas Supreme Court’s Committee on Professional Conduct for review and any discipline it deems appropriate. Clinton is a licensed attorney in the state and a former law professor there. The committee could suspend or revoke his license to practice law.

“The president’s conduct in this case,” Wright said, “coming as it did from a member of the bar and the chief law enforcement officer of this nation, was without justification and undermined the integrity of the judicial system.”

If Clinton does not appeal, the judge’s order will stand. She said that she issued a civil citation because a criminal citation could pose double jeopardy problems if Starr later decides to file criminal charges based on Clinton’s statements.

Starr’s office had no immediate comment on the judge’s action.

Officials in the White House Counsel’s Office declined to comment on Wright’s ruling, while Robert S. Bennett, Clinton’s private attorney in the Jones case, said that he would study the order.

Jones, reached at her home in Cabot, Ark., reacted enthusiastically. “Ah! Ta ta ta ta ta. That’s all I have to say,” she told Associated Press. Asked if she believed the action against Clinton was good or bad for the nation, Jones said, “I could care less. It’s not about that, it’s about what he did.”

Should Clinton choose to accept the citation and punishment, yet another asterisk would be added to how history records his presidency. Should he choose to challenge it, he would be prolonging a scandal that sharply divided the nation for more than a year.

Wright’s citation came on the same day that a jury deliberating in the same Little Rock federal courthouse acquitted Susan McDougal, Clinton’s friend and former Whitewater investment partner, of obstructing justice. It deadlocked on two criminal contempt charges related to her refusal to answer questions before a Whitewater grand jury.

Some Say Presidency Is Dealt Another Blow

Clinton’s detractors saw the contempt order as yet another blow to a presidency that has been wracked with scandal.

“This validates the claim that the independent counsel and House managers sought to make during impeachment proceedings,” said former House GOP counsel Barbara Olson, “that the president lied and misled the court in his civil case deposition. The judge obviously felt he did.”

Jim Nicholson, Republican National Committee chairman, added that “Judge Wright’s decision is a long-overdue victory for the rule of law.”

Several legal experts agreed.

“The judge had no choice but to send a message that future witnesses who are less than truthful won’t be tolerated,” said Steven Saltzburg, George Washington University law professor and a former high-ranking Justice Department official under Presidents Reagan and Bush.

“I wouldn’t have been surprised if the sanctions were a hundred times higher,” he said.

Stephen Gillers, a law professor at New York University, added:

“Any lawyer who testifies falsely before a federal judge has to expect a severe sanction, including possible loss of his license to practice law. If anything, a judge should take more severe action when that lawyer is the president of the United States.”

Gillers said that Wright’s citation “could make it easier for Kenneth Starr to seek an indictment of the president, because he has the support of a judge’s ruling and the weight of a public relations victory.”

Wright made it clear that she had no misgivings about citing a president with contempt while he is in office.

“This court has considered the matter and finds no constitutional barrier to holding the president in civil contempt of court in this case and imposing sanctions,” she said.

She determined that Clinton misled the judicial system in his January 1998 sworn legal deposition in the Jones case and then contradicted himself in his sworn grand jury appearance eight months later in the Lewinsky investigation.

In his deposition, taken on Jan. 17, 1998, Clinton was asked if he and Lewinsky were ever alone together in the Oval Office. “I don’t recall . . . “ he said. “It’s possible that she . . . while she was working there, brought something to me and that at the time she brought it to me, she was the only person there. That’s possible.”

He was asked if he and Lewinsky were ever alone together in a hallway outside the Oval Office. “I don’t believe so . . . “ he said. “I don’t believe we were alone in the hallway, no.”

Clinton Changes Tune on Lewinsky Affair

In Clinton’s Aug. 17, 1998, grand jury appearance, after a stain on a dress of Lewinsky’s was determined to contain his DNA, he admitted that indeed he had been alone with the former intern “from time to time” and that they engaged in “inappropriate intimate contact.”

One of Starr’s prosecutors said: “Let me ask you, Mr. President, you indicated in your statement that you were alone with Ms. Lewinsky. Is that right?”

Clinton responded: “Yes, sir.”

He went on to say that they were alone “a few times in ’96 . . . and there was one occasion in ’97 when, regrettably, we were alone together for a few minutes, I think about 20 minutes, and there was inappropriate conduct.”

At the deposition, Clinton was asked if he had engaged in “sexual relations” with Lewinsky.

“No,” he said.

He was asked whether Lewinsky had told someone that they had had a sexual affair.

“It’s certainly not the truth,” Clinton said. “It would not be the truth.”

Pressed further, Clinton said: “I have never had sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky. I’ve never had an affair with her.”

He also said that her legal affidavit in the Jones case denying an affair with Clinton--which she later recanted before the Starr grand jury--”is absolutely true.”

In addition, Clinton was asked in a legal interrogatory to identify “each and every” federal employee such as Lewinsky he had had sexual relations with, and he answered: “None.”

But in his grand jury statements, he said that “I did things that were--when I was alone with her--that were inappropriate and wrong.”

The judge, in discussing Clinton’s contradictory statements about his affair with Lewinsky, noted that, while Lewinsky told the grand jury that she had repeatedly given him oral sex in the White House, he did not consider that as having sex.

“It appears,” the judge said, “the president is asserting that Ms. Lewinsky is having sex with him while, at the same time, he was not having sex with her.”

The judge said the president’s deposition testimony was “intentionally false, notwithstanding tortured definitions and interpretations of the term, ‘sexual relations.’ ”

She said that she took pains to treat Clinton as any other witness who may have lied before the court but also considered “the high respect that is owed to the office of the chief executive.”

Wright also noted that Jones had dropped her appeal of the sexual harassment case in return for an $850,000 settlement from Clinton.

She ordered Clinton to pay Jones “any reasonable expenses, including attorney fees,” in this matter. Jones’ lawyers now have 20 days to submit a detailed statement of those expenses.

She also directed him to reimburse the court $1,202 for expenses incurred by the judge and her clerk, who traveled to Washington for the deposition.

And while making no recommendation on whether Clinton should or should not challenge her ruling, Wright said:

“It is in the best interests of the president and this court that this matter be expeditiously resolved.”

*

Times staff writer David Savage contributed to this story.

*

Participate in an online discussion on President Clinton being ruled in contempt of court. It’s going on now on The Times’ Web site: https://www.latimes.com/clinton