UNION, S.C. (7/19/95) -- The woman who was expelled from the Susan Smith jury and jailed on a contempt of court charge said Tuesday that her actions were accidental and misunderstood by Judge William Howard.

But legal experts say Howard responded well to an unusual situation in an effort to protect the integrity of the high-profile trial.

Gail Gibson Beam, of Union, was removed from the jury Monday for omitting federal charges of wire fraud from her jury questionnaire. Howard went a step further and jailed the 37-year-old when she told him that her daughter answered the questions.

"I didn't really lie to the court because he didn't directly ask me about it," said Beam, who was released by Howard Tuesday.

She said she had her 13-year-old daughter fill out the questionnaire because she was out of town when its due date arrived. She maintains that her daughter knew nothing of her arrest, saying "Some things you try to keep away from your kids."

And the mother of two did not reveal the charges against her during the court proceedings because she has not been sentenced. Her attorney said she pleaded guilty June 19 and is expected to be sentenced in August. "I felt like I just should have been dismissed," said Beam, who admits she erred in passing the questionnaire to her daughter. "It was a misunderstanding."

In a brief hearing Tuesday outside the jury's presence, Howard set a $25,000 personal recognizance bond for Beam. He also issued a bench warrant before freeing her to ensure that Beam faces trial for criminal contempt of court at a later date.

He could have sentenced her to up to six months in jail or fined her $10,000 without a trial. But the judge said he is seeking a stiffer penalty because the woman seriously endangered the Smith trial.

Many of those who practice law in South Carolina say they have never been confronted with a similar case of contempt and praise the judge's ruling.

"I never jailed anyone for out-and-out lying to me," said former Circuit Judge James McKown. "But I would have."

McKown, who's been practicing law since 1941 and now has a firm in Gaffney, said Howard may have been using Beam as an example to the other jurors.

"A lot of the time you do that to show the others they need to do what they ought to," he said. "You can't let them thumb their noses at you."

Jim Stephen, another retired circuit judge who still holds court, said Howard "vigorously" enforced order in his court against a "blatant lie."

Stephen added that notorious cases such as Smith's tend to attract people willing to perjure themselves to get onto the jury.

"Some will want it. Some will do anything to get it, "he said, citing the O.J. Simpson case as one example.

Beam said she had no intention of serving on the jury because she opposes the death penalty. Defense lawyers were able to have her seated by showing that she would support capital punishment in some instances.

Dick Harpootlian, a former prosecutor who now has a private practice in Columbia, believes Beam may have been genuinely confused by the line of questioning concerning criminal records. But, he said, that shouldn't excuse her from the judge's order.

"No matter what her intelligence level is, she's charged with answering the question," said Harpootlian.

Beam's lawyer, Thomas Mobley, who was appointed by Howard Tuesday, said his client failed to answer the questionnaire correctly because it was completed before she filed her plea on federal charges.

Mobley, who represented Beam in federal court, said she did not speak up in court because she believed her sentence for the wire fraud crimes would be small enough to keep her from being disqualified.

[Home] [Latest] [Nine Days in Union] [Photos] [Staff] [About]