Judge takes witness stand in Santiago trial

A Philadelphia prosecutor found himself today in the unenviable position of trying to discredit a sitting judge called by the defense to impeach the testimony of a jailhouse witness in a murder trial.

The unusual scene unfolded in Room 902 of the Criminal Justice Center, where Wilfredo Santiago is being retried in the 1985 execution-style slaying of Police Officer Thomas Trench.

Called as the second defense witness after the prosecution rested its case today was Benjamin Lerner, a judge in the Court of Common Pleas. But the jury did not know that. To them, the witness, who was addressed as "Mr. Lerner", was just a well-respected lawyer who had been the chief public defender at the time of the crime.

The defense called Lerner to punch holes in the testimony of Howard Long, an ex-convict who said that Santiago admitted while in jail in 1985 that he had shot Trench that May 28.

Long, however, also gave a tape-recorded statement to defense lawyers before the first trial - and after talking to Lerner - saying he had lied in a statement to homicide detectives and at Santiago's preliminary hearing.

Assistant District Attorney Carlos Vega, left with having to prop up an ex-con against a public defender, sought to portray Lerner's motives as less than detached in a series of questions that were often wordy and sometimes posed in an agitated tone.

Lerner remained calm throughout, beating back the challenges with answers offered in a clear and convincing voice.

At the first trial in 1986 - in testimony that the latest jury also heard - Long said he made up the recantation because Lerner had promised to get him into the federal witness protection program with a $1,300-a-month stipend.

"That is ridiculously, fabulously untrue," said Lerner. "These allegations are pretty offensive to me."

Long's claim, as Lerner also told Vega today, freed him from any client-lawyer relationship that existed between Long and the Public Defender's Office.

Lerner said Long had called him twice from jail, telling him that he had never spoken to Santiago and that officials reneged on a promise that he would "never spend another day in jail" if he testified that he heard Santiago confess.

Lerner testified that another inmate who called himself Ferret had told him in one call that a prisoner was recruiting jailhouse witnesses to testify against Santiago. He said Long wanted to tell the truth but was "scared" and asked if he could be put in the witness-protection program.

Lerner said he did not promise anything and suggested that Long should talk to Santiago's lawyers, which he did. The witness also said he raised the matter with the U.S. Attorney's Office but never learned of any investigation.

Vega, through his questioning, sought to convey that Lerner had a special interest in the Santiago case and somehow induced Long to recant.

Lerner, in reply, carefully spelled out his office's role in both the Santiago and Long cases and how it was eventually removed from defending both men because of potential conflicts.

During the cross-examination, Judge Rene Cardwell Hughes told Vega several times to pose more direct questions and narrow his area of inquiry.

In a number of questions, Vega asked how it was that Lerner - the head of a big office - ended up answering Long's phone calls.

Lerner explained that the first phone call came on Christmas Eve 1985, after the office went home early and he stayed behind to work. He said that when the switchboard closed, all calls went to his phone and he had the option of answering.

Vega asked why Long went to Lerner in the first place.

"I have no way of knowing what Mr. Long's motivation as at any time," Lerner said. "He could be lying all through this."

But when Vega asked Lerner if he should have recorded his conversations with Long, the judge could only agree.

"That would have been a good idea, and I wish I had," Lerner said.