Dispute over Sinatra Jr. kidnap film: Court hears challenge to ‘Son of Sam’ law

Thursday, May 27, 1999 | 9:22 a.m.

The 2nd District Court of Appeal did not immediately rule Wednesday on the appeal by Barry Keenan, one of the three kidnappers. Keenan seeks to overturn a court order obtained by Frank Sinatra Jr. that temporarily bars Columbia Pictures from making the payments on a true-crime movie deal.

Sinatra was 19 when he was abducted from Harrah's Casino at Lake Tahoe, Nev., on Dec. 8, 1963. He was released unharmed after a ransom payment. Keenan and accomplices Joseph Amsler and John Irwin were captured and convicted.

The arguments focused on whether the California law barring criminals from profiting from their actions violates the First Amendment and is retroactive punishment. California's 1986 law says that any payments must go into trusts for victims.

The law in question during Wednesday's court hearing arose from the "Son of Sam" murder case in New York. Reports that serial killer David Berkowitz was being offered big money for his story led the New York Legislature to limit book and movie profits for criminals.

The U.S. Supreme Court struck down the original 1977 law in 1991. A revised version was enacted in 1992.

"I think the problem you have here is that the California version is safe from the grounds that the New York version was attacked," Justice Miriam A. Vogel told attorney Stephen F. Rohde, who was arguing that the law is unconstitutionally retroactive.

Rohde said the content of the movie is not known because it hasn't been made yet, and he attacked the law as overly broad and vague.

"Vague statutes which leave people at a guess ... in First Amendment cases is condemned by a long line of Supreme Court cases," Rohde said.

Imposing the law on Keenan, who was convicted more than 20 years before it was enacted, violates prohibitions on retroactive punishment in both the state and U.S. constitutions, Rohde argued.

Sinatra's attorney, Richard B. Specter, spoke briefly, telling the judges: "This law clearly is constitutional."

Keenan is now a successful developer who lives in Mississippi. In a statement he handed to reporters, he asserted that he never sought to profit from the movie and was only interested in setting the record straight after more than 35 years of erroneous stories.

"I'm just exhausted by the whole process," he remarked. "If I had to do it again I would never have gotten involved in this."

Keenan, who blames his actions on drugs and alcohol, served less than five years in prison.

Rohde said he expects a ruling within 90 days, and expressed optimism despite the skepticism of Judge Vogel. The attorney said he has heard that when a court "engages counsel" it is a more useful process than when the justices remain quiet.