Kristin Smart murder case: Here’s what happened on Day 3 of preliminary hearing
Latest update to this story >> >> Kristin Smart hearing: Defense questions Cal Poly detective about early investigation
A retired Cal Poly police detective testified in San Luis Obispo Superior Court on Wednesday morning that Paul Flores had a black eye when he interviewed him three days after the disappearance of university student Kristin Smart.
Lawrence Kennedy also described Flores’ behavior during that interview, saying that it was apparent that Flores was nervous.
“He wasn’t shaking, but he was wearing a t-shirt (and) it appeared his heart beating was moving the shirt,” Kennedy said under direct examination. “He appeared nervous to me and I did not know why.”
Witness testimony resumed Wednesday in the preliminary hearing in the case of Smart, who was allegedly murdered more than 25 years ago.
The court also unsealed roughly 90 pages of motions that contain information from roughly four dozen searches conducted in the case over more than two decades.
Paul Flores, 44, is the last person known to have seen the 19-year-old Smart alive after walking her back from the party toward the Cal Poly campus residence halls on May 24, 1996. He is accused of raping or attempting to rape Smart in his dorm room before killing her.
Smart’s body has never been found, but investigators believe it was buried at the Arroyo Grande home of Paul Flores’ father, 80-year-old Ruben Flores, and “recently” moved, according to a San Luis Obispo County probation report.
Wednesday marked the third day of testimony in an evidentiary hearing for Paul and Ruben Flores that was expected to last at least 12 days before the judge in the case said Wednesday it’s likely to proceed through August.
So far, the prosecution has laid out its case against the father-and-son co-defendants in a mostly linear fashion.
Testimony began Monday with Smart’s parents, Stan and Denise, and continued through Tuesday with several former Cal Poly students who lived with Smart at Cal Poly’s Muir Hall or attended a house party with her in the hours before she vanished.
Testimony over the last two days has shown that investigators were still interviewing witnesses in early July.
The preliminary trial is not being live-streamed and media in attendance are under strict rules prohibiting the use of electronic devices and photographing or recording witnesses in the courtroom.
At the conclusion of the hearing, Superior Court Judge Craig van Rooyen will rule whether prosecutors established probable cause — a lesser standard of proof than guilt beyond a reasonable doubt — to proceed the case toward trial.
Here’s what happened Wednesday during the preliminary hearing.
.jpg "Afternoon FLORES1501-2 (1).jpg")
Lawyers debate booking photo of Paul Flores with black eye
Testimony ended Tuesday with San Luis Obispo Sheriff’s Office Det. Clint Cole, who testified that a booking photo taken of Flores when he was arrested on a warrant for driving on a suspended license on May 27, 1996, was not kept by the Arroyo Grande Police Department.
On Wednesday, that booking photo was the first topic of consideration.
A version of the photo has long been held as evidence by the Sheriff’s Office, but the quality is poor and can not be enhanced to properly show Flores’ black eye.
As a result, Cole obtained a negative of the photo from Jim Murphy, the Smart family’s civil attorney, who kept the negative as part of a civil wrongful death lawsuit, Cole testified.
“It’s extremely important that if we’re going to use this evidence that it be reliable,” Robert Sanger, Paul Flores’ attorney, argued before van Rooyen.
Van Rooyen initially would not admit the prosecution’s copy of the photo because it could not be verified as authentic, but said the prosecution could provide witnesses to attest that the prosecution’s photo shows how Flores appeared on May 27, 1996.
Deputy District Attorney Christopher Peuvrelle then called Lawrence Kennedy, the now-retired Cal Poly campus police detective who initially investigated Smart’s missing person’s case.
On Wednesday, Kennedy said that when he first interviewed Flores on May 27, 1996, he had discoloring under his right eye. Kennedy also interviewed Flores’ roommate, who said that Flores had the black eye when the two had dinner on May 25, 1996.
Van Rooyen then accepted the prosecution’s photo into evidence.
Cal Poly police detective testifies about first interviews of Paul Flores
Kennedy, who was a Cal Poly police detective until 2003 and was the first investigator in Smart’s missing person’s case, testified that he got the call about Smart’s disappearance on Memorial Day, May 27, 1996. He contacted Flores the next day.
Kennedy noted the black eye during the interview, when Flores said he didn’t know Smart, but walked her close to her dorm at Muir Hall, where the two parted ways and he returned to his room in Santa Lucia Hall.
Kennedy and another campus officer spoke with Flores again on May 30, 1996, and an audio recording of that interview was played in court Wednesday morning.
In the recording, Flores says that he had “too much” to drink the night of the party and admits to drinking regularly despite a recent DUI conviction and a suspended license.
Flores again describes the walk home, but says he doesn’t know how he ended up walking with Smart. During the interview, Flores says Smart was “flirtatious.”
Asked if he found her attractive, Flores responds: “Nah, she was drunk. ... If someone’s promiscuous, I don’t find them attractive.”
Kennedy then asks Flores whether he had any nicknames, and he said he was known as “Pauly Shore.” Kennedy asks about the nickname “Chester the Molester,” which other students reported to Kennedy.
“No, never ever,” Flores says. “No, I never heard that.”
At that point in the interview, Kennedy emphasizes to Flores the seriousness of the situation.
“I don’t want to say it’s dead serious, but it’s about as serious as you can get,” Kennedy tells him. “At this point you’re the last person seen with her.”
Flores had said that there was someone in his dorm hallway when he returned from the party that saw him come in. Kennedy tells Flores to find the identity of that person and any other witnesses that could establish an alibi.
