But prosecutors insist that the reluctance of Beverly Heard won’t hurt their case on allegations of sexual misconduct and obstruction of justice. By the end of the first day in the courtroom, just 1 juror is selected.
The woman who triggered the sexual misconduct charges against U.S. Rep. Mel Reynolds reaffirmed Wednesday that she would refuse to testify at the trial, but if forced to answer questions would deny she had sex with the congressman.
The revelation from Beverly Heard, which came before jury selection began in the courtroom of Cook County Circuit Judge Fred Suria Jr., sparked a barrage of arguments from attorneys about its legal significance-the defense said it gutted some of the charges against Reynolds, while the prosecution said it didn’t matter.
That and other developments signaled that the trial of Reynolds and co-defendant Eddie McIntyre, a city Water Department worker accused of obstructing justice, will travel a bumpy road, pocked with numerous delays for legal challenges and questioning of witnesses outside the jury’s presence.
Only one day after Suria had estimated the trial could end in three weeks, the judge told prospective jurors it could take up to five weeks to complete.
Jury selection, which Suria had once optimistically suggested could be completed in a day, might instead take three days.
A panel of 85 prospective jurors brought in Wednesday was exhausted with only one juror being selected-an African-American woman from Chicago’s South Side who works three days a week taking care of a neighborhood woman.
A new panel will be be brought to Suria’s courtroom on Thursday morning to resume the process of selecting 12 jurors.
Before that tenuous task began Wednesday, there were several other major developments in the case, in addition to Heard’s reluctance to testify.
First Assistant State’s Atty. Andrea Zopp told Suria that the state was dropping four counts of aggravated criminal sexual abuse against Reynolds, charges that involved allegations of fondling.
Reynolds still faces two counts of solicitation of child pornography, three counts of criminal sexual abuse that involve sexual intercourse, and four counts of obstruction of justice. McIntyre, 38, faces two counts of obstruction of justice.
Zopp and co-prosecutor Colleen Hyland also disclosed that they will seek to show jurors photographs of nude women, pictures they contend Reynolds kept in his South Side congressional office.
The photographs, some of which allegedly were sent to Reynolds through a post office box, were turned over to prosecutors by Sara Rodriguez, a former Reynolds aide, who has told authorities she received them from Reynolds’ wife.
The prosecutors said the photos would be used to buttress the pornography charges, which arise from Reynolds’ alleged comments during a tape-recorded conversation with Heard, the former campaign worker who first claimed she had sex with the congressman at age 16, and later recanted.
It is during those conversations that Reynolds is alleged to have asked for lewd pictures of a 15-year-old girl named “Teresa,” who was invented by authorities for purposes of the phone call to see what Reynolds would say.
In court, defense attorney Sam Adam read a passage from the transcript of the tapes in which Reynolds allegedly asks Heard to buy a camera and take pictures of the 15-year-old girl exposing her panties and pubic hair.
Adam sharply criticized the prosecution for bringing charges based on a girl who “was never in existence, never created by God, but only in the imagination of Beverly Heard.”
Zopp argued that the existence of the girl did not matter and that Reynolds’ possession of nude photographs of other women proved he really did want Heard to help him obtain similar photographs of a 15-year-old.
“This evidence (the photographs of other women) is clearly relevant to what the defendant meant when he said those words to Beverly Heard,” Zopp said.
Suria said he would not make any rulings until the prosecution actually sought to introduce the photographs during the trial, ensuring the lawyers will argue their positions again.
About an hour before the case was called, a smiling Reynolds walked hand-in-hand with his wife, Marisol, into the Criminal Courts Building, 2600 S. California Ave.
As he passed through metal detectors, Reynolds cracked that he should thank Cook County State’s Atty. Jack O’Malley “for his hospitality.”
eynolds, 43, a second-term Illinois Democrat, continued his seemingly relaxed disposition in court, laughing at an occasional humorous aside by Judge Suria.
Adam, however, was deadly serious in his reaction to the announcement by Heard’s lawyer, Eric Dunham, that his client would not testify.
Adam contended that without Heard’s testimony, the prosecution would be unable to air the tape-recorded telephone conversations between Heard and Reynolds. And, without Heard’s testimony or the tapes, Adam contended, there was little evidence against Reynolds.
Zopp countered that until Heard took the stand, no final decisions could be made on any evidence. She also argued vigorously that Heard’s testimony was not required before the tapes could be played.
“A defendant has a right to cross-examine evidence coming in against him, and you cannot cross-examine a tape,” Adam told reporters during a recess. “This really changes the whole complexion of the case.”
Heard’s stance on testifying was initially disclosed in court Wednesday when Adam read a letter sent by Dunham to defense and prosecution attorneys. Dunham wrote that “after much soul-searching,” his client, now 19, had decided she would not testify.
In June 1994, Heard accused Reynolds of having sex with her beginning in June 1992 when she was 16 and continuing until September 1993 when she was 17, sometimes as often as two or three times a week.
Dunham said she was now refusing to testify because she would open herself up to perjury charges if she contradicted her grand jury testimony in which she accused Reynolds.
Prosecutors declined to say whether they would seek to grant immunity to Heard if she takes the stand and refuses to answer questions. If she is given immunity, the judge could hold Heard in contempt of court and send her to jail for continuing to remain silent.
Even then, she might not utter a word.
“You can’t put a blowtorch to her head and say, `Testify or you burn to death,’ ” Adam said.
Though unwilling to take the stand, Heard haltingly answered reporters’ questions as she left the courthouse, saying she has been confused and frightened by the course of events and wants to put the case behind her. When asked what verdict she hoped for, she said, “innocent, because it never happened.”
“I don’t have any animosity toward the congressman,” she said.
Zopp and Hyland also told Suria they intended to offer evidence related to a second indictment against Reynolds charging obstruction of justice for his alleged involvement in the creation of affidavits filed in the sexual misconduct case, as well as for orchestrating Heard’s Dec. 28, 1994, recantation of her sex charges.
Adam noted that Reginald Turner, one of Heard’s former attorneys, had been indicted on charges of forgery, perjury and obstruction of justice and probably would not testify for the state.
In addition, Adam contended that Reynolds could not be held responsible for Turner’s conduct. “How can they connnect it to Reynolds?” Adam declared. “How is he responsible for that? Only by the thinnest gossamer type of inference.”
Hyland noted that from the days of Moses “to the present time” it has been illegal to suppress evidence or obstruct justice. “Moses declared, `Cursed be he that removeth his neighbor’s landmark,’ ” Hyland said.
Not to be outdone, Adam stood up to quote “one of my favorite authors,” Greek philosopher Socrates: “I do not know and I cannot tell the name of my accusers and I am forced to fight with shadows where there is no one there.”
“That’s what’s happening with Mel Reynolds,” Adams snapped.
After the legal wrangling was over, the selection of jurors moved slowly. More than 40 people were questioned and each said they had read about or heard media accounts of the case.
Seven of those were excused immediately when they said they could not give Reynolds a fair trial based on what they knew.
Other prospective jurors were excused after citing a variety of reasons ranging from medical conditions to job or child-care difficulties.
One woman was excused because she was only a month away from giving birth.
“We do many things in this courtroom,” Suria joked. “But delivering children is not one of them.”
At day’s end, when one juror had been selected and 40 other prospective jurors had not been questioned individually, Suria asked how many would be willing to return Thursday for continued selection.
Only one man raised his hand.
The remainder were excused and Suria ordered a new group of prospective jurors to be brought to his courtroom on Thursday.
