John Miller, one of the attorneys defending the county against Corey’s wrongful termination and defamation lawsuit, began his cross-examination of the former deputy prosecutor with a slew of questions designed to undermine her credibility or paint her as vindictive.

At one point, Miller referred to previous testimony from a former colleague of Corey who said the fired prosecutor carried some “venom for people in the office.”

“Do you still have that venom?” Miller asked.

“I don’t think I’ve ever had venom,” Corey replied. “I was hurt. I’m bitter.”

Miller’s onslaught came the day after Corey accused her former boss, Prosecuting Attorney Gerald Horne, of having given preferential treatment to some criminal defendants represented by his friends.

One of those instances was in 2003 when Corey said Horne gave a favorable disposition to a murder defendant whose lawyer Horne knew and liked. She testified that Horne attacked her when she expressed her displeasure over what she saw as “playing favorites.”

Miller addressed that accusation early on in his cross-examination, suggesting that Corey manufactured the favoritism complaint because she “intensely disliked” the lawyer involved, who had once reported her for professional misconduct.

He referred to an e-mail exchange between Corey and Horne on the subject to bolster his contention. At one point in the e-mail string, Corey seems to imply to Horne that he is giving preferential treatment to the defense attorney.

Miller read Horne’s e-mail reply: “I am not too pleased with your jumping to conclusions again without talking to me.”

“Where in this e-mail, or in any of the e-mails, did Mr. Horne attack you?” Miller asked.

“I don’t have any e-mails with me, but I know that he did,” Corey testified.

Miller’s questioning of Corey took up the last hour of testimony.

Corey, who was Horne’s No. 3 in command when she was forced out, spent the rest of the day answering questions from her attorney, Jack Connelly.

She gave her version of events surrounding the transfer of deputy prosecutor John Neeb, which touched off a controversy in Horne’s office when it was proposed back in early 2004.

Corey testified that it was her decision to move Neeb from the special assault unit to the juvenile division. Neeb is known as a good trial attorney but at that time exhibited some unprofessional tendencies that Corey said she found troubling.

Corey said that she pitched the plan to Horne and his chief administrative deputy, Dawn Farina, and both signed on. Horne told her to “put a positive spin” on the transfer so as not to upset Neeb, Corey said.

When the move was announced, an uproar ensued, she said. Some colleagues saw Neeb’s transfer as a demotion related to his actions as president of the prosecutors guild, Corey said.

Corey said she soon found herself being made the scapegoat for the decision, even though Horne and Farina had initially supported it.

Not long after, Corey said, Horne called her into her office and gave her a choice: resign or be fired. He testified last week that he could no longer trust her, and other deputy prosecutors have testified that she lied to them.

“I thought I was on an island by myself,” she testified.

Corey also testified about money she’d collected for colleagues who had suffered family difficulties about the time of her downfall.

Horne ordered an investigation into the whereabouts of that money after Corey submitted her resignation but still was on the county payroll while she burned her compensatory time.

Corey testified that she gave all the money collected – plus some from her personal accounts – to the people she’d collected it for as soon as she could following her departure from the office.

But the investigation and comments Horne made about it to the press damaged her reputation so badly that she couldn’t find work with any prosecutor’s office in the state, Corey testified.

Corey is expected back on the stand today.

Adam Lynn: 253-597-8644

blogs.thenewstribune.com/crime