Mayor Confident as Case Goes to Jury : Prosecutor Huffman Says Trial Could Have Significant Impact on State Election Laws

His legal and political fate in the hands of the 12 most important voters he has ever faced, Mayor Roger Hedgecock expressed confidence on Thursday that he will be absolved of charges concerning his personal and campaign finances as the jury in his trial began its deliberations.

After 6 1/2 weeks of testimony and closing arguments, the jurors in the mayor’s felony conspiracy and perjury trial began their deliberations early Thursday morning after Superior Court Judge William L. Todd Jr. read the last of nearly 100 instructions concerning points of law and evidence to the six-man, six-woman jury.

Outside the courtroom, Hedgecock, visibly more upbeat than he was during Assistant Dist. Atty. Richard D. Huffman’s caustic closing remarks on Wednesday, said he feels “very good” about his prospects for acquittal.

“It’s in the hands of the jury. There’s nothing more you can do, so I got a good night’s sleep and I’m back at work . . . (doing) the job I was elected to do,” added Hedgecock, who would be removed from office if convicted of a felony. After he left the court Thursday, Hedgecock attended a Metropolitan Transit Development Board meeting and returned to City Hall for other meetings.

Meanwhile, Huffman, saying he feels “like I’m about 20 years younger now” that the case has gone to the jury, described the trial as a “landmark case” that could have a significant impact on state election laws.

“If there’s a conviction, we will make law in this area,” Huffman said. “Whatever the outcome is . . . it will make some significant difference in the enforcement of the Political Reform Act.”

One of the major questions involved in the trial focuses on whether and under what circumstances the services that a political consultant or independent contractor provides to a political candidate should be considered a contribution that must be reported.

Prosecutors have charged Hedgecock with conspiring with Nancy Hoover and J. David (Jerry) Dominelli, principals of the now-bankrupt La Jolla investment firm of J. David & Co., in a scheme to funnel tens of thousands of dollars in illegal contributions to Hedgecock’s 1983 campaign via a political consulting firm owned by Tom Shepard, a close friend of the mayor. Shepard is also charged in the case. The perjury charges facing Hedgecock allege that he intentionally falsified financial disclosure statements to conceal that and other illegal financial aid from Hoover and Dominelli.

The defense, however, has characterized the more than $360,000 that the two former J. David officials invested in Tom Shepard & Associates as a routine business investment designed primarily to help Shepard start his own business, not an indirect and illegal method of underwriting Hedgecock’s mayoral campaign. Hedgecock has conceded that there were errors and omissions on his personal and campaign financial reports, but he calls those errors inadvertent ones caused by his “good-faith effort” to comply with complex regulations.

“The issue of the role of the political consultant . . . (and) these concepts of earmarking (money) and what’s a contribution . . . are all issues that really have never been fully litigated in the courts,” Huffman said. “The outcome here . . . may well set some guidelines for the future.”

The outcome of the trial also “may force San Diego to reconsider” the city’s $250-per-person political contribution limit, Huffman added.

Even an acquittal in the present case, however, will not end the legal problems confronting Hedgecock, who was overwhelmingly reelected to a four-year term in November, seven weeks after his indictment.

Huffman reiterated Thursday that, regardless of the verdict, prosecutors intend to pursue two additional perjury charges filed against Hedgecock after the Sept. 19 indictment that led to the current trial.

“There’s no doubt that what we’re going to do in the rest of the case is going to be influenced by what happens here,” Huffman said. “But our present plans are to proceed with the second case of Mr. Hedgecock.”