Defense witnesses testified Thursday afternoon in favor of Baltimore County Police Corporal Zachary Small after prosecutors rested their case on the third day of his assault and misconduct trial.

The defense witnesses, a county police sergeant and lieutenant, testified that they found Small was within departmental policy in their assessments of the 52-year-old corporal’s treatment of an armed robbery suspect arrested Sept. 27 after escaping from police custody at Johns Hopkins Hospital.

Small was indicted in February by a city grand jury on charges including second-degree assault, reckless endangerment and misconduct in office related to his conduct that day. His bench trial before Baltimore Circuit Judge Paul E. Alpert began this week and has so far included testimony from Small’s superiors as well as fellow officers facing related criminal charges.

Body-camera footage shows Small pepper-spraying the 32-year-old in his face several times after the suspect banged on the door of the police cruiser he was shackled in, saying he couldn’t breathe. Small is later seen dragging the man to the ground and lifting him by his hair.

Defense attorneys first called Small’s sergeant, Michael McCollum, who testified that Small’s conduct was necessary to effect the arrest as well as prevent the suspect from escaping again, breaking the windows, or injuring himself and others. They later called county Lt. Walter Noyes, McCollum’s supervisor who approved the sergeant’s assessment of Small’s use of force.

The defense witnesses said the suspect was aggressive with officers, at one point blocking them from shutting the door of the SUV, and posed a threat of escaping again or injuring somebody. Both argued they did not believe the man was in any actual danger when he complained that the car was too hot or when he said that he could not breathe.

On cross-examination, Assistant State’s Attorney Kimberly Rothwell pressed McCollum on how necessary Small’s actions were.

“I agree it doesn’t look good,” said McCollum, after being asked whether there were better alternatives to Small pulling the man’s hair, adding that he didn’t see it as an “assault” or a policy violation.

He acknowledged that Small had a “grasp” on the man’s long hair, but disputed prosecutors’ characterization of the pulling as “yanking.”

The assessments of McCollum and Noyes initially were approved by the Wilkens precinct’s commander, County Police Capt. Michael Fruhling, though he later wrote in a Nov. 22 memo to then-Maj. Orlando Lilly that Small’s use of force was unnecessary.

Prosecutors called Lilly, now the superintendent of the Maryland Natural Resources Police, as their last witness.

Lilly testified Thursday morning that he did not believe there was any immediate danger while the suspect was shackled in the back of a police vehicle. He testified he saw no “legitimate law enforcement objective” gained by pulling any suspect by the hair, and that it was “not likely” that the suspect would have escaped again at that point.

Under state law and departmental policy governing use of force, officers can use “necessary and proportional” force against a person only to “prevent an imminent threat of physical injury to a person” or “effectuate a legitimate law enforcement objective.” City prosecutors are arguing that Small’s use of force during the arrest was excessive and illegal.

Alpert denied a motion by Small’s attorneys — Brian Thompson, Patrick Seidel and Riane White — to acquit the corporal due to insufficient evidence after prosecutors finished their case.

The trial will resume Friday morning, when lawyers are expected to deliver their closing arguments.