Bomb Instructor Activist's Freedom May Hinge on His Intentions
By: Gerri L. Elder
It turns out, in the criminal case against Rodney Coronado, it's not what you say - or even how you say it. What matters is what you mean by what you say.
Coronado's criminal defense attorneys and the prosecution do not disagree on the basic facts of the case. It is true that Rodney Coronado, who is a radical environmental and animal-rights activist, was in San Diego on August 1, 2003, and while there he made a speech. Coronado spoke to a small group in Hillcrest about his "direct action" method of activism.
According to Coronado, in the past he has caused whaling ships in Iceland to sink and set fire to animal research laboratories in Michigan.
After the speech, Coronado reportedly answered questions from the group. His answer and demonstration in response to one question ended in arrest.
Coronado spoke to the group a few hours after an early morning arson that completely destroyed an apartment complex that was under construction in University City, causing $50 million in damages. A radical environmental activist group, The Earth Liberation Front, took credit for the fire. Coronado was at one time connected with the group that over the last ten years has taken responsibility for burning ski lodges, housing developments and other arsons across the country.
One of the questions asked by a person in the group was how to make a bomb that would burn down a building. Coronado answered the question with a demonstration, using an apple juice jug.
More than two years after the University City fire and Coronado's speech in Hillcrest, federal prosecutors got an indictment against Coronado. He was not charged with any involvement in the University City fire, but instead was arrested and charged under a rarely used law in connection with his question and answer session following his speech.
Federal prosecutors allege that Coronado broke the law by demonstrating how to make a destructive device with the intent that his audience that day would use the information to go out and commit acts of violence.
During the trial, prosecutors will be required to prove that by answering the question from his audience and doing the apple juice jug demonstration he intended for a person or people from the group to act upon it. They have the burden of proof in the criminal case, so they have to prove that Coronado wanted his listeners to use the information he had given them to go out and commit violent crimes.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael Skerlos told jurors that Rodney Coronado's intention in Hillcrest was to gain followers. He siad that he intends to introduce excerpts from Coronado's past speeches and writings to prove that he was recruiting radical activists who he hoped would commit violent criminal acts.
One of Coronado's criminal defense lawyers, Gerald Singleton, says that inciting violence was not on Coronado's to-do list in Hillcrest. He says that Coronado probably has made some statements that jurors will find offensive, but his radical activist client did not prepare a speech about creating bombs. His remarks and demonstration were only in response to a question from the audience. FBI agents attended the speech, recorded it and it was also videotaped, but the part about making a bomb is not included on either of the recordings.
The three words at the center of the case are "for an action." Prosecutors and Coronado's criminal defense attorneys disagree on the wording used in the question posed after the speech. Since the question was not part of the recorded documentation of the speech, it has become the focus of a hot debate in court.
Government prosecutors insist that the question was worded in a way to find out how to make a bomb "for an action." Coronado's criminal defense lawyers insist that those three words were not used in the question.
The person who asked the question will be called as a witness in the case. He will of course, testify for the defense. No one would expect him to come to court and say that he asked how to make a bomb so that he could go become an arsonist, would they? Coronado's criminal defense attorneys realize this fact.
Coronado has a criminal history and has previously served a four year prison sentence in Michigan for arson. He says that he no longer supports illegal direct action by activists. If convicted this time, he faces up to 20 years in prison.