When he entered the Berrien County courtroom in Niles Thursday morning, Trey Nichols, 18, saw his parents, family, friends as well as members of the media, and his face became pained with emotion.

The Niles High School honor student was in court Thursday to face a number of charges stemming from his May 12 arrest alongside Parnell Martin, Leon Murphy and Martise Washington, all 18, and Martell Miller, 17.

Nichols was arraigned on one count of criminal sexual conduct in the 1st degree; three counts of arranging to manufacture or finance child sexually abusive material; one count of extortion; and three counts of surveillance.

At the start of Thursday’s proceedings, a total of four more counts of criminal sexual conduct in the 1st degree were added to those charges Nichols was already facing.

Three female witnesses were heard from during the proceedings, each of whom had allegedly been filmed or video recorded by Nichols. One of the victims engaged in sex with Nichols.

The court first heard from Niles City Police Department Det. Richard Krueger, who had testified Wednesday in the preliminary examinations for Miller, Martin and Washington.

Krueger told the court following the original complaint — made back in March by a now 18-year-old female — that an unauthorized video had allegedly been made of the victim engaging in sexual intercourse with Washington. He questioned Nichols about the alleged video.

“Mr. Nichols told me Martise Washington asked him to videotape he and (the victim) having sex,” Krueger said. “He said he set up a video camera from a cell phone on a desk … He said it was recorded and he’d (filmed) the sex act on the phone video camera and transported it to his laptop computer. My understanding is the phone was tethered to the laptop.”

Krueger also testified that Nichols told him he had not talked to the victim about video recording her and he had not heard Washington talking to her about it either.

It was while Nichols was being questioned by police about that particular incident – allegedly taking place on March 14 in Nichols’ bedroom — that police discovered the defendant had two other videos on his laptop of Nichols and two other girls, both under age 18.

Both of those girls took the stand Thursday.

The first was a 17-year-old girl who said she was friends with Nichols. Visibly nervous, the witness testified she was at Nichols’ home in his bathroom when a video of her naked from the waist up had been taken by Nichols on his cell phone.

Asked by Pierangeli if she gave Nichols permission to videotape her, she said no.

“He asked to take a picture,” she said. “He didn’t ask to videotape it.”

She said she told Nichols not to photograph her, and she was not aware that he recorded her in any way until Krueger showed her the files.

The victim’s mother, who listened as her daughter testified in court, wiped away tears as her daughter spoke.

Upon cross examination by Nichols’ attorney, Tat Parish, the victim did say she clearly saw Nichols with his phone that day in the bathroom.

“You were aware he was taking a picture of some sort,” Parish asked.

“Yes,” she said.

Another 17-year-old, Nichols’ alleged ex-girlfriend, was next to take the stand. She testified she was 15 when the two started dating in 2009 and she identified two separate videos entered into evidence as videos of her engaging in sex with Nichols on two separate occasions in February.

She testified she was unaware of the videos prior to being notified by police and that she had not consented to being recorded.

Parish questioned her lack of awareness of the alleged recording, and asked if she really didn’t see Nichols with the cell phone while they were having sex on either occasion.

“I didn’t see it (the cell phone) in his hand,” she said.

The first victim who had told her story for the first time during the preliminary examination of Martin, Miller and Washington on Wednesday returned to the stand to tell it again.

Nichols is not being accused of engaging in any sexual acts with her, but it was his room where the victim and Washington originally had sex. And days later, when she was allegedly threatened with the video by Murphy and allegedly coerced into a number of sexual acts with him, Washington, Miller and Martin, the victim testified Nichols was at Murphy’s home for a short time.

The victim testified Nichols had been “messing with something on the desk” prior to leaving his bedroom for she and Washington to have sex.

She also said during the time spent at Murphy’s home on March 18, Nichols told her that “if I did stuff with Parnell, after I was done he’d make sure I got home.”

Parish, much like the defense attorneys for the other three defendants, questioned the victim’s belief in the alleged threats being made to her regarding the video.

“Certainly you knew Facebook does not permit pornography to be posted before March 14 of this year,” Parish said.

“Yes,” the victim answered.

“You knew that was an empty threat, didn’t you?” he pressed.

“Facebook would allow it to be posted for a certain amount of time” before someone reported it, the victim said.

But Parish pushed harder.

“You knew if there was a genuine threat, all you had to do was notify Facebook and they would handle it,” he said.

“I guess yes,” was the victim’s response.

Though officials with Facebook were not contacted for this story, the website explains the company’s policy on offensive or pornographic material.

“You will not post content that: is hateful, threatening, or pornographic; incites violence; contains nudity or graphic or gratuitous violence,” is one of the elements listed in Facebook’s “Statement of Rights and Responsibilities.”

Users can report photos or videos they find offensive and it is possible for users to see the videos or photos pulled from their page or their accounts disabled altogether.

Upon Parish’s cross examination, the victim also testified that she told police after reporting the incident that she did not want any of the defendants to get into trouble.

When asked why she didn’t contact police sooner, she said, “I didn’t know how to tell people.”

Parish also questioned why the victim never called for help, to which she said she had no outside calling capability on her phone.

But Parish countered, saying her phone was able to make emergency calls to 911, to which the victim confirmed.

Parish stated he had not viewed any of the recordings entered into evidence and objected to their admittance. At the end of proceedings he told the court he would view the recordings at the prosecutor’s office before reconvening this afternoon.

Nichols, along with Martin, Miller and Washington, face charges that could result in a life in prison sentence. Murphy accepted a plea agreement with the prosecution.

In a call to Parish following the preliminary exam, he said an offer had been made to his client with a 15-year maximum sentence. But he would not comment as to whether or not that deal was still on the table, saying only, “with the present parole board people don’t get out a whole lot sooner than the maximum (sentence).”