Baltimore homicide detectives say they?re infuriated by a policy in which the State?s Attorney?s Office won?t prosecute homicides unless at least two witnesses agree to testify.
Since January, at least five cases that detectives believe could be brought before a grand jury have instead languished, as prosecutors demand more witnesses, sources told The Examiner. The sources asked to remain anonymous because of fear of retribution.
But city prosecutors say the policy has kept flimsy cases from going forward and improved homicide investigations.
“The State?s Attorney?s Office has drawn a line in the sand that a case will not go forward with one wittiness,” said Margaret Burns, spokeswoman for city State?s Attorney Patricia Jessamy.
“We believeit has had a positive effect on homicide investigations.”
Prosecutors first declined to prosecute one-witness cases in 2001, after a rash of cases fell apart at trial when witness disappeared or changed their testimony, Burns said.
Homicide detectives initially chafed at the requirement, prompting state Sen. Ralph Hughes to introduce legislation in 2003 that would have made the policy law.
Only after then-police Commissioner Kevin Clark agreed to abide by the rule did Hughes withdraw the legislation.
But detectives complain the policy to not prosecute cases that lack two witnesses puts an artificial threshold on solving crimes.
Adding to the difficulty is the stop-snitching mentality that pervades neighborhoods where a majority of the city?s homicides occur.
Prosecutors, however, credit the policy for a rising conviction rate.
First-degree murder convictions rose from 14 in 2006 to 31 in 2007, Burns said.
In 2007, 282 people were slain in Baltimore, the most the since 1999.
Burns asserted that homicide investigations have improved because police need at least two witnesses.
“We believe the policy is well-intended and successful,” Burns said. “We believe that detectives are building more solid and better cases. We?re not going to budge.”