Later in the interview, Flores tells Kennedy that he drank a few beers at his residence hall before the party on May 24, 1996, and was walking to his sister’s house nearby when he happened upon the party, implying he didn’t intend on going.
Kennedy tells him “that doesn’t seem like a plausible situation.”
“That’s a stretch for me,” Kennedy tells Flores, before Flores agrees to take a polygraph.
Investigator says defendant gave conflicting accounts to friends
Kennedy testified that he interviewed a friend of Flores’ as well as his roommate, both of whom were given conflicting accounts of Flores’ version of events on May 24, 1996.
Javier Carillo, one of his friends, told Kennedy that Flores said Smart was “flirting” with him at the party but that the two and another student had each split up on the walk home and that he didn’t accompany Smart to her dorm.
Carillo recalled that he had dinner with Flores the night of May 26, 1996, and saw he had a black eye injury to his right eye. Flores had said he got it playing basketball.
Kennedy said he interviewed Derek Tse, Flores’ roommate at Santa Lucia Hall, who was out of town all Memorial Day weekend.
Tse told Kennedy he asked Flores what happened to Smart and Flores told him he walked her close to her dorm room before going his own way.
The roommate also recalled Flores made the remark: “She’s home with my parents.”
After the conclusion of the audio recording, Kennedy testified that he searched Flores’ dorm room on June 29, 1996, the same day it was searched by cadaver dogs.
Kennedy had to stop testifying about the dogs due to an objection from Sanger, who argued Kennedy could not testify to what dogs found.
It is expected that the dog handlers will testify in the hearing, Peuvrelle said, though he did not say when that testimony is expected.
Defense floats theories on disappearance, other suspects
Defense attorney Robert Sanger continued cross examination of Kennedy after the lunch recess, and asked again about a handful of other people and whether they were ever looked into as persons of interest in the case.
Sanger had previously asked other witnesses about the individuals, who include a former Santa Barbara police officer, Brian Sawicki, who was convicted of a lewd conduct charge in 2012. Sanger said that Sawicki attended the Crandall Way party, though no evidence has been introduced about him.
Another person, identified by Sanger only as Yanish, was reported for peeping into Kristin Smart’s dorm room, Sanger said. Van Rooyen has been presented with no evidence related to that person.
Sanger previously said Scott Peterson, serving life for murdering his wife and unborn son, was also at the Crandall Way party, but Peuvrelle objected, saying that Sanger’s assertion misstates the evidence.
No evidence related to Scott Peterson has been admitted.
The defense has also suggested through its questioning that Smart could have disappeared on purpose and had a history of doing so. Sanger questioned Kennedy about a person he interviewed as part of his investigation who was at a Christian camp in Hawaii with Smart in 1995.
That person, identified in court only as Alyssa, said Smart followed a male counselor she had a crush on to another island while she was also a counselor there and didn’t tell anybody.
Alyssa reportedly said Smart spent $175 on a hotel and bought the man a gold ring.
The woman, for whom more information is expected to be released in court Thursday, also described Smart to Kennedy as “carefree, outgoing, spontaneous and boy-crazy.” She added that Smart was “totally capable of hiding money and leaving on her own,” according to Sanger’s reading of the report.
Judge unseals search records, says hearing will last until September
Before adjourning early Wednesday, van Rooyen took up a handful of housekeeping items, including scheduling.
After Peuvrelle reported that the prosecution’s case is moving along slower than planned and one witness is only available Aug. 30, van Rooyen said the hearing will now likely proceed throughout the month of August.
The defense on July 21 filed a motion to suppress some evidence investigators secured through about four dozen searches conducted over the more than two decades of investigation.
Sanger argued that those documents contain exculpatory evidence beneficial to the defense. He argued that, because he now intends to refer to affidavits used to secure search warrants in the case, it is no longer necessary to keep the records sealed from the public, due to the media’s presence in the courtroom.
Harold Mesick, Ruben Flores’ attorney, joined in the motion, calling the information contained in the records, as well as the prosecution’s response, “a double-edged sword.”
“The Fourth Estate has seen only one side of this story,” Mesick told van Rooyen.
Van Rooyen, who said he cannot consider what the media has seen or reports, said that rules of the court dictate that there must be an overriding interest to shield the records from the public, and that he no longer sees a compelling government interest to keep the documents sealed.
Those records were unsealed Wednesday evening, and The Tribune is reviewing them for publication.
Paul Flores, father accused of killing Cal Poly student, hiding body
After a decades-long investigation, Paul and Ruben Flores were arrested in connection with Smart’s disappearance on April 13 in San Pedro and Arroyo Grande, respectively, and the San Luis Obispo District Attorney’s Office announced the criminal charges against the men the following day.
Paul Flores, a San Pedro resident, is charged with one count of murder. Ruben Flores, who lives in Arroyo Grande, is charged with felony accessory after the fact.
Paul Flores and his father pleaded not guilty at their arraignment on April 19, when van Rooyen ordered Paul Flores be held without bail.
Paul Flores remains in San Luis Obispo County Jail, where he’s being held without bail for the remainder of proceedings.
Ruben Flores was released from County Jail on April 22, hours after Superior Court Judge Craig van Rooyen significantly lowered his bail because he is not a flight risk or a risk to public safety.
Ruben Flores remains out of custody.
Paul Flores faces a sentence of 25 years to life if convicted of first-degree murder.
Ruben Flores faces a maximum of three years if convicted of the accessory charge, though it is not clear if that sentence would be served in County Jail or state prison.
This story was originally published August 4, 2021 at 11:01 AM.
