Judge Seeks Probe of Contacts Between Lawyer, Court Worker

U.S. District Judge Edward Rafeedie said Friday he will ask for an official investigation of whether social contacts between a court stenographer and a defense lawyer in the recently completed Enrique Camarena murder trial may have resulted in jury tampering.

Rafeedie made the announcement after lawyer Martin R. Stolar of New York refused to answer questions about whether he had any “social contacts” with stenographer Julie A. Churchill during the trial.

The judge ordered Stolar back to court next Friday for a further hearing. The judge said he would refer the matter to an appropriate “investigating authority.” He did not name the agency.

Stolar’s client, Juan Ramon Matta Ballesteros, was convicted last month of conspiracy to kidnap and murder Drug Enforcement Administration Agent Enrique Camarena and of two related charges.

The inquiry arose this week after Rafeedie said that he learned that Churchill had spent time “poolside” at the West Hollywood hotel where Stolar stayed during jury deliberations.

Stolar said this week that Churchill had been there for only 15 to 20 minutes after she delivered a transcript to him, had a soda and departed. But he refused to answer questions about any other contacts he had with Churchill.

The judge ordered Stolar to return to court Friday with a lawyer, and threatened him with contempt if he refused to answer.

Stolar’s lawyer, Stanley Greenberg, said Friday that the judge had no authority to ask Stolar questions about the alleged contacts until specific charges were filed against him.

But Rafeedie responded: “I have reason to believe that from these social contacts there may have been attempts to compromise this jury.” He said that he was using “his inherent power of the court” to seek answers and did not have to rely on statute.

The judge said he had become suspicious after Churchill reported seeing a newspaper with a story on the Camarena case in the jury room last week. The report led to a mistrial motion by defense lawyers who contended that the jury may have been subject to improper influence. That motion is still pending.

In a closed-door hearing last week, several jurors told the judge there were newspapers in the jury room every day. But they also said that they had not read stories about the case.

Stolar testified briefly Friday, saying he had not discussed the jury deliberations with Churchill. But Greenberg said he had advised Stolar to decline to answer questions about any social contacts he might have had with Churchill, citing four different provisions of the Bill of Rights, freedom of association and the right to privacy.

After the hearing, Greenberg insisted that his client had done nothing improper and said specifically that Stolar had not been involved in acts that would constitute jury tampering.