September 12, 2007 Update from Rod Coronado Trial

Cross-examination of San Diego City Undercover Police Officer Tony Lehr then continued. Defense attorney Tony Serra, having established the day before that the Officer’s report of the San Diego speech was “incomplete and fragmented”, was able to get officer Lehr to admit that the quote he attributed to a woman in the audience, one that is a cornerstone of the case, was actually paraphrased. Despite that admission, the officer repeatedly insisted that he heard the woman ask Rod “how to build a bomb for an action?”

The real bomb dropped was Tony Serra’s introduction of contradictory evidence to Officer Lehr’s sworn testimony. First introduced was the statement of another undercover officer who attended the event, a woman from the San Diego Sheriff’s department, who used significantly different terminology in describing the question to Coronado (saying the woman asked how to make “an incendiary device”, as opposed to a “bomb for an action”). Despite this, Office Lehr stuck to his story that words he heard were “bomb for an action.” Serra then read the actual question posed by the woman, as he introduced the existence of an audio recording of the event heretofore unmentioned. It seems clear that the testimony of this undercover officer of 18 years, who has infiltrated hundreds of San Diego groups, was fabricated. Tony also got Lehr to admit that he followed Rod after he and another person drove away from the event. Officer Lehr was excused for today and will be recalled later.

Prosecution then brought an ATF fire investigator to the stand. Brian Grove was hired by the FBI to test incendiary devices described in the lecture given by Rod at American University, and described in an anonymous pamphlet called “Maximum Destruction not Minimum Damage.” Lengthy testimony about these tests as well video documentations of them informed all about the mechanics of these particular devices. Defense attorney Omar Figueroa cross-examined the witness to determine that his tests did not include tests of the same device that was described by Rod in his speech in San Diego, for which he is being tried.

Prosecution then introduced the entire recording of the American University speech by Rod, personal writings of Rod’s seized from his computer in the raid of his home on February 22, 2006, as well as excerpt from an interview by Ed Bradley with Rod on 60 Minutes.

The final witness for the prosecution was Officer Kelly Stewart from the San Diego Sheriffs Department, who, in an undercover capacity was assigned to monitor Rod’s speech in San Diego on August 1, 2003. Much of Stewart’s testimony completely contradicted the testimony of Officer Lehr, including: where the officers were sitting in the audience, whether the woman who asked the question to Rod was sitting or standing, whether there were multiple police agencies involved, whether Stewart and Lehr had coordinated their investigations of the event, and most significantly, the actual wording of the question, for which Rod is on trial. More contradictions and misrepresentations are expected to come out when Officer Lehr is recalled in the morning.

Court recessed early today in order for Counsel and the Court to work on Jury instructions. The prosecution is expected to rest its case Thursday morning, and there is a chance that the Defense would finish by late in the day on Thursday, which would result in Jury deliberations on Friday. If closing arguments do not finish on Thursday, the case will go to the jury on Monday, Sept. 17.