Opinion ID: 2326772
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 11

Heading: Opinion Regarding the Credibility of the Rookie Police Officers

Text: The defendant next contends that the state's attorney improperly vouched for the credibility of the rookie police officers. During his closing argument, the state's attorney remarked: [T]hey didn't see what [the defendant] and Officer Middleton did that night, except the two rookies, the two rookies who hadn't been steeped in this blue code yet. They both testified as to what they [had] observed. Although, as we previously have explained; see part IV A 1 of this opinion; the state's attorney improperly introduced the concept of a blue code of silence in his closing argument, the state's attorney otherwise did not improperly vouch for the credibility of the rookie officers. It is permissible for a prosecutor to explain that a witness either has or does not have a motive to lie. Id., at 466, 832 A.2d 626. With the exception of the reference to the blue code of silence, we discern no impropriety in the state's attorney's remarks indicating that, in the state's view, some officers were motivated to avoid witnessing the alleged assault of Wilson and that other officers did not share that same motive. 3