LOS ANGELES – As the trial of a top fund-raising official on Senator Clinton’s 2000 campaign got under way in federal court here yesterday, the judge hearing the case vowed not to allow the proceedings to become a referendum on Mrs. Clinton, her politics, or her personal life.

“This isn’t a trial about Senator Clinton,” Judge A. Howard Matz said, as lawyers discussed written questionnaires filled out by potential jurors in the case. “Senator Clinton has no stake in this trial as a party or a principal. … She’s not going to be a witness,” the judge said.

David Rosen, 40, who served as Mrs. Clinton’s national finance director, is charged with hiding the true costs of a star-studded fund-raising concert that took place in Los Angeles on August 12, 2000. He faces three counts of causing false reports to be filed with the Federal Election Commission and has pleaded not guilty.

Judge Matz said he plans to stress to jurors that they should set aside their views about the former first lady. “She’s not in the loop in any direct way, and that’s something the jury will be told,” the judge said.

During yesterday’s session, 60 potential jurors were led into the courtroom and given a brief summary of the case. Judge Matz asked the diverse group to fill out a 16-page form about their employment, educational background, and political affiliations. Potential jurors were also asked if they’d seen news stories about the case. “There has been some publicity about it,” the judge said.

Judge Matz said a number of prospective jurors expressed strong views about Mrs. Clinton. For example, one thought the senator’s “lifestyle … is wrong,” the judge said. He said he would not ask jurors open-ended questions about their views to avoid having them blurt out opinions that might taint the jury pool. “It would invite a mistrial,” the judge said.

Judge Matz said he would also strive to keep views about President Clinton out of the case. “They’re both in the position of not being involved here.” Judge Matz was appointed by Mr. Clinton in 1998.

After examining the completed questionnaires and hearing arguments about them yesterday afternoon, Judge Matz excused 10 potential jurors for a variety of reasons, including apparent bias or incompetence. The judge promised to keep the questionnaires secret and ordered a clerk to shred the questionnaires of those who were excused.

Judge Matz declined to strike some jurors who wrote negative things about the senator or the former president, saying he would question those potential jurors today to see if they could be fair.

Court hearings earlier yesterday were occupied by jockeying over what the jury should hear about the unsavory histories of two convicted felons who may prove critical to the outcome of the case.

Lawyers for Mr. Rosen asked Judge Matz to admit evidence about the criminal records of the main financial backer of the gala, Peter Paul, and a key organizer of the event, Aaron Tonken.

Paul, once a Florida attorney, was convicted in 1979 for fraud in connection with a complex scheme involving a coffee deal and the national bank of Cuba. That same year he was convicted of cocaine trafficking in an unrelated case. In 1985, he pleaded guilty to trying to enter America from Canada using the identification of his deceased brother. And earlier this year, Paul pleaded guilty to a federal securities fraud charge stemming from the col lapse of a publicly traded company he ran, Stan Lee Media.

Tonken, a promoter of celebrity charity events, has admitted that most of the supposed fund-raisers he organized never made a dime. He pleaded guilty last year to federal mail and wire fraud charges and is serving a 63-month sentence at a prison north of Los Angeles.

During yesterday’s hearing, Judge Matz was unsparing toward Paul, who was extradited from Brazil to face the stock charge. “He’s a con artist. The fact that he is, is already established,” the judge said. Judge Matz also called Paul “a thoroughly discredited, corrupt individual.”

However, Judge Matz said he didn’t see the relevance of Paul’s and Tonken’s prior crimes to the charge against Mr. Rosen.

“They couldn’t have committed this crime on their own, unless the evidence shows they had some reporting responsibility,” Judge Matz said.

An attorney for Mr. Rosen, Michael Doyen, said Paul used multiple accounts to pay gala expenses as part of an effort to keep his checkered history under wraps.

“The relevance of those prior convictions of Mr. Paul is he concealed them from the sponsors of the event,” Mr. Doyen said. When Paul’s background came to light in the Washington Post a few days after the gala, “it was a political embarrassment,” the defense lawyer said.

Judge Matz said he wouldn’t have expected Paul to “put a badge on his lapel” saying he was a felon, but failing to mention the convictions didn’t amount to concealing them.

After the judge said he was inclined to keep the criminal records out of the case, the prosecution caused some surprise by announcing that it planned to raise Paul’s history during the trial.

Prosecutor Peter Zeidenberg said that when Paul’s tainted past was disclosed, the fear of political fallout gave added impetus to Mr. Rosen’s effort to cover up the costs of the fund-raiser. “We think it drove some of his actions,” Mr. Zeidenberg said.

Mr. Zeidenberg said Paul provided his name and Social Security number to Mrs. Clinton’s campaign, but campaign officials who were supposed to check the backgrounds of major donors slipped up. “They missed the vet,” the prosecutor said.

Judge Matz said he would allow a reference to Paul’s past when Mr. Rosen’s lead lawyer, Paul Mark Sandler, presents his opening statement, which is expected this afternoon. At a court conference earlier this month, Mr. Sandler called Tonken and Paul “liars” and the “scum of the earth.”

While both Paul and Tonken have told The New York Sun they are eager to testify in the case, the government said in court papers filed recently that it does not intend to call either man as a witness.

Judge Matz said he also does not expect Mr. Rosen’s lawyers to call Paul or Tonken as witnesses. Rather, the judge said he expects-and will allow-the defense attorneys to use “an empty chair defense,” where the defendants argue that a party not before the court was responsible for the crime.

The government has asserted that by understating expenses and in-kind donations to the fund-raiser, Mr. Rosen hoped to increase the money Mrs. Clinton’s campaign would receive. The Justice Department has indicated that the investigation into the episode has concluded and no further indictments are expected.

Mrs. Clinton has told the Sun that she expects Mr. Rosen to be acquitted. While Mrs. Clinton is not expected to testify here, one of her close political advisers, Harold Ickes, and a former traveling aide, Kelly Craighead, do appear on a list of possible witnesses.

The indictment against Mr. Rosen drew little attention after it was unsealed in January. However, interest in the case picked up substantially last month after the Sun reported that a New Orleans political operative who is Senator Kennedy’s brother-in-law, Raymond Reggie, acted as a secret FBI informant against Mr. Rosen.