New Coronado Trial Update 9-12

September 12, 2007 Update from Rod Coronado Trial

The hearing opened today with the Court redacting admission of parts   of
the videotape of a speech given by Rod Coronado at American
University in January of 2003, on the grounds that they were not
relevant to the case.

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.