Extortion Plot During Mayor’s Trial Surfaces

In a bizarre footnote to Mayor Roger Hedgecock’s second conspiracy and perjury trial, a San Diego woman reportedly demanded $50,000 from Hedgecock in exchange for keeping quiet about alleged illegal campaign contributions from “the mob in Mexico.”

Oscar Goodman, Hedgecock’s defense attorney, said Friday he met with the woman twice and informed Superior Court Judge William Todd Jr., who was presiding over the Hedgecock trial, after the first meeting. Because of the extortion attempt, Todd decided to sequester the Hedgecock jury during its deliberations, the judge told jurors after they found the mayor guilty on 13 counts.

Goodman said the woman, whom he declined to identify, made numerous phone calls to Hedgecock’s office during the trial saying she had to discuss something important and urgent. On each occasion, the woman, described by Goodman as about 45 years old and “very nice, well mannered and determined,” left her name and telephone number.

“She said it was a matter of money,” Goodman said. “I said I better meet with her. I didn’t know whether I was being set up or not.”

Goodman said he talked with Hedgecock about the alleged contributions and determined the allegation was unfounded. He said he took the woman seriously, advised Todd of the extortion attempt and the judge recommended that the state attorney general investigate the case.

Steve White, chief assistant attorney general, said his office agreed to investigate with the understanding that it would give the case to the district attorney’s office after the verdict. White described the investigation as “significant.”

Goodman said he met with two lawyers and an investigator from the attorney general’s office before he agreed to a second meeting with the woman. Equipped with a hidden tape recorder, Goodman listened to the woman repeat her demands before telling her he was not interested.

The woman then went to the district attorney’s office and proposed a deal--she would tell investigators about the illegal contributions if they agreed to drop a robbery charge filed against her son, sources said.

After the jury came back with a verdict, the attorney general turned the case over to the San Diego County district attorney’s office, which now does not consider the extortion attempt important enough to look into at this time even though it has the woman’s identity, said Deputy Dist. Atty. Chuck Hayes.

“There have been other things that have been happening in the office that have a higher priority,” Hayes said. “Obviously, the Hedgecock matter and the motions that have been filed are the first priority. That’s what I am involved with right now.”

Hayes said that the case would likely be reassigned to another attorney in the district attorney’s office, perhaps by next week. At that time, a decision will be made on how to proceed with the investigation, Hayes said.

Goodman criticized the district attorney’s office for reacting slowly, both to substantial evidence of jury tampering during Hedgecock’s second trial and to the extortion incident.

“I can’t believe they haven’t arrested her yet,” Goodman said in a telephone interview from his Las Vegas office. “I guess everything that happens in the San Diego criminal justice system is backward. I’ve never seen anything like this in my life. Here they have obstruction of justice, they have tampering with a jury and they have extortion. I don’t understand. I guess the only person they are interested in getting down there is Roger Hedgecock.”

Hayes replied: “Mr. Goodman mentions an attempted extortion. I would prefer to review the facts of the case and do a bit of research to see where it fits to make a determination, as opposed to shooting from the hip.”

Hayes said that the district attorney’s office, which did not cooperate with the woman, does not consider her a risk to flee the county.