Late last spring a New York publisher issued a new book by Texas-based writer Carlton Stowers, a respected, versatile author whose works have included a true crime book about a murder case in Waco that won a coveted Edgar Award from the Mystery Writers of America in 1987.

Open Secrets detailed the investigation that led to a final closure in the case of the murder of Rozanne Gailiunas in Richardson, Texas, in 1983, a seemingly senseless murder that remained unsolved for years. It was not until 1987 that police finally got a break when a woman seeking a reward for the conviction of Rozanne's killer came forward and identified the perpetrator. The person responsible for the savage killing, Carol Garland said, was her younger sister, Joy Davis Aylor.

In a matter of weeks after Carol came forward, the tiny Richardson Police Department's investigatory team, under the direction of then Sgt. Morris "Mo" McGowan, unravelled an incredibly tangled chain involving hit men, middle men, greedy men, and bunglers. By the time the investigation was complete, almost a dozen people, including Joy and Carol, were charged with various felonies ranging from capital murder to harboring a fugitive.

Stowers's book, like a made-for-tv miniseries in January 1993 that also dealt with the case, was an heroic tale of how McGowan struggled against tremendous odds to break a case that his colleagues felt was unsolvable. It gave details of McGowan's innermost thoughts during the long investigatory period and detailed how various leads were developed and followed through. The fact that this story was being told was somewhat remarkable because such details had never before been made public. McGowan himself rebuffed requests from other journalists -- myself included -- to ferret out these facts, turning aside any penetrating questions by replying that he could not reveal that information until after everyone involved had been tried. And that, he added, probably would not happen for months if not years in the future.

Then in late July, virtually on the eve of Joy's trial for the murder of Rozanne, the secret of Stowers's inside knowledge was made public. Stowers, it was learned, paid McGowan for exclusive access to the details. And he paid him well. During Joy's trial a few days later, McGowan admitted pocketing $109,000 from the deal. And more apparently was to come because Stowers also promised to deliver half the royalties from his book.

Far from being a recent development, the practice known in the trade as "checkbook journalism" has been around since the earliest days of reportage. It leaped into modern consciousness during the William Kenendy Smith rape trial in Florida and, more recently, during the preliminary hearing for O.J. Simpson, when it was revealed that several prosecution witnesses had fattened their bank accounts by selling their stories to the tabloid press. However, the Texas incident elevated the exercise to a new level.

For one thing, the amount of money was extraordinary. But the really phenomenal thing about the McGowan/Stowers deal was the fact that the seller of confidential information was not a peripherial witness whose testimony probably would not be crucial to determining the defendant's guilt or innocence but the chief investigator in an unresolved case. Four of the persons charged as a result of McGowan's detection have yet to be tried. And one of the three (four if Joy is included) who have been tried and found guilty in state courts were convicted after McGowan testified. In one case, that of the hit man, Andy Hopper, McGowan was the princiapl witness and it was largely his testimony that led to a conviction.

Although Judge Pat McDowell ruled during Joy Aylor's trial that McGowan did not act illegally by entering into his contract with Stowers, the full ramifications of the former cop's actions will not be known until the cases weave through the appeals courts. In the meantime, several issues remain.

From the perspective of the attorneys who defended Hopper -- Larry Mitchell and Peter Lesser -- there is the question of how much, if any, influence the contract had on McGowan's development of the case against their client. Negotiations leading to the McGowan/Stowers contract apparently began even before Hopper was arrested. This, Lesser said, put McGowan's initial interrogation of Hopper in an entirely new light. In particular, Lesser referred to an exchange that took place between McGowan and his boss, a Captain Golden.

According to a transcript of the interrogation reluctantly given to the defense by Chapman after Hopper's trial was well under way, Golden summoned McGowan from the interrogation room after Hopper repeatedly asked for an attorney, requests that were either refused or ignored. Why was McGowan persisting in the interrogation, Golden wanted to know, considering Hoppers' repeated requests for a lawyer. "He could drop to his knees and confess all day long, but we ain't going nowhere now," Golden said.

"I'm going after information," McGowan replied ... "Right now I want the information."

Why did he want "information?" Lesser asked. Was it for the investigation or because it would make better detail for the forthcoming book in which he had a financial interest?

For Mulder, who tried to get McDowell to declare a mistrial in Joy's case because of the incident, the question is how the contract may have effected all the cases since McGowan interviewed almost every witness involved and his findings shaped the district attorney office's presentations.

During his closing arguments in Joy's trial, Mulder claimed that Stowers's book (largely a recitation of events as viewed by McGowan) served as a "blueprint" for prosecution witnesses to help them coordinate their stories.

Lesser and Mitchell used knowledge of the contract to ask the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals to abate their appeal of Hopper's conviction and allow them to petition McDowell to hold a fact-finding hearing on the subject. By taking this action, they sought to force a proceeding in which they could learn the precise details of the agreement in an attempt to determine if the contract might be grounds for another point in their appeal.

The appeals court subsequently denied the request "without prejudice," a ruling which went unexplained by the court and continues to puzzle Mitchell and Lesser since "without prejudice" is a term more commonly used in civil cases.

And, despite McDowell's ruling regarding the legality of McGowan's actions, there is the question of ethics. McGowan apparently knew what he was doing was questionable since

he admitted under cross-examination by Mulder that he kept the existence of the contract secret from his superiors and from prosecutors, although he claimed he would have told them about the deal if they had asked. By the same token, his name was not listed among the credits in the tv movie, "Telling Secrets," aired on ABC in January 1993, starring Sybil Shepherd and Ken Olin, which indicates an attempt to hide his participation.

In testimony during Joy's trial, McGowan denied taking part in negotiations ith Stowers, claiming the details were worked out by a lawyer friend of his to whom he had given the power of attorney. Mulder saw this as another attempt at deception, pointing out that McGowan could then take the stand and deny negotiating and signing a contract.

McGowan also tried to soften the impact that knowlegde of the deal might have on Joy's jury by denying that he planned to keep the money. He testified that he "intended" to put the money into a trust fund to help pay for the college education of three children directly affected by the crime: the murder victim's niece and nephew as well as the murder victim's son. What he did not tell the jury was that Rozanne's son is being brought up by his father, who was estranged from Rozanne at the time of the murder, and who, as a prominent kidney specialist probably brings in close to a half million dollars a year.

There is a question, too, about how the incident will effect Stowers. While apparently legally blameless, there is the question of journalistic ethics. In his testimony, McGowan, said he had been assured by Stowers, possibly contracturally, that "he would write it as I told him."

Finally, on a broader scale, the incident brings into question what, if anything, can be done to prevent sources in other cases from talking to writers before a criminal case can be resolved.

Following the revelations in the O.J. Simpson case, the speaker of the California assembly, Willie Brown, introduced proposed legislation which would make it illegal for a witness to sell information to the media until a year after trial. But the propsoed new law deals only with witnesses, not principals involved in a case. But even if the proposal is approved and signed into law, it still faces a major challenge from the appeals courts, which would have to be mindful of the U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down New York's Son of Sam law on grounds that restricting an individual's speech was a violation of the First Amendment.