Kris Buelna

402 Hearing on admissibility of testimony:  Guilt Phase

September 23, 2004

JUDGE: All right. This is People versus Scott Peterson. Let the record show the defendant is present with counsel. And these proceedings are taking place out of the presence of the jury. Last week we had a 402 hearing with respect to the testimony of Officer Buelna. The Court had indicated a ruling, and then the court decided, after hearing further argument, the Court would reserve a ruling until I read the testimony of Pin Kyo and the testimony of Sarah Yoshida. What the subject matter of the dispute is the People's 254A through E. In reading Pin Kyo's testimony on Page 17091, she describes the contents of the exhibit that was presented to her. She describes pieces of plastic, et al. And on page 17092, Line 4, she indicates that the debris came from the Bay. At page 17093 she identifies a long piece of plastic. Then she examined it and sent it on to Sarah Yoshida for analysis. On page 17095, Lines 9 and 10, Pin Kyo testified that they were -- the piece of plastic that was in 254Athrough E was chemically similar to that the found on Conner. She doesn't say in her testimony where the 254E was recovered or what date it was recovered. The Court read Sarah Yoshida's testimony. At page 16449, starting at Line 6, she describes testing this material. She described the material, you will all recall, as Polyethylene. At page 16455, at Line 14, it appears to be similar in its chemical properties. She also doesn't say where the debris was recovered. She apparently doesn't know. In the examination of Miss Yoshida, Mr. Harris refers to 819 dash 30. That is a sample from 254 -- our number 254A through E. And Rich dash 1 is the piece of plastic that was recovered around Conner's neck. At page 16261, Line 19, she says it has a similar chemical composition. Now, the Court after reviewing that, there was a 1054 issue. I don't believe there is a violation of 1054. That information about Pin Kyo's testimony and Yoshida's testimony was in the hands of the defense, and the subject was properly pursued on cross examination. Now, the fact that these particular samples were gathered in June, which is a few months after the discovery of the bodies, goes to the weight rather than the admissibility. So we all we would have is this 254. Nobody would know where it came in. And I think it's important for the jury to know that they can put whatever weight they want on the fact that this material was recovered in June, months after the bodies were found. So the Court will permit the testimony of Officer Buelna after reviewing the evidence of Pin Kyo and Sarah Yoshida. The Court -- I'm accepting the proffer of the prosecution that the witness is going to say she recovered this particular material, and I think it was June 1st or June the –

GERAGOS: June 21st.

JUDGE: June 21st. Okay. All right. So the Court will permit that evidence. Are we ready to go?

FLADAGER: We are.