Hedgecock Plea Bargain Unravels in San Diego

Efforts to negotiate out-of-court settlements for Mayor Roger Hedgecock’s legal problems appeared dead Tuesday, and Hedgecock is expected to push for a new trial on charges that he conspired to illegally funnel money into his 1983 mayoral campaign.

Hedgecock is scheduled to appear today before Superior Court Judge Barbara Gamer and to name Las Vegas attorney Oscar B. Goodman as his new defense counsel, a move that almost surely will scuttle weeks of intense, private discussions about a possible settlement of the mayor’s criminal and civil woes.

Negotiators were working on a plea bargain to deal with 15 felony conspiracy and perjury counts facing Hedgecock, plus settlement of a $1.2-million civil suit filed against the mayor and several supporters by the state Fair Political Practices Commission.

At one point, the talks included 12 attorneys and several prominent San Diego businessmen. They began shortly after Hedgecock’s first trial ended in a mistrial Feb. 13 when the jury reported itself hopelessly deadlocked 11 to 1 in favor of conviction.

But the discussions stalled last week and all sides said Tuesday that they were ready to throw in the towel.

“There are no negotiations,” said attorney Michael Pancer, who represented Hedgecock during the trial and now wants off the case. “There’s been no bargain and that’s the end of it.”

State FPPC Chairman Dan Stanford and a spokesman for Dist. Atty. Edwin L. Miller both confirmed late Tuesday that no out-of-court settlement was likely.

Hedgecock declined to discuss the apparent failure of plea-bargain talks, but J. Michael McDade, his chief of staff, said:

“I think that a very sincere effort was made by a number of well-intentioned people in the community to put together an arrangement by which this matter can come to an end. That effort apparently has failed and the matter will proceed to trial. The mayor is very comfortable with the decision.”

McDade said that Goodman, Hedgecock’s new lawyer, will likely spurn any further attempts at a plea bargain.

“Roger’s indicated to me that that is his (Goodman’s) attitude, yes,” McDade said. “He’s a trial specialist, not a negotiator.”

Before the breakdown, negotiations had centered on a plan in which Hedgecock would resign as mayor in exchange for dismissal of 14 felony perjury charges. An unusual “trial by transcript” would have been held on the remaining felony conspiracy charge, with the expectation that Hedgecock would be found guilty and the charge reduced to a misdemeanor at some point.

There was also a general agreement that the FPPC would assess Hedgecock a $200,000 fine, but actually collect substantially less.

But McDade said the discussions “didn’t go far enough,” and negotiations snagged. According to sources close to the negotiations, agreement could not be reached on:

- How quickly any felony conviction in the criminal case would be reduced to a misdemeanor. Hedgecock wanted the charge reduced immediately, effectively leaving him without any felony on his record. The district attorney’s position, however, was to keep the felony conviction on the books for at least six months before having it reduced to a misdemeanor.

- The fine to be paid for a out-of-court settlement with the FPPC. Businessmen working on a solution to the civil suit have proposed that Hedgecock pay a $50,000 fine, while FPPC Chairman Stanford reportedly fixed on collecting no less than $100,000.

- What to do with one of Hedgecock’s co-defendants in the civil suit. The FPPC has also sued Peter Q. Davis, president of the Bank of Commerce who was Hedgecock’s 1983 campaign treasurer. Businessmen have proposed that Davis be dropped from the suit and assessed no fine, while Stanford reportedly wants to fine Davis at least $5,000.

McDade said that Hedgecock became angry over some of the discussions, especially talk about how long Hedgecock could be kept out of office after a resignation.

“I think he became very angry the longer this went on with the overtly political nature of the proposals,” McDade said. “It became apparent to him, I think, that the principal goal of some people was not to bring this matter to a close but to try to keep him out of public service forever, or for a substantial period of time that would cause the public support he has to dwindle.”