Where do you see this in the article?
The prosecutor said it was baseless, but was he referring to payments to inmates for testimony, or the overall defense argument?
The only way the defense would bring up the payment to prisoner witnesses is if they were later deposed by the defense.
There is nothing in the article that denies those payments or favors. You think a prosecutor wouldn't lie about this? If so, are you ever naive.
"Assistant State Attorney General Greg Rosen dismissed Engelhard's allegations as "baseless."
AllegationS as baseless. For all you know the defense attorney could have easily bribed an inmate to state he'd been paid to testify - that has happened in the past.
However, without solid proof I'll take the word of the prosecutor over a activist defense attorney and a convicted, DNA evidenced proven, murderer.