When Dr. Stephen Bartlett and his wife arrived in March 2018 at The Capital Grille by the Inner Harbor in Baltimore, a host told Bartlett that medical malpractice attorney Stephen L. Snyder was waiting for him at the bar.

Snyder had a host deliver him a package at the bar once Bartlett arrived, Bartlett recalled during his testimony in Snyder’s federal trial Tuesday.

The package contained “gory photographs” of someone who had undergone a medical procedure, part of a case Snyder said he had against the University of Maryland Medical System, where Bartlett worked as a transplant surgeon.

“He said the client was a nutcase and she wanted revenge against the hospital system,” Bartlett testified, adding that Snyder mentioned a video that he would publish “if I did not cooperate with him.”

“He wanted the hospital system to employ him, in some capacity, perhaps as a consultant, for $25 million,” Bartlett testified.

Bartlett’s testimony cut to the heart of the government’s case against Snyder, 77, who is charged with attempted extortion and seven counts of violating the federal Travel Act, which forbids the use of the U.S. mail, or interstate or foreign travel, to engage in extortion among other criminal acts.

His trial began Wednesday with the testimony of another doctor from the Maryland medical system who recalled several meetings in which Snyder raised the prospect of a $25 million consulting deal.

Prosecutors say Snyder threatened to launch an aggressive media campaign to accuse the hospital system of transplanting diseased organs in patients without their knowledge. Snyder offered his silence for $25 million under the guise of a consulting deal, even though he never planned to do any work for the hospital system.

“Every interaction that he had with the University of Maryland was carefully planned,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Matt Phelps told jurors in opening statements.

‘Going forward full blast’

Back at The Capital Grille, Snyder and Bartlett went to the table to dine with their spouses after conversing for about 15 to 20 minutes at the bar, Bartlett and his wife, June Jaekels, testified.

The couple said small talk at the table — about vacation homes, Snyder’s Rolls Royce, their families potentially spending Passover together — turned sinister. They said Snyder was sweating, his face red and eyes bloodshot, as he became “very excited.”

“‘As long as he does what I say, he’ll be OK,’” Bartlett recalled Snyder saying. “He repeated that over and over.”

Jaekels said she interpreted Snyder’s refrain as a threat, leaving her “scared.”

Bartlett said he left dinner feeling “sick inside.”

But Snyder sent him text messages in the days and weeks that followed, as he pressured Bartlett to take his proposition to other hospital system officials.

“If I don’t get a straight answer, I’m going forward full blast,” Snyder texted Bartlett on April 8.

And then in a later text, Snyder wrote, “If it wasn’t for my friendship with you, I would pursue this GOLDMINE.”

Bartlett testified that he didn’t consider Snyder a friend, despite Snyder’s assertion of as much during opening statements Wednesday. Bartlett resigned as the hospital system’s chief medical officer — and one of the highest-paid employees in Maryland — in 2019 and now works for the University of Illinois Chicago.

Snyder described himself before the jury as a victim of malicious prosecution.

He spent much of his hour-long opening statement going over his accolades as an attorney and discussing his philanthropic endeavors. He claimed he pursued a consulting deal at the request of his client, who lost her husband to complications associated with a kidney transplant at the University of Maryland Medical Center.

Attorneys and consulting deal

Snyder also said he consulted lawyers about the potential consulting agreement.

Eric Yaffe, an ethics attorney Snyder hired, billed Snyder $50,000 for his firm’s services.

“Advised S. Snyder to be careful of any agreement with (sic) hospital,” Yaffe wrote in a June 2018 billing note.

Yaffe testified Thursday “be careful” referred to the potential of the agreement seeming like extortion.

His colleague John McNutt sent an email to Snyder on June 21, 2018 — the day before Snyder met with hospital system officials and proposed the consulting agreement officially.

“Any consulting agreement with (sic) hospital must have full consent of (sic) client,” read a header in the email, in which the attorneys recommended Snyder give two-thirds of the proceeds of the agreement to the client.

Prosecutors say Snyder kept the proposal from his client; Snyder maintains he proposed the agreement at his client’s request.

Alicia Reynolds, senior director of claims at Maryland Medicine Comprehensive Insurance Program, the hospital system’s insurance provider, took notes of the June 22, 2018 meeting with Snyder. Prosecutors had her read segments of her notes for the jury Thursday.

“Mrs. S. would know she doesn’t deserve that $ for her case,” Reynolds wrote, paraphrasing Snyder’s words during the meeting.

Reynolds testified “nothing about this meeting was typical,” saying it left her and her colleagues feeling “very shaken, threatened.”

She added that Snyder showed them a video commercial he threatened to publicize if the hospital system didn’t meet his demands.

“The facts were one-sided,” Reynolds said. “There was spin to them. They were designed to inflame.”

Snyder, who is representing himself with an attorney on standby to assist, questioned Reynolds for hours. He asked her if he was the greatest adversary the hospital system had faced.

“Respectfully, no,” Reynolds responded.

‘Dignity of the courtroom’

Snyder asked Reynolds about his reputation as a plaintiff’s attorney. He also asked her about settlements he reached with the hospital system for $12.5 million and $10 million.

But for the second day in a row, Snyder’s line of questioning devolved into argument, drawing numerous objections from prosecutors. U.S. District Judge Deborah L. Boardman interjected several times, ordering Snyder to refrain from using cross-examination as an opportunity to argue his case to the jury.

Before testimony Thursday, Boardman asked Snyder about the last time he tried a case in front of a jury. She warned him against out-of-line questions.

“I can’t have you do it at the expense of the dignity of the courtroom,” Boardman said.

“To be honest with you, your honor, federal court is different than state court,” Snyder responded.

If he continued, the judge added, she has the power to hold him in contempt of court and to revoke his right to represent himself.

Have a news tip? Contact Alex Mann at amann@baltsun.com and @alex_mann10 on X.