Prosecutors Move to Stop Mistrial in Officers’ Case : Courts: They hope papers, witness will sway judge, save corruption proceedings against narcotics lawmen.

With their case on the verge of a mistrial, federal prosecutors on Tuesday produced new documents and a second FBI witness they hope will salvage their corruption case against six Los Angeles County narcotics officers.

The case has floundered since the key prosecution witness, former Sheriff’s Sgt. Robert R. Sobel, testified last week he had made numerous corrections on FBI reports of his interviews with investigators. U.S. District Judge Robert M. Takasugi tentatively declared a mistrial after authorities admitted they could not produce the reports containing Sobel’s original corrections.

But government attorneys said Tuesday they had discovered new handwritten notes that will allow them to reconstruct the documents, which had been discarded by FBI agents.

FBI agent Charles L. Teevan Jr. testified Tuesday that he had destroyed a document containing Sobel’s handwritten corrections after he incorporated the changes in his final report.

Teevan and fellow agent Robert Hightower, who testified last week, contradicted Sobel’s contention that he had made more than 140 changes in the documents the agents prepared in 1989.

“I have a recollection that he made relatively few changes,” Teevan said of his “correction sessions” with Sobel.

Sobel has testified that his revisions included some significant corrections involving alleged wrongdoing by the defendants--five sheriff’s deputies and a Los Angeles police detective.

But Teevan testified that he could only recall minor spelling changes and a clarification Sobel made in referring to the alleged theft of some cellular telephones by deputies.

“I was surprised at the relatively small number of changes,” said Teevan, who added that he had incorporated the changes suggested by Sobel in his final draft and discarded the version, which included the ex-sergeant’s handwritten comments.

Teevan said he saw no need to retain the amended draft of his FBI report, which defense attorneys now maintain is essential to their efforts to discredit Sobel, who has testified that their clients beat drug dealers, skimmed drug money during raids and planted narcotics on suspects.

In tentatively declaring a mistrial Thursday, Takasugi had noted that Sobel’s credibility was central to the case but agreed not to implement his ruling until prosecutors could call the FBI agents as witnesses and file legal arguments against a mistrial. He is expected to make a final ruling today.

In their legal papers, prosecutors said the FBI agents made “an innocent mistake” in destroying the “rough drafts” of their amended reports and told the judge that “to strike Sobel’s testimony and declare a mistrial would be grossly excessive” after the jury had already heard seven weeks of testimony.

Government attorneys also produced a copy of the original draft of the Hightower report, as well as handwritten notes taken by a sheriff’s investigator who took notes of the changes in Hightower’s report and was also present at Teevan’s meeting with Sobel.

The sheriff’s investigator, Deputy Bonnie McCormick, died last year, but prosecutors said the court could still reconstruct the destroyed FBI reports with the help of McCormick’s notes coupled with the handwritten notes taken by the FBI agents themselves.

However, during cross-examination of Teevan, defense attorneys pointed out several contradictory statements Sobel had reportedly made in notes taken by McCormick and those taken by one of the FBI agents.

For example, a sheriff’s document summarizing McCormick’s notes shows Sobel describing defendant Stephen W. Polak, a Los Angeles police detective, at an Inglewood address where two drug dealers claimed the officer had beaten them. But Teevan’s report said Sobel actually placed the sergeant and Polak at a Los Angeles home that was being raided by police about 20 miles away.

“The two versions are diametrically opposed, isn’t that right?” asked defense attorney David Wiechert, who represents Polak.

Teevan agreed.

The federal agent was also asked if he had ever allowed any other witness to review and correct his own FBI report during Teevan’s 19 1/2 years with the government. “No, that’s the only instance that I have done that,” he said.