Judge Cites Iran-Contra Figure’s ‘Skewed Attitude’ : North Motion to Dismiss Charges Denied

WASHINGTON — The judge in the Iran-Contra case, declaring that Oliver L. North has “a skewed attitude toward our form of constitutional government,” Thursday bluntly rejected North’s contention that he had “an absolute right to lie,” destroy documents and obstruct investigators while he was a White House aide.

Noting that this is “a country governed by the rule of law,” U.S. District Judge Gerhard A. Gesell said that nothing in the Constitution or federal statutes “warrants this cynical approach” by North to have six criminal counts against him dismissed.

“Certainly he gains no special status under the law because he held a high office of public trust or because he knew top secrets,” the judge wrote in denying North’s motion. “He has only the rights of an ordinary citizen.”

Four Indicted in March

North, a retired Marine lieutenant colonel, was indicted in March with retired Rear Adm. John M. Poindexter and two others on conspiracy, theft and cover-up charges in the Iran-Contra scandal.

North and Poindexter, his superior at the National Security Council, were accused of secretly supporting Nicaragua’s rebels with profits from U.S. arms sales to Iran. They also were charged with obstructing Congress and making false statements to cover up their alleged conspiracy to defraud the United States.

Reviewing North’s legal arguments with disdain, Gesell noted that he “urges that no government official, including even the attorney general when acting on behalf of the President, was authorized to ask him questions regarding his involvement in Iran-Contra matters while he was employed at the President’s National Security Council.”

‘Reaching Even Further’

Gesell further related North’s contention “that he had the absolute right to lie, to obstruct such inquiries and to remove or destroy official NSC records because he had not been warned that if he did so he might be indicted.”

The judge said: “Reaching even further, he asks the court to hold that the federal government cannot function in harmony with its constitutional obligations if officials in positions of high responsibility like himself are required to be candid and truthful when dealing with each other in matters of grave consequence to the nation.

“Although he makes this argument most forcefully and explicitly with regard to congressional inquiries, its substance even pervades his motions to dismiss the counts relating to his conduct in the presidential inquiry into his activities.”

‘Not Give Judicial Approval’

Recounting that North was accused of covering up wrongdoing when he was questioned by then-Atty. Gen. Edwin Meese III on Nov. 23, 1986, at the direction of President Reagan, Gesell said: “The court will not give judicial approval to the suggestion that he (North) was free in these circumstances to place his personal interests or objections to national policy ahead of the public trust he had accepted.”

The trial, originally scheduled to begin Sept. 20, was postponed by Gesell in August and is not expected to start until next year.

Meanwhile, it was rumored in Washington that Reagan was about to issue North a pardon. A senior White House official denied that any such step was in the works, saying that “there has been no movement on that issue whatsoever.”