Attorneys for Christian Delaurentiis, who is accused of murdering and dismembering an Aloha man, asked a Washington County judge last week to keep prosecutors from presenting evidence they say attacks them.



Delaurentiis, accused of stabbing his 43-year-old roommate to death, cutting up the body and storing it in a freezer, appeared before Circuit Judge Thomas Kohl last Thursday. The defendant, 31, has been in Washington County Jail custody since his arrest on May 17, 2012. He is charged with aggravated murder and abuse of a corpse in the death of Phillip Lindemuth.



In a motion before the court, defense attorneys asked the judge to rule out potential testimony from other jail inmates about what Delaurentiis has reportedly told them about his case:



"The state has recently indicated that they intend to introduce testimony from jailhouse informants that Mr. Delaurentiis allegedly told the informants that his attorneys were encouraging him to 'go with' a certain defense, were supportive of him allegedly scheming with other inmates to plant false witnesses in the case, and most absurdly that they encouraged him to steal another inmate's medication because it would help him pass a polygraph examination.



"The allegations are insulting to defense counsel and patently false."





Christian Delaurentiis

If the information is allowed into evidence, the attorneys told the court, they would be forced to withdraw from the case and become defense witnesses to testify against the allegations.

Prosecutors say they will only offer such evidence if defense attorneys claim at trial that Delaurentiis killed Lindemuth in self-defense.

According to earlier court records, Delaurentiis told a relative that

to cover up information about

. He then told investigators two different versions of what happened before saying

with a pen knife, prompting Delaurentiis to stab Lindemuth to death in self-defense.

Delaurentiis reportedly told authorities that he and Lindemuth

over "bank robberies and sexual matters."

Defense attorneys said in last week's hearing they would likely present evidence that Lindemuth was sexually aggressive, but not necessarily to support a self-defense theory.

The Thursday hearing addressed some of the evidence brought up in the defense motion. Judge Kohl ultimately decided it was too early for him to make a ruling on the evidence and concluded the matter without hearing testimony.

Before his ruling, though, Kohl received documents and heard from defense attorneys Conor Huseby and Greg Scholl and prosecutors Jeff Lesowski and Beth Roberts.

In the motion and memorandum filed by the defense, attorneys wrote:

"To believe that Mr. Delaurentiis' attorneys told Mr. Delaurentiis to steal medications to pass a polygraph … the court would have to believe that Mr. Delaurentiis' attorneys are both exceptionally dishonest, and exceptionally dumb."

According to court records, a jail inmate has informed police that Delaurentiis "said his attorneys were encouraging him to go with a story that the victim had attempted to rape him while he was high and that Mr. Delaurentiis acted in self-defense."

Another inmate, defense attorneys say, told police Delaurentiis and his attorneys "were trying to 'paint a picture' of the victim as a sexual deviant capable of committing rape."

In their memo, defense attorneys asked the judge to exclude the state's potential evidence on the grounds that it is false, unreliable, would cause undue delay in the case, is unfairly prejudicial and it intrudes upon attorney-client privilege.

"In sum, the statements from the informants in this case come from dubious sources armed with powerful motives to lie," the motion says.

In their written response, prosecutors argued the evidence is highly relevant, the witnesses' credibility is for the jury to decide and the defense team is not forced to withdraw from the case.

"Finally, it is important to note that the State believes (the informants),” prosecutors wrote. “We understand that like all inmate-witnesses there will be impeachment, but we have looked these witnesses in the eye and believe what they say. We would not use them if we did not."

At the hearing last week, Lesowski, a senior deputy district attorney, further said the evidence in question was convincing. For that reason, he understood why the defense would want it excluded.

“When you hear these witnesses testify,” he said, “it’s pretty good stuff.”

Scholl said prosecutors were putting the defense attorneys' credibility on the line.

“We’re not liars,” he said.

Attorneys on both sides said they felt insulted by the other side's comments.

-- Emily E. Smith