In arguments before the decision, Michael R. Bromwich, a lawyer for Walsh, said that publicity, while extensive, has often favored the defendants.

He said "Colonel North is on the lecture circuit and receives $20,000 a lecture. He certainly doesn't carry a stigma that would be prejudicial in this case."

Any evidence of pre-trial prejudice, he said, should be tested "against real people who step into the jury box."

And he added, "We don't think any political considerations ought to enter into fixing a trial date."

Beckler argued that the Iran-Contra affair will play a major role in the presidential campaign, especially as questions are raised about Vice President George Bush's role.

"It would be a travesty to have this case proceed under that glare and spotlight," he said.

North, Poindexter, and two businessmen--Richard Secord and Albert Hakim--are charged in a 23-count indictment with conspiring to illegally divert profits from sale of arms to Iran to the Nicaraguan Contra rebels. Other counts involve obstruction of presidential and congressional investigations of the Iran-Contra affair, and theft of U.S. government property.

Beckler said the Iran-Contra case, unlike Watergate, saw the public exposed to massive amounts of information from Congress and the Reagan administration that would not be admissible at trial.

Gesell assured Beckler, "If these men are convicted, they're not going to be convicted by pre-trial publicity. That can be assured."