On the eve of Wimbledon, this week's "The Line Judge" looks at the latest twist in the Martina Hingis stalking trial. It is likely to be a hot story over the next two weeks in England. Also, it has been two years since Alexandra Stevenson burst onto the tennis radar by making the Wimbledon semifinals as a qualifier. Likewise, Alexandra's mother Samantha raised eyebrows as potentially another troublesome parent. While Alexandra has yet to equal her result of two years ago, Samantha appears quite capable of topping herself on an ongoing basis.

Courting Controversy?

Just when we thought that we heard the last about the Martina Hingis stalking trial, some surprising revelations occurred this week that may just re-open the case. Chris Calkin, the assistant state attorney who successfully put Hingis's stalker, Dubravko Rajcevic, behind bars this past April, told The Miami Herald last weekend that he is involved in a "personal relationship" with the Hingis. The love- bitten 31-year old attorney elaborated: "I'm willing to spend whatever money I can gather, and whatever time I can set aside from my caseload to be there for her. I'm beyond floored, I'm flabbergasted. I just want Tom Hanks to play me in the movie." The relationship allegedly bloomed the weekend after Rajcevic's sentencing. However, that is not deterring his attorney from filing an appeal in the on the grounds that any non-professional relationship between the prosecutor and Hingis should have been disclosed prior to or during the trial. A spokeswoman for Hingis stated the two have "a friendship" but likewise emphasized it did not begin until after the case.

One thinks by now the British tabloids are already having to wipe away the drool from their mouths over this one. Things should reach a fevered pitch if Calkin, eleven years older than Hingis, makes his anticipated appearance at the All England Club this coming week. There are a lot of questions to be asked: Why did Calkin feel the need to make a public statement about the relationship in the first place? Why would Calkin or Hingis pursue a relationship outside of the courtroom when it does not take much thought to realize that it could jeopardize the outcome of the case? Why bring it up now at arguably the most crucial time of the tennis season and under the harshest light of media scrutiny?

One can only find some wry irony as one reads of Calkin's profession of love and interest in following Hingis around the globe. Add another fifteen years and knock an extra screw loose from this and you have someone not entirely different from the person he put behind bars. How serious this relationship is remains to be seen, and I am sure Hingis will have to answer questions about it this coming fortnight. Overall it just seems that this was not the smartest move by any of the involved parties. Love, they say, is blind - but sometimes it seems to make people stupid.