Hundreds of documents were unsealed in the Kristin Smart case. Here’s the first look
Editor’s Note: This is the first in a series of stories examining hundreds of improperly sealed documents in the Kristin Smart trial. The Tribune obtained the documents by joining with three other media companies to form a coalition that took the issue to court. The coalition won its argument, and the documents were unsealed.
Recently unsealed documents in the Kristin Smart case give new insight into the prosecution’s efforts to investigate the Flores family, as well as their claims of harassment.
The documents are just a few among hundreds that were unsealed in the case after a Tribune-led news coalition that includes ABC News, the Associated Press and the Los Angeles Times took the issue to court claiming constitutional violations.
Monterey County Superior Court Judge Jennifer O’Keefe agreed with the coalition’s assertion to unseal documents on Aug. 4.
With documents — and their requests — being completely sealed until after the coalition filed its motion on July 14, the public could only know what was argued in open court, which often lacked context during the pretrial hearings.
The documents reveal a more complete understanding of the motions and evidence shown in the case against Paul Flores, who is accused of murdering Smart in 1996, and his father, Ruben Flores, who is charged with helping his son hide Smart’s body — one of the key reasons the Tribune formed the news coalition in the first place.
The Tribune has spent weeks reviewing thousands of pages of unsealed documents. This story is the first in a series bringing these documents to light.
Documents reveal efforts to get Flores family to cooperate with investigation
In January 2020, the San Luis Obispo County District Attorney’s Office offered Paul Flores’ sister, Ermelinda Thomas, “a degree of immunity from prosecution” in exchange for her cooperation with the investigation, the unsealed documents reveal.
According to the 1996 interview with law enforcement, Paul Flores said he was headed toward Thomas’ house when he passed by the Crandall Way party Smart attended on the nigh she was last seen.
In exchange for her cooperation, the District Attorney’s Office would have granted Thomas immunity “from prosecution for any acts (she) committed after the death of Kristin Smart that were directly related to her disappearance and death,” including accessory after the fact — the crime that Paul Flores’ father, Ruben Flores, is charged with — records show.
The letter went unsigned, the documents show.
Thomas has not been charged with any crimes related to the case.
The prosecution also subpoenaed Susan Flores, Paul Flores’ mother and Ruben Flores’ ex-wife, to testify on the stand, records show. She asked for the subpoena to be quashed because “it is her intent to exercise the Fifth Amendment privilege not to testify,” the documents say.
The Fifth Amendment, in simple terms, protects a person’s right to remain silent and not incriminate themselves of a crime.
In a motion opposing the subpoena, Susan Flores’ lawyer, Jeffry Radding, focused on a statement made by San Luis Obispo County District Attorney Dan Dow at a press conference following Paul and Ruben Flores’ arrests.
“The question is ‘are we going to be charging Susan Flores or any other family members,” Dow said at the Apirl 14, 2021, conference. “We don’t have evidence sufficient to charge anyone else at this time.... if (the investigation) were to lead to other suspects, we will follow the evidence when it becomes available.”
Radding claimed his client is considered one of the “other suspects,” and therefore it would be impossible for her to be asked questions that wouldn’t implicate her Fifth Amendment right.
The people indicated they wanted to asked Susan Flores about statements from her son in 1996 and her observations on Memorial Day weekend 1996, the motion said. Answers to those questions “reflect potential knowledge” of Susan Flores that could be used “against her in any subsequent criminal prosecution.”
While San Luis Obispo Superior Court Judge Craig van Rooyen granted this motion during the 2021 preliminary hearings, Monterey County Superior Court Judge Jennifer O’Keefe denied it, with the caveat that Susan Flores could still attend court proceedings, unlike other witnesses in the case.
Susan Flores has yet to attend a court proceeding since opening statements, and it is unclear if the prosecution will call her to the stand.
Flores family claims harassment, witness intimidation, documents show
The Flores family has long claimed it has experienced harassment ever since 1996, when Paul Flores was first deemed a suspect for Kristin Smart’s murder.
This was evident in the defense’s motion to move the trial outside of San Luis Obispo County, which included claims that Paul Flores was a “pariah” in the county due to the publicity of the case. It also included photos of rocks and flyers that had been thrown or placed outside of Susan Flores’ Branch Street home, as well as a “beep log” which Susan Flores used to keep track of each time someone honked their horn outside her house since 2008.
The defense claims the prosecution has continued to harass the Flores family “with the unfounded hope that somehow one of them would make a case for them by making confessions,” according to the defense motion to dismiss the case on the grounds of outrageous government conduct.
The motion claims the government has been harassing the family for years, but a search warrant served by Arroyo Grande Police Department on May 28 on Susan Flores to obtain her phone was “a direct attempt to intimidate Susan Flores and her family” and a tactic to “invade the defense camp.”
The unsealed documents include the search warrant, which was obtained in response to Jamilyn Holman’s report to Arroyo Grande police that Susan Flores had taken pictures of her 8-year-old daughter in an attempt to dissuade Holman, who is Ruben Flores’ neighbor, from testifying.
Holman, who took the stand on Aug. 29, testified she saw the Flores family “yelling” outside Ruben Flores’ home days after an FBI search warrant was served in February 2020. She said two trailers were present at the house, and one was backed into the garage.
According to the police report, Holman’s daughter opened the freezer door in Holman’s garage, looked over her should, was “terrified” and yelled “Mommy that lady is taking a picture of me,” referring to a driver inside a red SUV. Holman recognized the car as Susan Flores’ because she sees Susan Flores park at Ruben Flores’ house often.
Susan Flores denied taking photos, according to the police report.
“I believe that Susan Flores maliciously attempted to dissuade Holman from testifying by taking pictures with her cell phone of Holman and her daughter at their residence,” Stephen Doherty, a senior Arroyo Grande police officer, wrote in the warrant request.
The defense claimed the search warrant “coincides with the discussions of counsel regarding the commencement of trial” and “conveniently” called for a search of Susan Flores’ phone from May 20 through May 27 — the same week as those discussions, the motion says.
In the oral hearing of the motion, Robert Sanger, Paul Flores’ attorney, alleged there was a settlement discussion on May 24 that surprised both sides and was shut down quickly. He alleged this was to intentionally determine “what reaction Susan Flores would have had in response to the fact that settlement was discussed and rejected,” the motion said.
If the warrant had actually been for photos taken on a specific day, the warrant should have been tailored to that day, the motion says. The warrant states the window is necessary in order to see if there were additional incidents of Susan Flores loitering near Holman’s home without Holman noticing.
Monterey County Superior Court Judge Jennifer O’Keefe ultimately denied the defense’s motion because the complaint originated from a witness — not the government — and said the defense failed to meet the high bar set to prove there was misconduct at all, let alone outrageous conduct.
Susan Flores has not been charged with any crimes related to the May warrant.
This is the first in a series publishing the unsealed documents in the case. Subscribe to read our next story.
This story was originally published September 16, 2022 at 11:32 AM.
