Prosecutors say defense leak of Padilla's phone conversations could taint jury

MIAMI (AP) _ Prosecutors on Monday asked the judge in the Jose Padilla terrorism-support case to punish a defense attorney who leaked transcripts of Padilla's intercepted phone conversations, saying

Monday, January 22nd 2007, 5:39 pm

By: News On 6

MIAMI (AP) _ Prosecutors on Monday asked the judge in the Jose Padilla terrorism-support case to punish a defense attorney who leaked transcripts of Padilla's intercepted phone conversations, saying the leak violated a court order and could jeopardize selection of an impartial jury.

``There is no question that the disclosure was calculated and deliberate, with the effect of exposing potential jurors to evidence before it is introduced at trial when both sides will have the opportunity to argue its significance,'' prosecutors said in court papers.

The transcripts were part of a Jan. 4 New York Times story that raised questions about the strength of the case against Padilla. On the transcripts, Padilla is not heard discussing any violent acts or terrorist plots, and many of the conversations seem to be relatively harmless.

U.S. District Judge Marcia Cooke has scheduled a hearing Wednesday on the issue, the latest in a string of complications to arise in the case of the suspected al-Qaida operative.

Padilla, a 36-year-old U.S. citizen and former Chicago gang member, is charged with being part of a North American cell that provided cash, supplies and recruits to Islamic extremists. Originally accused of plotting a radioactive ``dirty bomb'' attack after his 2002 arrest, Padilla was designated an enemy combatant by President Bush and held without criminal charge at a Navy brig for 3 1/2 years.

He was added to an existing Miami terrorism-support case in late 2005 during a legal battle over the president's wartime detention powers. The dirty bomb allegations are not mentioned in the Miami indictment.

Three Miami-based public defenders representing Padilla _ Michael Caruso, Anthony Natale and Orlando do Campo _ acknowledged in court papers that ``one of Jose Padilla's counsel'' provided the transcripts to a Times reporter.

The lawyer responsible was not identified. Padilla is also represented by attorney Andrew Patel of New York, but his name does not appear on the document acknowledging responsibility for the leak.

The seven transcripts were covered by a 2005 order by Cooke prohibiting dissemination of ``sensitive'' evidence. The transcripts are of declassified telephone intercepts on which Padilla's voice is heard that were obtained under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

Prosecutors accused defense lawyers of ``whipping up a media frenzy'' that could taint the pool of prospective jurors, and contend that the disclosure violates state and U.S. bar association rules. Penalties for such violations vary greatly, from jail time in extreme cases to a judicial reprimand.

The defense lawyers said in their own court papers that because the 2005 order had been replaced in 2006, not everyone on Padilla's team understood that the rules regarding sensitive material still applied.

A spokeswoman for The Times declined to comment. None of the four defense lawyers responded to e-mail messages seeking comment about the latest government claims.

The Padilla trial had been scheduled to start Monday but was delayed until April.