New Problems Surface With Gag Order in Olson Case

Enforcing the gag order in the Sara Jane Olson bomb plot case is proving to be problematic for Superior Court Judge James M. Ideman.

Dist. Atty. Gil Garcetti and star prosecution witness Patricia Hearst Shaw recently have spoken out about the case. But at a hearing on Monday, Ideman directed his ire at an attorney who publicly filed a civil lawsuit on behalf of another prosecution witness, former LAPD Officer James Bryan, who was a target of the alleged bomb plot in 1975.

Bryan’s lawyer, Bradley Gage, went to court seeking sanctions against Olson’s civil lawyer, Andrew Vorzimer, who criticized the civil assault suit as a “publicity stunt.”

Ideman instead threatened to hold Gage in contempt, saying he should have filed the suit under seal. It seeks unspecified damages against Olson, a 53-year-old housewife from Minnesota and alleged former soldier of the radical 1970s Symbionese Liberation Army.

Olson is accused of conspiring to kill police officers by planting pipe bombs under patrol cars in August 1975. The nail-packed bombs did not detonate.

Ideman called Gage’s filing “a breathtaking act of chutzpah” and said he would consider imposing sanctions and taking disciplinary action against the lawyer. Gage said he did not believe he had violated the gag order simply by filing a lawsuit, which alleges that Olson, then known as Kathleen Soliah, “placed one or more bombs underneath his police vehicle” while Bryan and his partner were inside a Hollywood pancake house.

Meanwhile, Olson’s criminal defense lawyer, J. Tony Serra, is continuing with plans to ask Ideman to hold Garcetti and Shaw, the SLA kidnap victim-turned-comrade, in contempt. No hearing date has been set.

In court, Ideman indicated he is inclined to accept Garcetti’s explanation that he was unaware of the gag order when he talked about the case recently on National Public Radio. The judge said he also was concerned about Shaw’s comments in the June edition of Talk magazine.

Deputy Dist. Atty. Michael Latin said Shaw’s lawyer told him that the Talk interview occurred in February--before Ideman’s formal gag order. Earlier, in January, the judge had ordered all lawyers and witnesses in the case to remain mum.

The judge chastised Gage for complicating the case, and accused him of “baiting” Olson’s civil lawyer with his public filing, which included a history of SLA crimes.