Attorney: Rudin murder case was a ‘disaster’

Tuesday, Sept. 23, 2003 | 9:03 a.m.

CARSON CITY -- An attorney representing convicted killer Margaret Rudin told the Nevada Supreme Court on Monday that her District Court trial in Las Vegas was a "disaster" and that Rudin was "not given her day in court."

Craig Creel argued that 27 errors were made at the trial by presiding District Judge Joseph Bonaventure, defense lawyer Michael Amador and others. Any one of them was serious enough to overturn the murder conviction, he argued.

Chris Owens, chief deputy district attorney for Clark County, disputed the claim. He said Bonaventure "bent over backward" for the defense at the trial, which lasted 10 weeks. He said the district attorney's office presented an affidavit from Amador stating that the defense presented "an overwhelming effective defense."

The court took the arguments under submission and will rule later.

Margaret Rudin was convicted of killing her husband, Ronald Rudin, a prominent Las Vegas real estate executive. She was sentenced to prison for life with parole eligibility in 20 years.

Ronald Rudin disappeared in December 1994, and his bones were found in January 1995 near Lake Mohave. He had been shot in the head.

Creel said that two weeks before the trial Amador had not read any of the discovery and had not talked to any of the witnesses. The defense, Creel said, saw prosecution evidence for the first time in the morning of the trial and was forced to cross-examine witnesses that afternoon with no time for analysis or investigation.

In pre-hearing briefs, Creel said Amador was guilty of "ineptitude." He said Bonaventure made repeated "caustic, intemperate and partial remarks" during questioning of jurors.

Creel said the trial turned into the "singular worst example of a criminal trial I have ever seen."

In arguing for the court to uphold the conviction, Owens said there was strong evidence against Rudin and the defense did a reasonable job of representing her.

Justice Bob Rose asked about Amador's handling of the case, saying the defense lawyer "rambled three and a half hours" in the opening statement. He also asked whether Amador had a conflict in having a contract for media rights in the story of Rudin's case.

"Here it seems to me Mr. Amador had considerable conflict," Rose said. "He showed much more interest in getting the media coverage than handling the trial."