An hour after the 12 jurors handed down their verdict, Bronx District Attorney Robert Johnson defended his prosecutors’ case against the four Diallo cops and called it a fair trial — although he didn’t like the outcome.
“We gave it our best effort,” Johnson told reporters in Albany yesterday. “This was a fair trial, even though we don’t agree with the result.”
Fielding a range of questions about the way prosecutors grilled the four cops during cross-examination, Johnson said part of their strategy was to elicit information by not shredding the officers apart while they were on the stand.
Johnson said the Albany jurors gave the case their “fair and full attention,” but added, “There’s no question that 12 fair people could have been found in The Bronx.”
Legal experts said that even if the case had remained downstate, the cops’ emotional testimony would likely have won out over a weak prosecution case marked by dry medical evidence and “ear” witnesses.
“The officers’ testimony, their own demeanor, put it over the top for them,” said Dino Lombardi, a criminal defense lawyer who has represented cops accused of misconduct.
Another ultimate weakness, he said, may have been the prosecution not lighting into the cops on cross-examination.
“I think the testimony [of the cops] had a compelling quality to it, where one could conclude that this really was a tragedy, not a crime,” said lawyer Ben Brafman.
Criminal defense lawyer Arthur Aidala said prosecutors had to rely largely on scientific evidence — and had no eyewitness who could emotionally lead the jury through what happened.
The jurors “were able to see [Officer] Sean Carroll cry,” he said. “It just plays on the much-more human aspect of everything.”
Aidala said the cops’ testimony was buttressed by an expert witness who said they acted by the book — and noted prosecutors failed to put on a rebuttal witness to minimize the damage.
Brafman said Johnson never should have brought a murder charge.
“It made this case into something it never was, and when it did not live up to the expectations of the jury, I think it may have compromised the entire prosecution,” he said.
But Lombardi argued the jurors had the option of lesser charges, and said Johnson had little choice with the indictment since the cops chose not to appear before the grand jury.
Aidala said prosecutors should have called a rebuttal witness to counter police tactics-and-training expert James Fyfe, who testified the cops’ engagement of Diallo was by the book.
“At the very least, the prosecution has to call someone to neutralize the defense witness,” Aidala said. “They just left the jury with someone who basically said the cops are not guilty.”
While the experts said a downstate jury likely would have had the same verdict, Aidala said the defense was able “to convey an image of The Bronx that may have been more severe” than it really is with the Albany panel.
The experts said the effects of Johnson’s defeat would be “short-term.”
“The DA charged the highest count he could, and went after the cops full force,” Aidala said.
“This was a political football, and Johnson did the best he could,” Lombardi said.