Judge May Reject Olson Guilty Plea

A day after Sara Jane Olson pleaded guilty to attempted bombing charges and then denied her guilt outside the courtroom, a Los Angeles judge announced he will hold a hearing next week to decide whether to toss out the plea.

Thursday’s development was the latest surprise in a case that began more than a quarter-century ago when nail-packed bombs were found beneath two LAPD cars. If the judge sets aside the guilty plea Tuesday, the accused Symbionese Liberation Army member, who was arrested in 1999, will be tried on charges of conspiring to kill police officers.

Neither defense attorneys nor prosecutors requested the upcoming hearing. Superior Court Judge Larry Paul Fidler called it in order to discuss the apparent contradictions between Olson’s statements inside and outside court, a court spokesman said.

“The purpose of the hearing is to inquire into the continuing validity of the plea, given Sara Jane Olson’s comments in the hallway after she had pleaded guilty,” said Superior Court spokesman Kyle Christopherson.

Olson, 54, pleaded guilty Wednesday to charges that could result in anywhere from five years to life in prison. Minutes later, she told reporters she accepted the plea agreement because she feared the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks would prevent her from receiving a fair trial. She added that she did not plant bombs or try to murder anyone.

Fidler plans to meet with attorneys in his chambers Tuesday and then hold a hearing in open court, Christopherson said. At that time, the judge could void the guilty plea. If he does, Olson’s trial would go forward as previously planned, with attorneys scheduled to deliver opening statements in December.

Olson, who was arrested near her Minnesota home after living nearly 25 years under her assumed name, pleaded guilty Wednesday to two counts of attempting to explode a destructive device with the intent to commit murder. In exchange, prosecutors agreed to drop two counts of possessing a bomb and one count of conspiring to commit murder.

‘Guilty’ in Court, ‘Not Guilty’ Outside

The charges stem from a 1976 Los Angeles County Grand Jury indictment in which Olson was accused of conspiring with other members of the radical SLA to kill police officers. Prosecutors said she helped plant the bombs, which did not explode, as part of a wide-ranging conspiracy to overthrow the government. Defense attorneys have maintained she never joined the SLA or placed the bombs.

On Wednesday, Olson signed a written agreement--presented in court--that said she “is pleading guilty because she is in truth and in fact guilty” to the charges.

But minutes later, while flanked by teary-eyed family members and friends, she said, “I pleaded to something of which I am not guilty.”

Defense attorney Shawn Chapman said Thursday that she does not know what to expect at the unusual court session next week.

She says that Olson, in proclaiming her innocence, was trying to explain that she was not the one who planted bombs beneath police cars. Rather, she only admitted in her plea that she had acted to “encourage, endorse or incite” the bombing attempt, Chapman said.

The defense attorney said her client has the right to say whatever she wants to say in public. “The prisons are filled with people proclaiming their innocence,” Chapman said.

Chapman said Olson agreed to a guilty plea because it was in her best interest and she believed it avoided the risk of receiving a life sentence in prison if a jury convicted her. She preferred to plead no contest to the charges, Chapman said, but the district attorney’s office demanded a guilty plea.

Prosecutors said the evidence against Olson was strong and they want her sentenced.

“We had an overwhelming case,” said district attorney’s office spokeswoman Sandi Gibbons.

Prosecutors do not believe that Olson accepted the deal because of fear over the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. If that was the reason, she should have waited to see if the court could find enough fair jurors--or agree to a trial before the judge, Deputy Dist. Atty. Michael Latin said.

Latin added that he was taken aback by Wednesday’s turn of events, having never seen a defendant plead guilty and then walk out of the courtroom and say the opposite. “I thought it was quite inconsistent with what happened in the courtroom,” he said.

Under state law, defendants can enter guilty pleas while maintaining their innocence, as long as there is evidence to support a guilty verdict, legal experts said Thursday. The right was upheld in a unanimous ruling by the California Supreme Court in 1970 in a case called People vs. West.

In that case, Dale I. West entered into a plea bargain after a trial judge refused to suppress incriminating evidence in a marijuana possession case. Under a deal worked out with the prosecution, West pleaded no contest to opening or maintaining a place for selling or using narcotics. He then appealed the conviction. The Supreme Court ruled that defendants maintaining their innocence can plead guilty if the evidence could lead to a guilty verdict.

At the same time, defendants who declare their innocence in public can sometimes aggravate a judge and cause a plea bargain to fall apart, said Cristina C. Arguedas, former president of the state’s criminal defense association.

Loyola Law School professor Laurie Levenson said Judge Fidler might want to make sure that Olson is pleading because she in fact guilty and not because she feels pressured to do so.

“The judge has the ultimate responsibility to ensure that only guilty people plead guilty,” she said. “He wants to set the record straight and to avoid problems down the road at sentencing.”

Golden Gate University Law School Dean Peter Keane said that defendants often plead guilty but then say they are innocent, and that the only reason Fidler may be concerned is because the case is a high-profile one. “It is only because of the celebrity nature of this case that [Fidler] is getting a little bit rattled,” Keane said.

Olson’s plea came after a two-hour closed meeting in the judge’s chambers. A transcript from those proceedings, released Thursday, reveals the intense negotiations between prosecutors and defense attorneys on the terms of the settlement. During the meeting, the attorneys disputed how much time Olson would serve in prison.

Though Olson is due to be formally sentenced to 20 years to life in prison Dec. 7, her attorneys believe the state Board of Prison Terms will mandate her to serve just over five years in prison. Attorneys on both sides have agreed that her time can be served in Minnesota, where her family lives.

In the discussions, prosecutors were insistent that Olson clearly understand that the state board could hold a rare hearing and raise the sentence to a life term.

According to a law passed after Olson’s crime was committed, the state prison board will have to decide whether or not to hold a hearing to determine whether she should get more than the five years. If such a hearing is held, the board could decide she is a danger to society and extend her term to life.

Latin said he didn’t want Olson to base her plea on her attorneys’ advice that she would receive more than five years only if “some extraordinary action” occurred. Olson interjected at that point to say that she was indeed basing her plea on such advice.

But Fidler quickly warned her that she still could spend the rest of her life in prison despite her attorneys’ assurances.

“I will be the one to tell you they may be wrong,” Fidler said. “They may be right. They may be wrong.”

Task Force Probing Her Role in 1975 Killing

During the closed session Wednesday, Fidler told Olson and her attorneys that the “guilty plea acknowledges every element of the crime.”

“If she doesn’t want to enter, then she mustn’t,” Fidler said. “No one is forcing her to.”

Meanwhile, in Sacramento, authorities told Associated Press that the alleged SLA member remains under investigation for a bank robbery that left a woman dead.

Despite several investigations, no one was ever successfully prosecuted for the 1975 Sacramento bank robbery, during which Myrna Opsahl, 42, was shot and killed while depositing a church collection.

But now a task force is reviewing evidence unearthed in Los Angeles after Olson’s arrest in 1999, authorities said Thursday.

Olson has denied participating in the robbery. However, media heiress Patty Hearst, in a 1982 book about her kidnapping and time with the SLA, placed Olson at the robbery scene and said SLA member Emily Harris carried out the shooting.

Authorities expected that evidence related to the bank shooting would surface during Olson’s trial. A son of the victim, Dr. Jon Opsahl, called the lack of prosecution so far an “atrocity.”