Rudin’s lawyer attacks ‘blase’ attitude

Kim Smith

Wednesday, Aug. 22, 2001 | 9:32 a.m.

In a new motion filed Tuesday, Margaret Rudin's defense attorneys use the harshest language yet to demand a new trial with a new judge.

Deputy Public Defender Craig Creel blasts both District Judge Joseph Bonaventure and prosecutors for adopting what he says is a "blase" attitude toward Rudin's rights.

Rudin, 58, was convicted May 1 of first-degree murder in the December 1994 death of her husband, Ronald Rudin, 64.

Bonaventure is scheduled to hear arguments from the attorneys on both sides Friday as to whether Rudin should be granted a new trial. If he denies the motion, Rudin will most likely receive a life sentence on Aug. 31.

Creel argues in his motion there is no way Rudin could have received a fair trial, because her attorney, Michael Amador, was incompetent. Bonaventure continuously harangued Amador in front of the jury, he points out, and both the judge and prosecutors violated numerous ethical and judicial canons.

"Legal, ethical and constitutional wrongdoing falls, like rain, over the entire landscape" of the Rudin trial, Creel writes.

One of Bonaventure's mistakes, Creel maintains, was in denying Rudin's motion for a mistrial -- a motion that was lodged several days into the trial and based upon Amador's performance.

In his latest motion, the defense attorney takes issue with Chief Deputy District Attorney Chris Owens' response to their motion for a new trial.

"The prosecutorial response to every error, large or small, legal or constitutional, is uniform," Creel writes. "Mr. Amador's performance, their own legal maneuvers, and ethical violations galore, bring forth the same response: 'Doesn't matter.'

"We believe it does."

Owens filed a motion last week in which he says Bonaventure did everything he could to ensure Rudin was granted a fair trial.

The prosecutor also refuted Creel's contention that Bonaventure broke the rules by meeting with Rudin privately during the trial. Making sure justice is obtained is far more important, Owens said, than the idea of attorney-client privilege.

Creel says that despite the fact Bonaventure promised Rudin the conversation would remain private, he "irresponsibly" released transcripts of that meeting in retaliation for her motion for a new trial.