Doing It All : Hedgecock Is Cast in Role of Talk-Show Host Talking About Himself

When radio listeners tuned in to KSDO Thursday morning, they heard a somewhat breathless announcement that there shortly would be a news flash about the California Supreme Court’s decision on former Mayor Roger Hedgecock’s appeal of his 13-count felony conviction on campaign-law violations.

What made the announcement so unusual was the person who made it: Roger Hedgecock, ex-mayor, radio talk-show host and namesake of The People Vs. Roger Hedgecock.

As illustrated by that blurring of the line between reporting the news and being the news, Thursday’s “Roger Hedgecock Show” was unorthodox even by the admittedly loose standards of talk-show radio.

Throughout the morning, Hedgecock acted as master of ceremonies for a spirited dialogue on his case, interviewing his own attorney at length about the meaning of the high court’s decision amid accepting congratulatory calls from listeners and fielding on-air questions from a studio full of news reporters.

“I was fish and fowl at the same time, and it was a pretty strange combination,” Hedgecock joked later. “I was just showing you my versatility.”

Though the Supreme Court’s ruling dominated the four-hour program, Hedgecock’s other on-air duties and normal radio talk-show fare occasionally intruded.

Even as he promised listeners that they would get the news about his 5-year-old case “live--at the same time I do,” Hedgecock also was chatting with viewers and guests on subjects as disparate as racism, voting patterns and underwater photography. Moments before the 9:30 a.m. ruling, Hedgecock calmly noted that it was time to take a break for “traffic, news and weather.”

When the subsequent news bulletin reported that the Supreme Court had reversed the 4th District Court of Appeal, without explaining precisely what that meant, Hedgecock chuckled softly as he told listeners, “I’m probably as perplexed as you are as to what that means.”

Hoping to clear the confusion, Hedgecock launched into a lengthy telephone interview with his attorney, Charles Sevilla, struggling to remain somewhat objective about the topic.

“There’s some confusion here in the newsroom as to what the Supreme Court ruling actually is in my case,” Hedgecock said. “It didn’t strike anybody around here as something we could understand. A lot of legal terms were used. So we’ll turn now to my legal expert, Chuck Sevilla, who joins us now on the KSDO news line. . . . What’s up, Chuck?”

Sevilla, who was being handed faxed pages of the court decision even as he interpreted it for his client’s listeners, told talk-show host Hedgecock what citizen Hedgecock wanted to hear: that he had been “unconvicted” of 12 felony perjury counts and that the remaining conspiracy count was “hanging by a thread” pending a court hearing.

As Sevilla detailed the ruling, Hedgecock interrupted to remind him of plans for an afternoon news conference--a matter the two proceeded to discuss as casually as two people arranging a lunch.

“Let’s shoot for 2 (p.m.),” Hedgecock told Sevilla.

Calling the ruling “a pretty good victory on the road to getting this straightened out,” Hedgecock said: “My first thought was relief that we’re finally getting somewhere. From my standpoint, finally--five years later.”

While he predicted vindication on the remaining conspiracy count, Hedgecock kept his characteristic cockiness in check during most of the 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. show. One of the few moments when his temper flared came when a newspaper reporter suggested that the ruling might be interpreted as simply an evasion of justice due to legal technicalities.

“We’re not talking about technicalities,” Hedgecock angrily shot back. “Directing a jury verdict is not a technicality--it’s a kangaroo court. Tampering with the jury, pressuring the jury with booze and stories . . . is not a technicality.”

Then, it was time to get back to those phone-in lines to accept congratulations and wishes of good luck from, among others, Rosie in Chula Vista, Chris and “Dan on his car phone.” Typical of most callers, Dan simply said, “I hope this is the end of it for you.”

By day’s end, Hedgecock summarized his dual role as news maker and news commentator as “pretty peculiar, even for me.”

“Here’s the subject of the hot, breaking news that shoved even the Middle East aside sitting in a studio, talking about underwater photography,” Hedgecock said. “And then talking about your own case in what was virtually an on-air news conference. It was tough to know which side of the microphone I was on.”

