Still Missing CA - Kristin Smart, 19, San Luis Obispo, 25 May 1996 *arrests* #3

Discussion in 'Currently Awaiting Trial' started by Litlstar04, Jan 5, 2004.

  1. Slawsb

    Slawsb Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    134
    Likes Received:
    575
    Trophy Points:
    93
    exactly...
    such Arragonce
     
    MerBeach, Lynn1366, MemPat and 3 others like this.


  2. kolokolo

    kolokolo Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,051
    Likes Received:
    338
    Trophy Points:
    83
    It's time, it's been long overdue but I'm glad the accused PF and RF will be held to stand trial.
     
    MickeyRose, Kapua, Lynn1366 and 7 others like this.
  3. Slawsb

    Slawsb Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    134
    Likes Received:
    575
    Trophy Points:
    93
    exactly...
    such Arragonce

    Arrogance lol
     
    Markybug, Lynn1366 and Aloe like this.
  4. Niner

    Niner Long time Websleuther

    Messages:
    60,006
    Likes Received:
    178,007
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Wednesday, October 20th:
    *Arraignment Hearing for both (@ 8:30am PT) - CA - Kristin Denise Smart (19) (missing May 25, 1996 while walking back to her dorm from a off campus frat party at Cal Poly, reported missing on May 26, 1996, San Luis Obispo, still missing) – *Paul Ruben Flores (19 @ time of crime/44/will be 45 in 2 days) arrested & charged (4/13/21) & arraigned (4/15/21) with 1st degree murder. Plead not guilty. No bond.
    *Ruben Ricardo Flores (55 @ time of crime/80) arrested & charged (4/13/21) & arraigned (4/15/21) with accessory to murder after the fact. Plead not guilty. $250K bond. Bond was lower to $50K. Has posted bond (4/22/21), out of jail.
    Case & court info from 5/17/21 to 9/17/21 reference post #3 here:
    Still Missing - CA - Kristin Smart, 19, San Luis Obispo, 25 May 1996 *arrests* #3

    9/20/21 Update: Motions hearings on 9/24/21 have been cancelled. Testimony wrapped up Monday in the preliminary hearing for Paul and Ruben Flores. On Wednesday, the judge in the case is expected to rule whether there is enough evidence to move the case forward to trial.
    State witnesses: Jennifer Hudson on cross exam. Det. Cole. Jamilyn Holman, a neighbor of Ruben Flores in Arroyo Grande. The defense declined to call any of its own witnesses.
    During closing arguments Monday afternoon, San Luis Obispo County Deputy District Attorney Chris Peuvrelle said Paul Flores lies to cover up the murder of Kristin. Defense attorney Robert Sanger said there is no case against Paul Flores & there is certainly no case against Ruben Flores. He said there was nothing found in this case that is real evidence. Defense attorney Harold Mesick echoed the same thoughts & said the prosecution has tried to paint "lipstick on a pig." Judge Craig van Rooyen's ruling is expected at 8:30 a.m. on 9/22/21. And case management hearing for Ruben on 9/22/21.

    9/22/21 Update: Judge Craig van Rooyen ruled Wednesday morning that there is sufficient evidence to move the case forward to trial. The judge's ruling followed a month & a half-long preliminary hearing which began on Monday, Aug. 2, & included testimony from more than two dozen witnesses, including current & former detectives, former friends & acquaintances of both Paul & Kristin, cadaver dog handlers & soil experts. The judge based his decision on the standard of probable cause, which is a lesser standard of proof that will be used by a jury in trial. The judge said, among the convincing evidence for him, was how Paul minimized his contact with Kristin the night of the party & how he was aware of her level of intoxication. He also brought up how Paul admitted he lied about getting a black eye while playing basketball around the time of Kristin's disappearance & then said he got it while repairing a car stereo. The judge said his lies showed his "consciousness of guilt." Judge Van Rooyen also brought up the four cadaver dogs that independently alerted to Paul's dorm room in June 1996 & how the defense did not call any expert witnesses to refute the science behind human remains detection. Lastly, the judge touched on the recent excavations at Ruben's Arroyo Grande home. While two dogs displayed a change of behavior while under the deck, that's not proof human remains were there, the judge said, but he pointed to how archaeologists & ground-penetrating radar surveyed under the deck & found an anomaly the size of a human body. Plus, soil staining under the deck tested positive for human blood. The judge said, "nothing links it definitively to Ms. Smart" since no DNA was detected, but it leads to a reasonable suspicion that she was buried there. The judge wrapped up his decision by pointing out how Ruben was protective of the deck & had knowledge of what was under it, leading to a strong suspicion it was Smart's remains. Paul & Ruben Flores are scheduled to be arraigned on October 20.
     
