PROSECUTORS FACE PAYBACKS AFTER ELECTIONS : BACKING THE WRONG CANDIDATE FOR DA CAN DAMAGE CAREERS.

Byline: Jeannette DeSantis and Janet Gilmore Daily News Staff Writers

As voters headed to the polls last week, prosecutor Stephen L. Cooley hosted an election night party at his Toluca Lake home, entertaining volunteers who joined him in supporting John Lynch for district attorney.

Cooley, head of the district attorney's San Fernando branch, had contributed to Lynch's campaign with money and time. And, with the aroma of homemade chili in the air, he talked openly with guests about the need to replace his boss, Gil Garcetti.

In so doing, Cooley likely altered his own future.

``It is common after any election that changes are made,'' said Cooley, 49, an outspoken critic of Garcetti. ``And if I were a betting man, I would bet that meant me - either way.''

Which is precisely why Garcetti and Lynch aren't the only ones in the DA's Office anxious to have the race decided.

Even Friday, with more than 100,000 absentee ballots still to be tallied, the narrowing split between Garcetti and Lynch left the top spot - and, potentially, the fates of prosecutors who allied behind them - up in the air.

Will heads roll? For his part, Lynch says no.

``No one should be concerned that I'm going to be seeking vengeance for people who supported Mr. Garcetti,'' Lynch said. ``I can't afford to have this thing dividing the office.''

Garcetti, the incumbent, could not be reached. His campaign manager said the DA would make no comment on the election or any other issue until today, at the earliest.

But veteran prosecutors inside the Los Angeles District Attorney's Office are well aware of the prospects for political retaliation. They have almost come to expect it.

The stories stretch back numerous administrations, with losing district attorney candidates and their supporters passed over for promotions, moved to less prestigious positions or sidelined to offices far away from home in what has become known as ``freeway therapy.''

A deputy district attorney who fervently backed the opponent of then-candidate Evelle Younger back in the 1960s saw immediate consequences when Younger was elected DA.

The day after the election, prosecutor Sterling ``Ernie'' Norris recalls, Younger ``walked in and said, `You're fired.' ''

Though an extreme example, prosecutors recall instances under virtually every administration in the last few decades in which DAs retaliated against political opponents or former allies who fell from grace and thus became political threats.

Kevin Greber, who has been with the District Attorney's Office almost six years, had heard the stories and was warned that his actions one Saturday last year would come back to haunt his career.

During an office seminar in December, Greber sharply questioned Garcetti about $43,000 in bonuses he gave to the lead prosecutors in the O.J. Simpson criminal trial.

``I asked him, wasn't he prepared to admit it was a mistake, and I said he owed us an apology,'' Greber said.

A few weeks later, Greber learned the office was conducting an internal investigation into allegations that he tried to talk himself out of a traffic ticket with an LAPD officer. He was suspended for five days, passed over for promotion and transferred from Long Beach to Torrance.

``As long as he's in power, my career has a permanent black mark and my chances for advancement and promotions are nil,'' said Greber. ``Would I do it again? I'm not sure.''

At the other end of the political spectrum is Malcolm Jordan, a veteran prosecutor who ran against Garcetti in the primary but actively supported the incumbent in the general election.

Years ago, Jordan filed a civil service complaint claiming that then-District Attorney Ira Reiner and his top administrators - including Lynch - passed him over for promotion in 1990 as a political payback.

This summer a state appeals court concurred, ruling that Lynch unfairly gave Jordan a low score during the promotion review. The court noted an earlier Civil Service Commission finding that ``Ira Reiner had a history of politically discriminatory actions as district attorney, Lynch was involved in these practices.''

The court went on to point out apparent retaliatory actions against Norris, ``Twilight Zone'' prosecutor Lea D'Agostino, and others who challenged Reiner or supported Reiner's challengers.

Such allegations also were made against other former DAs including Robert Philibosian, who demoted Garcetti from his staff position.

James Bozajian, a Van Nuys prosecutor and president of the Association of Deputy District Attorneys, noted that concerns about retaliation do seem more acute this political season.

``Lots of people are uneasy about it,'' he said. ``A lot of (deputy) district attorneys expressed themselves in this election.''

One veteran prosecutor, Dinko Bozanich, a fervent Lynch supporter, said he is unconcerned with such matters and believes his hard work and reputation as a trial attorney will insulate him.

Bozanich said that he questioned Garcetti privately about the Simpson bonus issue. Then, frustrated with the results, he went public with letters to county officials and the media.

``I've become sort of Mr. Garcetti's personal gadfly,'' he said. ``At the risk of appearing to be an egomaniac, I would welcome welcome Mr. Garcetti to try to take action against me. I'll put my record against anyone in this office.''

Cooley himself has become a poster boy for what can happen if one plays office politics. The buzz in the Van Nuys and San Fernando branches centers on what will become of the veteran prosecutor.

Most are sure that if Lynch wins, Cooley will likely join the new leadership downtown. Those same people are just as sure that Cooley could likely end up in a less-than-desirable position if Garcetti wins and focuses on those in his office who were his harshest critics.

Cooley was once friendly with Garcetti.

He was promoted to head San Fernando in 1993 from the Antelope Valley branch soon after Garcetti was elected. ``I had been a supporter of his at that time,'' Cooley said.

Like most deputy DAs, Cooley said he became disillusioned when his office lost the O.J. Simpson case. And when Garcetti gave bonuses to the prosecutors handling the case, that disillusion became disappointment.

He drew a line in the sand in September 1995, when Cooley learned of allegations that Garcetti played a role in a case involving the grandson of a campaign contributor.

``Gil acted inappropriately in the case,'' Cooley said. ``That was a major factor for me in supporting Lynch.''

Garcetti denied any wrongdoing in the case - in which the grandson averted a potential life prison term in a ``three strikes'' case - and the state Attorney General's Office declined to pursue the matter.

Later, Cooley took it upon himself to write the state Attorney General's Office to request that the investigation into the allegations against his boss be reopened.

In letters to George Williamson, the chief assistant attorney general, Cooley wrote, ``When the chief law enforcement official of the largest county in the state engages in conduct which, if true, could constitute a criminal conspiracy to obstruct justice, it merits a thorough investigation.''

The matter is unresolved, Cooley said.

``We are in the truth business here,'' Cooley said. ``Right now this office is in trouble but it could be easily fixed without Garcetti. The young lawyers here need a better example at the top.''

When asked about the uncertainty of his own future because of the close race, Cooley remains undaunted.

``I know that wherever I go, I will make my own happiness,'' he said.

CAPTION(S):

Photo

PHOTO Stephen L. Cooley

Campaigned against his boss