L.A. Jury Misconduct Discussed

Friday, November 17th 2000, 12:00 am

By: News On 6

LOS ANGELES (AP) â€” The judge in the Los Angeles police corruption trial has asked lawyers to meet privately with her to discuss allegations of possible misconduct by jurors who convicted three officers.

Judge Jacqueline Connor scheduled a Friday meeting with defense attorneys and county prosecutors, the Superior Court information office said Thursday.

A day earlier, the jury convicted anti-gang unit members Sgt. Brian Liddy, Sgt. Edward Ortiz and Officer Michael Buchanan of conspiracy and other crimes involving frame-ups of gang members in 1996. The panel acquitted Officer Paul Harper.

District attorney's spokeswoman Victoria Pipkin said she did not know the nature of the potential misconduct or how many jurors might have been involved.

But some reported comments from jurors after the verdict raised questions.

The Los Angeles Times on Thursday quoted jury foreman Victor Flores as saying that an unidentified juror slept through testimony.

Alternate juror Wendy L. Christiansen, 30, who did not deliberate with the panel, told the newspaper that jurors discussed the case during breaks. Jurors are forbidden to talk about cases until they are ordered to deliberate, and then only during deliberations.

She said she asked to meet with the judge during the trial to voice her complaints, but changed her mind after being told by court staff to put her request in writing.

The jury heard 3 1/2 weeks of testimony in what was the first trial arising from allegations by a disgraced former officer who alleged extensive wrongdoing in the Rampart station anti-gang unit.

Ex-policeman Rafael Perez made the allegations after his theft of $1 million worth of cocaine from a police evidence room was discovered and he made a deal to cooperate with the investigation in exchange for leniency.

The probe has forced prosecutors to seek dismissal of more than 100 criminal convictions tainted by alleged misconduct and brought the Police Department under intense scrutiny.

After the verdicts, defense attorneys alleged that jurors had made up their minds in advance.