A victim who gets cold feet on the witness stand isn’t enough to sink a case, the D.C. Court of Appeals has ruled.
The court upheld robbery convictions against Rodney Lewis and Jonathan Price after the high-school victim who had previously identified the pair recanted his testimony on the stand.
The robbery took place during the winter of 2005, when Lewis and Price pulled a gun on the victim and stole his coat, wallet and cell phone.
When the victim was asked to identify in court who robbed him at gunpoint, he said “I don’t want to do this,” and “I’m not comfortable” several times before telling the court he couldn’t remember who his robbers were, according to court records.
The victim’s apparent memory loss came after he had identified both Price and Lewis multiple times to the police, in photo lineups, and to a grand jury, records show. Price and Lewis had both dated the victim’s cousin, court records show.
The jury convicted the pair, but they appealed the case to the appeals court. Attorneys for both men could not be reached for comment.
But in court records, attorneys for Lewis and Price contended that the victim’s prior identification of their clients as the robbers should have been excluded from the case because it was inconsistent with what he said on the stand.
Lewis and Price said the victim’s inconsistent statements were a result of “an honest mistake” or a “waning of memory,” according to court records.
But the U.S. Attorney’s Office argued that Lewis and Price had targeted the victim specifically because they thought he wouldn’t put up a fight, either during the robbery or if the case went to trial.
“He was small and … he was alone and it was dark and he was weak, and because they knew him … they knew they could count on him to come to court and fail to follow through,” the prosecutors said. “They picked the right victim.”
