Contempt Charges Against Starr Spokesman

W A S H I N G T O N, July 6, 2000 -- Kenneth Starr’s former spokesman has beencharged with criminal contempt and ordered to stand trial next weekin a case involving news leaks during the Monica Lewinskyinvestigation.

Charles Bakaly is being prosecuted by the government before U.S.District Judge Norma Holloway Johnson, who as the chief judge ofthe federal court in Washington oversees matters involving grandjury secrecy.

A trial has been scheduled for July 13, according to documentsat the U.S. District Court.

Johnson signed an order on June 29 granting Bakaly’s request fora trial of the criminal contempt charge, according to the documentsreviewed by The Associated Press.

Leaks Lead To ProsecutionThe court documents state Bakaly faces trial over statements hemade in connection with investigations into alleged leaks from thespecial prosecutor’s office investigating the Lewinsky case.

The judge, who presided over most of the legal cases during theLewinsky impeachment drama, also solicited the views of PresidentClinton’s lawyers and Starr’s successor, Robert Ray, as to whethersealed documents in the case should be made public at trial.

Bakaly was unavailable for comment, his wife said today. Hisattorneys, Gary Coleman and Michelle Roberts, were alsounavailable, their offices said.

Spurred By Clinton AttorneysThe trial is the latest twist in a case spurred by Clinton’slawyers.

During the height of the impeachment investigation, thepresident’s attorneys, David Kendall and Nicole Seligman, launcheda legal assault accusing Starr and his staff of illegally leakingto the news media information covered by federal grand jury secrecyrules about the Lewinsky case.

Starr’s office denied any illegal leaks, but his staff wasforced to undergo an intense investigation directed by the court.

In the midst of that investigation, Bakaly abruptly resigned asStarr’s spokesman after his former boss referred him to the JusticeDepartment in connection with a press leak two months earlier.

The New York Times, citing sources, reported July 31, 1999 thatStarr had concluded the president could legally be indicted whilestill in office.

Bakaly went on national television the day after the articleappeared and said the “information did not come from our office.… We did not leak this information. … We do not leak grand juryinformation.”

Starr made the referral to the Justice Department after hisoffice conducted its own inquiry and concluded Bakaly may have hadsome involvement in the leak, officials said.

Starr’s Office ExoneratedJohnson ultimately concluded there was evidence that Starr’soffice may have been behind as many as two dozen improper leaks.Starr appealed, and won a key ruling from an appeals court. Amongother things, the court ruled that the information in the Timesarticles was not covered by grand jury secrecy and thus was not animproper leaks.

Bakaly, however, was forced to face the criminal contemptcharge.

Bakaly is the second major figure in the impeachment drama toface contempt charges.

Clinton was accused of civil contempt by a federal judge forfalse statements in the Paula Jones case and ordered to pay a fine.