Brian Appel, CEO of the Boston Calling music festival, took the stand for the second day in a row Friday, as a witness for the prosecution in the trial of Boston City Hall officials Kenneth Brissette and Timothy Sullivan, charged with extorting Boston Calling into hiring union labor.

Federal prosecutors allege that Brissette and Sullivan used their power and positions to illegally pressure the festival into hiring members of the local stagehands union they didn’t want or need.

On Thursday, Appel testified that the defendants pressured him to hire union members while, weeks and even days before the festival was set to open, it was still waiting for the permits needed to open.

But during cross-examination, Appel’s testimony seemed at several times to support key arguments by the defense in this case.

Those arguments include the idea that, far from being a case of extortion, Boston Calling’s ultimate decision to hire eight union stagehands occurred as part of larger and ongoing negotiations between the festival and various city officials; and that the defendants’ requests that Boston Calling hire union members was just that – a request – and that they were trying to facilitate a successful festival.

During questioning by Brissette attorney Bill Kettlewell, Appel acknowledged that while he and his business partners had not wanted to hire union stagehands for its upcoming September, 2014 festival, they had discussed treating a request by defendant Brissette that they consider doing so an opportunity to advance their goal of obtaining a multi-year lease for the festival for future years.

At one point, Kettlewell introduced an email from Appel to Joyce Linehan, a senior advisor to Mayor Marty Walsh and whom Appel said he considered a friend to Boston Calling within the administration.

In the email, Appel writes: “Ken [Brissette] called me Friday to discuss adding union production staff to the festival … as a partner of the city, we are open…”

“Were you open?” to hiring union labor, Kettlewell asked.

“Yes,” Appel answered.

“This was to be as much a partner of the city as you could [be]?”

“Yes,” said Appel.

The defense’s cross-examination also took aim at an August, 2014 meeting that has been central to the prosecution’s narrative so far.

At the meeting, held just weeks before Boston Calling was scheduled to open on City Hall Plaza, and while the festival was still waiting to secure crucial permits, and at which Brissette and Sullivan were present, Appel testified that he was asked to hire union stagehands.

“At this meeting you didn’t think Ken Brissette was trying to harm you and your company, did you?” asked attorney Kettlewell.

“I didn’t think specifically he was trying to harm us, no,” Appel answered.

Asked a similar question later regarding defendant Sullivan, Appel gave a similar answer.

During cross-examination, the defense also elicited more testimony about ongoing problems the festival had been having – not with either defendant or with any union, but with the Boston Police Department.

The prior May had marked the first time the festival allowed guests to consume alcohol anywhere on the premises, rather than in prior years in which alcohol could only be consumed in age-restricted tents.

Boston Police Commissioner Bill Evans had requested a special meeting with Boston Calling, in which he expressed his displeasure at the new alcohol arrangements.

The Police Department is required to sign off on liquor licenses, Appel acknowledged, and it was with the BPD, not either defendant, that Appel was negotiating the terms of a new license.

“When you had this concern about your liquor license did you go to Mr. Brissette?” Kettlewell asked.

“I did not,” Appel answered.

“That’s because he had nothing to do with the liquor license?”

“I didn’t believe he did,” Appel said.

Follow Isaiah Thompson on Twitter.