CHRONOLOGY OF THE LEGAL WOES OF FORMER MAYOR ROGER HEDGECOCK * Feb. 9, 1984: The J. David & Co. investment firm is sued by an investor who claims that the owner, J. David (Jerry) Dominelli failed to return a $1.2 million deposit. Hedgecock friend Nancy Hoover, who was Dominelli’s business aide and girlfriend as well as a former mayor of Del Mar, provides the link for what prosecutors alleged was a conspiracy to illegally funnel thousands of dollars into Hedgecock’s 1983 mayoral campaign. * Feb. 27, 1984: The state’s Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) begins an investigation into Hedgecock’s finances. * April 9, 1984: The D.A. opens a criminal investigation. * May 22, 1984: District Atty. Edwin Miller files a civil suit against Hedgecock, political consultant Tom Shepard and others, claiming the mayor and his advisers concealed as much as $357,000 in “laundered” campaign contributions from the now bankrupt J. David & Co. and Hoover. * June 5, 1984: Hedgecock wins the mayoral primary but is forced into a November runoff. * June 30, 1984: The first grand jury to look into Hedgecock’s finances is dismantled without returning an indictment. * July 30, 1984: A second grand jury begins hearing the first of 82 witnesses. * Sept. 19, 1984: The grand jury indicts Hedgecock, Hoover, Shepard and Dominelli on felony conspiracy and perjury charges alleging that they schemed to circumvent city campaign donation limits. * Sept. 28, 1984: Hedgecock and three co-defendants plead not guilty to all charges. * Oct. 15, 1984: The FPPC files a $1.2 million suit against Hedgecock, Shepard, Hoover, Dominelli, and others, citing more than 450 violations of the city’s campaign laws. The FPPC asks for for nearly $1 million in penalties from Hedgecock alone. * Nov. 6, 1984: Hedgecock overwhelmingly wins reelection and proclaims: “One down and one to go.”

* Nov. 15, 1984: The grand jury again indicts Hedgecock, charging him with two more counts of perjury because he did not report a $3,000 payment from Dominelli in Dec. 1981. * Dec. 3, 1984: Opening arguments begin in the first Hedgecock trial. * Jan. 22, 1985: Hedgecock takes the stand, emphatically denying he had any knowledge of the so-called conspiracy and saying the perjury charges stemmed from “good-faith” mistakes. * Feb. 13, 1985: Jury votes 11 to 1 for conviction on all counts. Superior Court Judge William L. Todd Jr. declares a mistrial and prosecutor Richard D. Huffman declares that the D.A. will retry the case. * Feb. 20, 1985: The D.A. files two additional felony perjury charges and a misdemeanor conflict of interest charge against Hedgecock. * Aug. 20, 1985: Opening arguments begin in the retrial. * Oct. 9, 1985: Hedgecock is convicted on 13 felony conspiracy and perjury counts. * Oct. 15, 1985: A lawyer representing one of the jurors delivers to Hedgecock atty. Oscar Goodman and Dist. Atty. Edwin Miller a letter detailing a series of alleged incidents in which bailiff Al Burroughs Jr. purportedly talked with jurors about the case in violation of court rules. A sworn statement by another juror corroborated some of the details. * Dec. 10, 1985: Hedgecock resigns as mayor and is sentenced to one year in jail, shortly after a ruling by Todd that jury-tampering allegations did not affect the Oct. 9 verdict nor did they entitle Hedgecock to a new trial. * April 25, 1988: The San Diego-based 4th District Court of Appeal orders a lower court by a 2 to 1 vote to hold a hearing on whether Hedgecock’s conviction should be overturned because of the jury-tampering allegations. * Aug. 19, 1988: The California Supreme Court agrees to review Hedgecock’s conviction. * June 12, 1990: After a backlog of appeals which delayed the hearing of the case for nearly two years, the California Supreme Court listens to Hedgecock lawyer Charles Sevilla argue that his client was deprived of a fair trial because of judge’s errors and jury tampering by a court bailiff. During the one-hour hearing, Dep. State Atty. General Robert Foster countered that those claims should be dismissed and Hedgecock should serve the year in County Jail he was sentenced to. * Sept. 6, 1990: By a 5-2 vote, the California Supreme Court reversed 12 perjury convictions because of faulty jury instructions by Todd. The court ordered additional hearings on the jury tampering allegations in connection with the conspiracy conviction. The conspiracy conviction, if upheld, could still mean jail time for Hedgecock.