6.Erika Johnson — Direct/Cross/Redirect

JUDGE WHEELER: Erika Johnson, please.

I apologize to the jury. We are going to staya little bit later today, but we have one witness that has a scheduling issue and so we'd like to get her testimony today. Okay? Thank you.

Good afternoon, Ms. Johnson.

JUDGE WHEELER: All right. Thank you, ma'am. You're free to go.

All right. That concludes the testimony for today. So before you go, just my daily reminders to you not to have any conversations, don't look at the internet, any local new reports, no conversations with friends or family or with each other. And we'll see everybody back tomorrow at 8:30. we'll will start promptly after that. Okay? All right. Thank you all very much.

JUDGE WHEELER: All right. we are back on the record.

And I just want to address a few things. First of all, so that we could have some certainty moving forward in regards to the jail calls. I'm going to rule on that motion at this time. And the Court's going to rule that any calls between Ms. Kawass and Garcia are not going to be admissible. I think I'm going to find that they are work product and they won't be admissible at trial.

The remainder of the calls I'm separating into two types of calls. There's the ones that are in English and there's the ones that are in Spanish. And, therefore, the remainder of these calls are what I'm going to have a Richardson hearing on. The ones that involve Ms. Kawass I don't need to because they're not admissible. They're not coming in.

So the remainder of the calls, I'm going to find that the failure to turn those calls over to you, particularly before trial, is not willful. It was inadvertent because these are just recent calls. So I'm going to find that the State turned them over to you when jt came to their attention or when they had them in their hands in order to turn them over to you.

I'm also going to find that according to the State's representations, that they're only going to be used for impeachment purposes. And so they're not substantial, given the fact that they're not coming in in the case-in-chief.

As far as being prejudicial, I'm going to -- this is where I'm going to make the distinction between the English calls and the Spanish calls. The Spanish calls now, we're having to go through this whole process at the 11th hour in regards to having an interpreter and transcribing the phone calls, and whether that's an accurate transcription. And we are in the middle of trial and getting close to the end of the State's case, I would assume.

So, any of the Spanish calls, I'm going to find that they're -- the process that we are going through now and the transcription and having to provide that to the defense is more prejudicial. And I'm not going to permit those to be admitted. we don't even know what they say. None of us know what they say. And they haven't been transcribed yet because I haven't signed the order. And it's just -- it's too late in the game for them to be admitted and -- because it's too prejudicial to the defense.

So any of those Spanish calls, I'm not even going to sign the order because I'm not going to take up the Court's resources to have those transcribed. If you choose to do that out on your own, then that's up to you all.

In regards to the ones that were in English, they were clear. There wasn't any issue with any translation or any difficulty in hearing what they say. And so those conversations are not prejudicial. They have been in the defense's possession since last Friday. They had all weekend to go over them. They know for what purposes they are going to be used. And, therefore, I'm going to allow those to be admissible.

The State has represented that they're clearly for impeachment purposes and so I'l] accept their representation on that. So the English ones will be admissible because I find that they are not prejudicial under the Richardson hearing test under -- that is applicable under the Richardson hearing test.

Going forward, my understanding is that there may be some other jail calls. And I don't know from when they are from or if they're recent or from this weekend or whatever. Moving forward, there is no -- nothing that's going to be admissible in regards to jail recordings. The Court is not even going to review those.

we can't have this going on where we don't know what to expect in regards to evidence and what's going to be admissible. And it's -- would be overly prejudicial to the defense to have any of those admitted at this point in the presentation of the State's case.

And so if there are any further ones, I'm putting you on notice right now that they won't be admitted. Okay. So that clears that up in regards to the phone calls as to what's admissible and what is not.

Now, Ms. Dugan, we had two witnesses that were remaining on this witness list. So I take it that you'll be calling Ms. Rodriguez and Ms. Hull as the first two witnesses tomorrow?

JUDGE WHEELER: All right. And so it would be the audio evidence then.

And so before the audio evidence, we will have the hearing so that you can make your motion on the record in regards to any Crawford argument that you want to make in regards to playing of those three calls between Charlie Adelson and Donna Adelson. And I'll allow you to get that on the record and I'll make my ruling on that.

So, if those are going to being played, then maybe we can have that -- if they're going to be played in the afternoon, we can have it right before the testimony in the afternoon. Okay.

So given that, I guess it depends on the video, Ms. Dugan, as to whether or not that would be played tomorrow, as to whether or not the State would be resting tomorrow or on wednesday?

JUDGE WHEELER: -- anticipating?

Mr. DeCoste?

JUDGE WHEELER: All right. I would anticipate that it's going to be a wednesday resting that we would take up.

when is Sanford testifying? Is that tomorrow?

JUDGE WHEELER: All right. Okay. So, in all likelihood, resting will be some time on wednesday, it appears. Okay.

with that, then also we need to start looking at jury instructions. So I would expect to draft of those to the Court by wednesday. And that would be not wednesday at the end of the day, but by wednesday morning.

JUDGE WHEELER: All right. So, I think that takes care of things moving forward, who will be called and when, and any rulings on any outstanding motions other than the hearing that we need to have on the Crawford issue prior to the playing of those recorded calls. Okay.

Ms. Dugan, is there anything else on behalf of the State?