Paul Flores’ mother not expected to testify at Kristin Smart murder trial, lawyers say
The mother of Paul Flores, who’s accused of killing Cal Poly student Kristin Smart, likely won’t testify during the murder trial against her son.
That revelation came Tuesday as a series of pre-trial hearings wrapped up in Monterey County Superior Court.
Paul Flores, 45, is accused of murdering 19-year-old Smart after an off-campus party in May 1996, while his father, 81-year-old Ruben Flores, is accused of helping hide her body. The two men were arrested in April 2021.
The trial against the Flores men was moved to Salinas after San Luis Obispo Superior Court Judge Craig van Rooyen ruled that they would likely not receive a fair trial in San Luis Obispo County because of pretrial publicity.
Several of the motions heard Tuesday restated various rules and laws that pertain to criminal court proceedings, but others determined court procedures, evidence and witnesses.
All but one motion filed by both parties have been filed under seal, so information is limited to what was said in court. The only public motion pertains to jury selection procedures.
Here are the motions that stuck out:
Defense: Susan Flores is not planning to testify
On a motion filed by the prosecution, Monterey County Superior Court Judge Jennifer O’Keefe ruled that witnesses in the case cannot attend trial court proceedings, with one exception: the Smart and Flores families.
Smart and Flores family members will be allowed to attend trial court proceedings only after they have given their witness testimony. This means if they plan to testify, they cannot attend opening statements.
This only applies to members of the Smart family, because Susan Flores, Paul Flores’ mother and Ruben Flores’ ex-wife, is not being called to testify by the defense at this time, Robert Sanger, Paul Flores’ attorney, said Tuesday in court.
If Susan Flores attends the opening statements, she will not be able to testify, the judge said, so the decision must be made final before then.
Judge: No objections in front of juries
O’Keefe also ruled on the prosecution’s motion that neither party can object in front of the jury.
So how will this work in practice?
According to Trial Guides, a legal research crowdsourcing platform, if the defense or prosecution becomes aware of something that may cause an objection, they should address it in the judge’s chambers before court.
This practice is meant to streamline court proceedings, because time won’t be spent pausing for objections and listening to evidence that cannot be considered for the verdict.
If the need for an objection does arise in the moment, parties will have to approach the bench and speak with the judge about it before a ruling about the objection is made. This means the public, and the jury, will not know the reason behind an objection.
Kristin Smart is a victim, judge rules
The defense team filed a motion that asked the court to only refer to Smart by her name or as a “missing person.” Sanger said calling her a victim is inappropriate because it makes a “conclusion” about what happened to her.
Deputy District Attorney Chris Peuvrelle said this kind of motion is usually reserved for self-defense cases where whether someone is a victim is core to the case. “There is no doubt that Ms. Smart is a victim,” he said.
O’Keefe ruled in Peurvelle’s favor, noting that Smart was rarely referred to as a victim in the preliminary hearing transcripts.
Sanger also asked for Paul Flores to not be referred to by a “pejorative designation,” but it is unclear what specifically he meant.
Sanger said he believes referring to accused people as “defendants” is an issue but noted the court precedent has almost always referred to those accused as such. Peuvrelle said the term is a legal term and should not be an issue. It was ruled that Paul Flores can be referred to by his name and as “defendant.”
The judge ruled that a May 27, 1996, mug shot of Paul Flores, that shows he had a black eye following Smart’s disappearance is deemed admissable only if the prosecution can track down the original photo. Sanger said the Arroyo Grande Police Department and/or the San Luis Obispo County Sheriff’s Office misplaced the photo, so copies of it lack foundation.
What’s next in the case
A few motions remained without a ruling on Tuesday, including whether an expert witness’ testimony is admissible and whether unnamed “digital evidence” will be admissible.
The next hearing is scheduled July 13, when jury questioning begins. The potential jury pool is 1,520, and will be narrowed down to 40 total between two juries — one for Paul Flores and one for Ruben Flores — and juror alternates.
The trial is set to begin its opening statements on July 6.
This story was originally published June 7, 2022 at 7:02 PM with the headline "Paul Flores’ mother not expected to testify at Kristin Smart murder trial, lawyers say."
