After prosecutor Anne Colt Leitess questioned inmate Bradford Matthews yesterday about the beating he allegedly suffered at the hands of correction officers, the defense attorneys got their chance.
And again, and again, and again and again.
The second-degree assault trials of five Jessup Correctional Institution officers were heard jointly this week in Anne Arundel Circuit Court, which means there have been five opening statements, five chances to cross-examine witnesses, and, often, a chorus of objections requiring all 10 people seated at the defense table to approach the judge's bench.
"It's very difficult," said Leitess, an assistant state's attorney who is trying the case solo. "If one of them forgets to ask something, they can pass a note down the line, and they can ask questions based on my questions but also their co-counsel's questions. It never ends."
The number of attorneys has at times served to further complicate an already complex case - a rare prosecution of correction officers accused of actions against an inmate inside a Maryland prison.
Prosecutors allege that the defendants - Officers Naron Dyer Sr., 28, and Antoine Fordham; 22, Sgts. Berkeley Ghee, 32, and Keith Randolph, 35; and Capt. Manuel Williams, 36 - were unnerved by a gang-related wristband that Matthews refused to remove and beat him excessively.
Though the officers are charged with assaulting Matthews on July 27, 2006, at the now-closed Maryland House of Correction, the incident became intertwined with the murder investigation in the death of corrections officer David W. McGuinn, who was killed a day earlier at the prison.
A knife said to have been recovered by officers from Matthews after the beating had already been documented in a different part of the prison as possibly being the weapon with which McGuinn was killed. Prosecutors have claimed that the knife was planted on Matthews to justify his beating.
Attorneys involved with the case said the number of defendants being tried simultaneously is unusual, though not unheard-of. So far, the defense attorneys have eased into their own niches. Kent L. Greenberg, for example, has led off most of the cross-examinations thus far, with particularly forceful questioning.
"I have more leeway than the others," said Greenberg, who represents Randolph. "I'm supposed to cover as much as I can, and their role is to pick up whatever I don't cover. I prefer to go first."
That works well for Lawrence B. Rosenberg, an attorney for Fordham who said he prefers to cross-examine last in multiple-defendant cases.
"It works better for my strategy," Rosenberg said.
The defense team's strength in numbers has provided them ample opportunity to hammer home their points. Matthews, a 25-year-old serving a sentence for armed robbery, was grilled for hours yesterday about his role in a prison gang called Deadman Inc. and asked extensively about his criminal past, both inside and outside of prison.
Matthews compared the gang to a social fraternity that aims to keep others out of trouble and offers protection for its members - though state officials have called Deadman Inc.'s members "extraordinarily violent" hit men. The inmate acknowledged that he has carried weapons and would not hesitate to use them if necessary.
The defense has tried to paint Matthews as an out-of-control inmate who was the only one to cause trouble during strip searches of 50 others the day after McGuinn's death, as prison officials sought to move inmates to another facility.
Some of the officers told investigators that they saw him reach for a weapon, but the weapon eventually logged into evidence had already been documented two days earlier before disappearing. The defense attorneys said it was a simple mix-up.
But prosecutors say Matthews was not carrying a knife and that the 5-foot-5-inch inmate's behavior would not justify such a beating. He claims to have suffered from vision and hearing loss and sustained other injuries to his face and neck.
Matthews' mother, Susan Nelson, cried in the courtroom as her son detailed the beating. But she said she was proud that her son stood up to the barrage of defense questioning.
"Their job is to trap you and pressure you, and he went through all five and didn't show any aggression, didn't get upset or angry, and they didn't catch him in any lies," said Nelson, of Baltimore.
Though the cases are being heard jointly, jurors will be instructed to judge each of the defendants independently. Certain evidence, such as the officers' statements to investigators about others' actions, has been the source of much acrimony among the defense and prosecuting attorneys, who have worked with Anne Arundel Circuit Judge Pamela North to redact or narrow testimony.
The back-and-forth between the five defense attorneys and Leitess has at times veered into the personal, with both sides raising issues of possible misconduct. Leitess said it's been like "David versus five Goliaths."
"If anyone's up to the challenge," said Deputy State's Attorney Laura Kiessling, who briefly sat in on the proceedings, "it's [Leitess]."
justin.fenton@baltsun.com