An Ogle County judge will allow defense attorneys to call certain witnesses during the trial of a Chicago woman charged with falsely reporting a shooting near Rochelle in May 2025.

Jodie Wiederkehr, 56, is charged with two counts of false reporting, a Class 4 felony, and one count of harassment by telephone, a misdemeanor. The charges were filed in June 2025. She pleaded not guilty Aug. 20. The judge’s ruling about allowing certain witnesses is the result of a May 29 hearing.

Wiederkehr serves as the campaign director of the animal advocacy group, SHowing Animals Respect and Kindness, which has alleged that a rodeo holding steer-tailing events, Rancho La Esperanza south of Rochelle, is violating Illinois’ animal protection laws, and has been urging Ogle County officials to shut it down.

[ Northern Illinois counties struggle to regulate Mexican-style rodeos, steer-tailing events in their area ]

The group’s advocacy efforts ramped up in summer 2025, but the rodeo continues to operate on private property under a permanent land-use permit issued by county officials in 2012, Ogle County records show.

Steer tailing, or coleadero, is when a horseback rider chases a running steer, grabs its tail and wraps the tail around the rider’s leg to slam the animal to the ground. It’s banned in Nebraska and in parts of California and Colorado. Illinois has animal cruelty laws, but none that specifically outlaw steer tailing.

SHARK advocates have continued urging officials to stop the events in Rochelle and were on hand to document any potential animal injuries at another rodeo on the property on May 24.

The charges against Wiederkehr stem from May 25, 2025, when prosecutors allege she repeatedly called 911 and told an Ogle County dispatcher that she saw someone get shot at 16989 Ritchie Road, the location of the rodeo, when she knew what she was telling the dispatcher was not true, court records show.

Wiederkehr’s attorneys have argued that context is important, and those calls were intended to report animal cruelty actively occurring on the property.

On May 29, Wiederkehr appeared before Ogle County Associate Judge Anthony Peska with her attorneys, Brad Thomson of Chicago and Chris Carraway of Colorado, who explained that at trial they intend to argue a necessity defense.

A necessity defense is a legal defense that justifies breaking the law if it was done to prevent a greater harm.

Defense attorneys said the greater harm was the alleged animal cruelty occurring on the property that Wiederkehr was trying to report. To establish that at trial, they filed a motion requesting the court allow them to call three SHARK members who were capturing video footage of the rodeo that day and two Illinois veterinarians as witnesses.

Carraway said they mainly intend to call to the stand SHARK President Steve Hindi and one vet, as the second vet was only included as a backup. He said the two other SHARK members are “may call” witnesses.

Ogle County Assistant State’s Attorney Matthew Liesten filed a motion May 22 objecting to those witnesses being called to testify.

Calling all those witnesses would be “creating a trial within a trial,” Liesten said at the hearing.

Liesten argued that their testimony would be irrelevant because none of their names are mentioned in any police reports pertaining to the case and would not help the jury understand the evidence relevant to the false report.

Liesten said prosecutors agree that the defense has a right to argue a necessity defense, but said that “she can present it through admissible and relevant evidence.”

Defense attorneys disagreed.

“We have to show what the harm Wiederkehr was hoping to avoid is” and “if a jury is weighing what harm is worse” there should be testimony about that, Carraway said.

Carraway explained that Hindi would testify that he was operating a drone to capture video footage of the rodeo that day, observed animal cruelty and relayed that information to Wiederkehr, who was at her residence in Chicago. He said the veterinarian would testify, based on SHARK’s footage, that harm was caused to animals.

The expert witness “supports greater harm,” Carraway said.

“This is causing an animal to suffer” and Wiederkehr “would be justified in telling law enforcement that I [she] saw someone get shot,” Carraway said.

Liesten disagreed.

He said the veterinarians would be testifying “what the harm is,” not that they were at the scene and conveyed that information to Wiederkehr on the day the calls were made.

“Our belief [is] that Wiederkehr would have made these calls regardless” of that knowledge from the veterinarians, Liesten said.

Carraway said SHARK members who were capturing footage that day never observed any veterinarian care being provided to injured animals and he doesn’t know if anyone contacted a vet to provide care.

“This isn’t an animal cruelty case. We are going to avoid having a trial within a trial,” Peska said.

However, Peska said he’s “not going to cut the defense off at the knees,” because they have a right to present a necessity defense.

Peska granted the prosecutors’ objection to the expert testimony from veterinarians, but ruled defense attorneys are free to call the civilians they want to testify. He said prosecutors are free to make proper objections at trial.

Wiederkehr’s final pretrial hearing is scheduled at 9 a.m. June 11. The trial is set to begin at 9 a.m. June 15.