| Page 2 of 2 < |
Ex-Officer's Trial Hangs On What Jury Hears
|
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.
|
In one pretrial ruling, Whalen held that the defense could introduce evidence of three of White's criminal convictions for offenses that occurred in the mid-1990s. Whalen, however, excluded evidence of two other convictions from the same period -- pointing a firearm and assault and battery -- after finding that they were not relevant to White's credibility.
Whalen ruled that the defense could question White about his burglary conviction because it was relevant to his credibility because it involves "acts of a covert and deceitful nature."
Under state law, defense attorneys are generally entitled to introduce into evidence previous convictions only if the trial judge decides that the convictions relate to the credibility of the witness, Dash and veteran defense attorneys said.
Washington's attorneys, Starr and Vincent H. Cohen Jr., are expected to assail White's credibility, since he will be the prosecution's key witness.
Washington, who was a driver for Jack B. Johnson (D) in 2002 during Johnson's successful campaign for county executive and who was later appointed the county's deputy director of homeland security, has no criminal convictions. He has another trial pending on charges that he brandished a gun at a real estate appraiser who said he had knocked on Washington's door by mistake.
But that cannot be brought up at trial, nor can previous incidents in which he reportedly has lost his temper. These include four instances in which he came under investigation by the Prince George's police department for allegations of assault or "unbecoming conduct." Each allegation was deemed unfounded.
In two of the cases, he was sued. Once, a D.C. police officer said Washington assaulted him and had him falsely arrested. That case was dismissed after the plaintiff was fatally shot in 1997 during a traffic dispute. The plaintiff in the other lawsuit was awarded $260,000, but the verdict was overturned on appeal.
Such incidents are inadmissible in court unless they can be tied directly to the charge at hand, legal experts said.
Or unless Washington's attorneys, or his own words, create an opening.
"The defense has to be very careful not to go too much into [Washington's] personality," Dash said. "If they try to make him into a very good character, then they open the door. For example, if Washington were to testify that he has always been calm and never lost his temper, that could allow prosecutors to question him about previous incidents where he became angry."
In general, Dash said, it is difficult to persuade a jury to convict a police officer of a crime committed while the officer is carrying out his duties, legal experts said.
But the circumstances in this case -- the shootings occurred at Washington's home, during a furniture delivery -- might mitigate the deference that jurors often give to officers. "I don't know how much weight they will give to him being a police officer," Dash said. "I think they'll go with the facts."
Washington has been granted a medical disability retirement from the police department, The Washington Post reported in September.
Judge Whalen rejected a prosecution request for access to Washington's psychiatric records from the mid-1990s. Washington was placed on restricted duty for more than a year in the mid-1990s when doctors and department officials concluded that his inability to handle the stress of regular police work made him a potential danger.
"The state has not shown a relationship between the charges, the information sought, and the likelihood that relevant information will be obtained as a result of reviewing the defendant's psychological records," Whalen wrote in his ruling.


Discussion Policy