Federal Judge Lifts Secrecy in Starr Leaks Investigation

A federal judge overseeing grand jury secrecy unsealed court documents Wednesday that show a court-appointed investigator is still probing 1998 news leaks in the Monica S. Lewinsky case which came amid a war of words between the White House and independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr.

The documents released by Chief U.S. District Judge Norma Holloway Johnson revealed that Starr’s office, which has been accused of leaking sensitive material about its investigation of President Clinton’s relationship with Lewinsky, sought unsuccessfully to have all court proceedings kept secret until the leaks investigation is concluded.

Among the documents made public is an Oct. 1, 1998, court filing in which Starr argued that continued secrecy “will help preserve the integrity of the ongoing grand jury investigation . . . and allow the special master to undertake his task without outside interference.”

But David E. Kendall, Clinton’s lawyer, contended in a court brief that keeping the leaks investigation secret makes it “more difficult for individuals holding relevant information to come forward” to notify the special master.

Johnson turned down Starr’s request, holding that “the court will unseal these papers because continued secrecy is not necessary.” However, she adopted a suggestion by Starr that the identity of the special master conducting the leaks probe be kept confidential. He is reportedly a District of Columbia Superior Court judge.

In one newly released document, Johnson for the first time described the special master’s duties.

“In his final report, the special master shall detail the evidence that he has collected and assess whether members of the OIC [office of the independent Counsel] have violated grand jury confidentiality in specific instances,” Johnson wrote.

She said this investigator “shall have the authority to subpoena documents, such as telephone records, telephone logs, letters, facsimiles, notes, memorandums, appointment records, visitor logs, calendars, etc., from the OIC or any other relevant parties. He is also authorized to gather testimony from present or former members of the OIC or any other relevant persons.”

On Oct. 30, Johnson made public her finding that 24 leaks of grand jury information in the Lewinsky investigation--in violation of federal law--were linked at least by inference to Starr’s office. She ruled that all of them “constitute prima facie violations of Rule 6(e),” the grand jury secrecy rule.

In that court order, Johnson cited news stories on television, in newspapers and in a magazine attributing information about the case to “sources close to the independent counsel,” “sources in Ken Starr’s office” and less direct references.

Starr has denied being the source of any leaks about grand jury evidence, and in the newly released documents, he accused “someone outside the office of the independent counsel” with leaking Johnson’s confidential decision in September to appoint a special master.

Starr said it was apparent that the leak had come from the White House or attorneys close to Clinton because his own office received calls from reporters asking for comment on Johnson’s decision, which Starr said he refused to confirm.

The new documents permitted a further peek into the acrimonious relationship between the White House and Starr. In one document, for example, the White House heaped scorn on Starr for his insistence that Johnson’s orders be kept confidential.

William McDaniel Jr., an attorney for presidential aide Sidney Blumenthal, ridiculed Starr for asserting, in McDaniel’s words, that making the leaks probe public “will result in a grab-bag of alleged evils.

“It is extraordinary that the OIC would try to hide questions about its own conduct for no reason other than that it might be criticized,” he added.

The documents also show that Johnson rejected Starr’s argument that about half of the 24 news leaks cited by the judge did not qualify as disclosures of grand jury material. These reports dealt with Lewinsky’s early attempts to negotiate an immunity agreement.

“None of these [reports] in any way discloses matters occurring before the grand jury or even matters likely to occur there,” Starr’s office said in a filing dated Oct. 15.

“Nor do these [reports] reveal the strategy or direction of the grand jury investigation. It is important that they be viewed in the context of the public disclosures repeatedly made by Ms. Lewinsky’s former attorney, William Ginsburg.”

Lewinsky obtained immunity from prosecution last summer after she retained two veteran Washington lawyers, Plato Cacheris and Jacob A. Stein.

Times staff writer Richard A. Serrano contributed to this story.