NEW YORK — A federal jury awarded crime writer and former prosecutor Robert Reuland $30,000 for the humiliation it found he suffered when the Brooklyn district attorney demoted him because of comments he made in a magazine article.

New York magazine had quoted the homicide prosecutor and first-time crime novelist as saying, "Brooklyn is the best place to be a homicide prosecutor. We've got more dead bodies per square inch than anyplace else."

Reuland, whose statement was wrong, was demoted by District Attorney Charles J. Hynes after the magazine came out in February 2001. He sued Hynes, alleging his demotion and a forced resignation four months later violated his right to free speech.

The eight-person jury was asked about Hynes’ motivation for demoting Reuland and whether Reuland’s statement was motivated by desire to address a matter of public concern. Hynes, testifying July 13, had portrayed Reuland as an untrustworthy subordinate who performed unacceptably after he was justifiably demoted.

The jury found on July 14 that the district attorney demoted Reuland because of the article, but it left open the question of whether the demotion violated Reuland's First Amendment rights.

It found that he was not forced to resign because of his statements.

U.S. District Judge John Gleeson said after the July 14 verdict that Reuland’s statement still might deserve First Amendment protection. He said he would examine briefs from both sides and decide whether Reuland’s constitutional rights were violated.

The jury award will not stand if the judge decides Reuland's First Amendment rights were not violated.

The judge said the law was far from clear on the question of what made up protected speech by a government employee.

“This verdict raises an interesting legal question,” he said on July 14. “Deciding which of you is right is not the easiest call in the world.”

Juror Tom Torma, a 59-year-old Long Island park worker, said the jury wanted to compensate Reuland for the humiliation of being demoted to a less prestigious bureau.

"The man just made a flippant statement," Torma said. "I don't think he even realized what he said."

Both sides described the jury's decisions as victories.

"I feel vindicated," Reuland said. "This was a battle not over finances but over constitutional rights."

City attorney Pat Miller said: "The verdict yesterday and today is a victory for Mr. Hynes."

Reuland’s attorney said she would argue that motivation was not essential to First Amendment protection.

“A statement can be on a matter of public concern, and it doesn’t matter what the intent of the speaker is,” attorney Jane Gould said.

The judge had appeared sympathetic to that point of view before the trial, saying in a rejection of a city request to dismiss the lawsuit that statements could contain a blend of public and private concerns and still merit constitutional protection.

Reuland’s first book, Hollowpoint, tells the tale of a bitter and burned-out assistant D.A. and his investigation of a Brooklyn killing. The book earned glowing reviews but had moderate sales.

His new novel, Semiautomatic, contains a thinly fictionalized account of one of his homicide cases: the killing of a Lebanese immigrant bodega owner by two teenagers who were trying to rob him.

Reuland is completing his third book, based on the 1997 police assault on Haitian immigrant Abner Louima. His lawsuit sought unspecified damages.