Homicide Witness Apparently Contradicts Prior Police Interview

Thank you for reading Baltimore Witness.
Consider making a donation to help us continue our mission.

As testimony began on Aug. 26 in the trial of a Baltimore man accused of fatally shooting a stranger in the back, a witness apparently contradicted statements she previously made during a police interview.

Uriah Cunningham, 32, is charged with first-degree murder, firearm use in a felony violent crime, illegal possession of a regulated firearm, having a loaded handgun in a vehicle and having a loaded handgun on his person in connection to the Sept. 29, 2024 murder of Melvin Rogers, 43, on the 1800 block of Wilhelm Street.

According to the prosecution, Cunningham shot Rogers in the back after mistaking him for an individual who had asked Cunningham to turn down the music coming from his car. Cunningham was driving his friend’s blue Nissan Altima at the time of the incident, with the owner unconscious in the passenger seat while Cunningham’s cousin and sister rode in the backseat.

Cunningham’s friend and the owner of the Nissan Altima took the stand before Baltimore City Circuit Court Judge Troy K. Hill and counsel, including Cunningham’s defense attorney Staci Pipkin, to deliver her account of the fatal shooting. However, the witness said that she was unconscious and intoxicated during the incident, awakening to the sound of gunshots and coming away with little memory of the night’s events preceding and following the shots.

During the prosecutor’s questioning, the witness professed that she had never said she saw Cunningham hand a gun to his cousin in the backseat after hearing the shots. The prosecutor then played a segment of the witness’s interview with police in which she said that she did see Cunningham pass a gun to his cousin on the night of the incident.

Confronted with the conflicting evidence, the witness pointed out that she had rephrased her statement later in the interview to say she had only seen that Cunningham “passed something that looked like a gun” to his cousin.

The witness repeatedly stated that she felt pressured by the police during the interview and feared being locked in the interview room. Multiple requests from the interviewers to be transparent, coupled with the witness’s false belief that her children were being watched by members of Child Protective Services during the interview, “made [her] feel like [she] gotta tell them something,” even if it was not the truth.

Contradictory information also arose about the cleanliness of the witness’ car. At first, she told the prosecution she had not cleaned the car until after homicide detectives concluded investigations and returned it to her. However, further questioning revealed that she cleaned the vehicle on the day after the shooting.

When asked why she cleaned her vehicle, the witness’ only explanation was that “it was dirty.”

Testimony is expected to continue on Aug. 27.