Get Local Alerts on Your Mobile Device

Text "LOCAL" to 98999 to get breaking news, traffic and weather alerts.

Page 2 of 2   <      

Jury Acquits Two Detectives Accused of Swaying Witnesses

Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.

The case also featured an unusual government witness: a sitting D.C. Superior Court judge.

Anderson, a tough, respected prosecutor who was the first to accuse the detectives of wrongdoing, now sits on the local bench.

Finally, one defense attorney raised eyebrows in the court and in Washington's legal circles by accusing that sitting judge of being vindictive, spinning the facts to "get" two detectives she didn't like or trust.

Departing jurors interviewed yesterday said their group reached its not-guilty verdict fairly easily because they found the government's case weak.

"They really only had one witness who said the detectives asked her to change her story, and she had admitted to lying once to Jennifer Anderson," said Demetrius Garrett, 35, a information technology specialist.

"Then on the stand she said more things that weren't very believable."

Garrett said he agreed with the claims of defense attorneys that heated arguments between Erick Brown and Anderson might have led the prosecutor to assume the worst about the detectives.

"It seemed like a situation that got out of control," Garrett said. "When she got challenged, she got mad . . . and she went over the top by bringing this case."

Another juror, 25, who identified himself only as Michael, said the government presented bits of evidence that didn't add up.

"There was reasonable doubt all over the place," he said.

The public corruption section of the U.S. attorney's office initially recommended not going forward with the case. Eventually, the Justice Department recused the local office and assigned federal prosecutors from Virginia to the case.

Thomas A. DiBiase, a former deputy homicide chief prosecutor who tried Jones for assault, said that Anderson's concerns were justified and that the detectives had to be prosecuted to protect the integrity of the local justice system.

"As always, I respect every jury, but the actions of the detectives in this case were an outrage and a discredit to the Metropolitan Police Department and every good homicide detective working there," he said.


<       2


More in the Metro Section

Local Blog Directory

Find a Local Blog

Plug into the region's blogs, by location or area of interest.

Virginia Politics

Blog: Va. Politics

Here's a place to help you keep up with Virginia's overcaffeinated political culture.

D.C. Taxi Fares

D.C. Taxi Fares

Compare estimated zoned and metered D.C. taxi fares with this interactive calculator.

FOLLOW METRO ON:
Facebook Twitter RSS
|
GET LOCAL ALERTS:
© 2007 The Washington Post Company