Federal court rules for 5 Baltimore officers

Judge says questions about testimony settled long ago

A federal judge ruled in favor of five former Baltimore Police officers accused of coercing testimony to secure a murder conviction decades ago, dismissing the since-exonerated man’s claims against them.

In a memorandum filed Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Stephanie Gallagher found legal questions about the credibility of the testimony of a boy who saw the 1986 fatal shooting of Faheem Ali, and later recanted, were settled long ago and could not be used to continue in Gary Washington’s lawsuit against the officers who investigated the homicide.

Having served more than 30 years in prison after being convicted of murder in Ali’s death, Washington was released in 2019 when a Baltimore Circuit Court judge overturned his conviction and prosecutors dropped the underlying charges — a ruling that relied on the now adult eyewitness, Otis Robinson, recanting his testimony and alleging police forced him to lie.

In a federal lawsuit filed in August 2019, Washington said officers threatened Robinson by saying “cooperate or you’ll never see your mother again,” tactics that tainted the state’s entire case against Washington.

His complaint named the police department, the mayor and city council, and the officers who investigated the homicide he was implicated in decades ago and then absolved of.

The detectives named in the lawsuit were Oscar Requer, Richard Fahlteich, John Tewey, Fred Ceruti and Thomas Pellegrini, who inspired the character of Detective Tim Bayliss, played by Kyle Secor, on the 1990s television series “Homicide: Life on the Street,” adapted from David Simon’s book “Homicide: A Year on the Killing Streets.”

With the mayor and city council already dismissed from the lawsuit, Gallagher’s ruling ends Washington’s claims against the five officers. The police department is the only defendant remaining.

Gallagher set a status hearing April 28 to determine how the case will proceed.

In the meantime, Washington’s legal team said he plans to appeal her ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.

“It’s our intent to prevail on appeal, pursue claims against the individual defendants and pursue claims against the Baltimore Police Department,” attorney Renee Spence told The Baltimore Sun. “Mr. Washington from the very beginning has had to fight to undue the impact of the officers’ unconstitutional conduct. He’s going to continue to fight to prove his innocence and obtain justice.”

Attorneys for the five officers named did not respond to a request for comment.

Gallagher’s memorandum closely analyzed rulings by Baltimore Circuit Court judges in 1999, after Washington first moved to have his conviction overturned, and 2016, in response to Washington saying new evidence proved he was innocent. In both instances, Washington sought to clear his name based on Robinson recanting his identification of the shooter.

The federal judge found that in 1999 then-Circuit Judge Allen Schwait, after hearing testimony from Robinson about why he changed his story, found Robinson’s recantation not to be credible and upheld Washington’s conviction. Maryland’s intermediate appellate court agreed with Schwait when Washington appealed.

In 2016, Circuit Judge Charles Peters held a hearing on Washington’s claims of innocence, eventually granting his petition and overturning his conviction. Prosecutors dismissed Washington’s case Jan. 15, 2019.

Gallagher, in her memorandum, found that Peters did not evaluate the credibility of Robinson’s recantation in granting Washington’s petition of innocence. As a result, Gallagher said Peters vacating Washington’s conviction didn’t undo Schwait’s finding on his credibility, meaning the underlying allegations of officers coercing testimony was a settled legal dispute and can’t be reargued.

In a statement, Acting City Solicitor Ebony Thompson applauded Gallagher’s ruling.

“The Court found that the record did not reflect that officers involved in Mr. Washington’s arrest violated his constitutional rights, and therefore did not give rise to liability on the part of BPD or the City,” Thompson said Thursday in an email. “The decision underscores the fact that a decision to vacate a conviction does not necessarily mean there was misconduct on the part of BPD in the underlying arrest.”

“While the City has demonstrated a willingness to reach a fair settlement when there is evidence of wrongdoing from BPD,” Thompson continued, “where such evidence is lacking, the City will vigorously defend the Department and its officers.”