    katydid23, LinasK, kolokolo and 4 others like this.
  5. Emi

    Emi Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    6,588
    Likes Received:
    28,391
    Trophy Points:
    113
    FLORES, PAUL 21F-02402-A 10/20/2021 08:30 D5 Robert M Sanger Superior Court Arraignment

    FLORES, RUBEN 21F-02402-B 10/20/2021 08:30 D5 Harold V. Mesick Superior Court Arraignment
     
  6. Emi

    Emi Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    6,588
    Likes Received:
    28,391
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Truth Prevails, Kapua, Niner and 2 others like this.
  7. Emi

    Emi Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    6,588
    Likes Received:
    28,391
    Trophy Points:
    113
  8. Emi

    Emi Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    6,588
    Likes Received:
    28,391
    Trophy Points:
    113
  9. Kapua

    Kapua Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,507
    Likes Received:
    31,075
    Trophy Points:
    113
    May Kristin be found before the trial starts and may justice finally be served. MOO
     
  10. Emi

    Emi Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    6,588
    Likes Received:
    28,391
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Matt Fountain @MattFountain1 8m
    Replying to @NickWilsonTrib and @SLOCounty_DA
    A 12/6 pre-trial conference and a readiness conference 4/6 are scheduled prior to the trial start date. Many things could happen at those hearings that would delay or make moot the 4/25 date for jury selection.
     
  11. tarabull

    tarabull Life is a puzzle.

    Messages:
    10,466
    Likes Received:
    8,677
    Trophy Points:
    113
  12. Luna20

    Luna20 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,642
    Likes Received:
    11,501
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Markybug, Emi, Slawsb and 2 others like this.
  13. Niner

    Niner Long time Websleuther

    Messages:
    60,006
    Likes Received:
    178,007
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Just a reminder! :)

    FLORES, PAUL RUBEN 21F-02402-A 12/06/2021 08:30 D5 Robert M Sanger Pre-Trial Conference

    FLORES, RUBEN 21F-02402-B 12/06/2021 08:30 D5 Harold V. Mesick Pre-Trial Conference

    link: 5day.pdf
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2021
    MemPat, JMapes, Lynn1366 and 7 others like this.
  14. Niner

    Niner Long time Websleuther

    Messages:
    60,006
    Likes Received:
    178,007
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Monday, December 6th:
    *Pretrial Conference Hearing for both via Zoom (@ 8:30am PT) - CA - Kristin Denise Smart (19) (missing May 25, 1996 while walking back to her dorm from a off campus frat party at Cal Poly, reported missing on May 26, 1996, San Luis Obispo, still missing) – *Paul Ruben Flores (19 @ time of crime/44/now 45) arrested & charged (4/13/21) & arraigned (10/20/21) with 1st degree murder. Plead not guilty. No bond.
    *Ruben Ricardo Flores (55 @ time of crime/80) arrested & charged (4/13/21) & arraigned (10/20/21) with accessory to murder after the fact. Plead not guilty. $250K bond. Bond was lower to $50K. Has posted bond (4/22/21), out of jail.
    Trial set to begin on 4/25/22.
    Case & court info from 5/17/21 to 9/20/21 reference post #44 here:
    Still Missing - CA - Kristin Smart, 19, San Luis Obispo, 25 May 1996 *arrests* #3

    9/22/21 Update: Judge Craig van Rooyen ruled Wednesday morning that there is sufficient evidence to move the case forward to trial. The judge's ruling followed a month & a half-long preliminary hearing which began on Monday, Aug. 2, & included testimony from more than two dozen witnesses, including current & former detectives, former friends & acquaintances of both Paul & Kristin, cadaver dog handlers & soil experts. The judge based his decision on the standard of probable cause, which is a lesser standard of proof that will be used by a jury in trial. The judge said, among the convincing evidence for him, was how Paul minimized his contact with Kristin the night of the party & how he was aware of her level of intoxication. He also brought up how Paul admitted he lied about getting a black eye while playing basketball around the time of Kristin's disappearance & then said he got it while repairing a car stereo. The judge said his lies showed his "consciousness of guilt." Judge Van Rooyen also brought up the four cadaver dogs that independently alerted to Paul's dorm room in June 1996 & how the defense did not call any expert witnesses to refute the science behind human remains detection. Lastly, the judge touched on the recent excavations at Ruben's Arroyo Grande home. While two dogs displayed a change of behavior while under the deck, that's not proof human remains were there, the judge said, but he pointed to how archaeologists & ground-penetrating radar surveyed under the deck & found an anomaly the size of a human body. Plus, soil staining under the deck tested positive for human blood. The judge said, "nothing links it definitively to Ms. Smart" since no DNA was detected, but it leads to a reasonable suspicion that she was buried there. The judge wrapped up his decision by pointing out how Ruben was protective of the deck & had knowledge of what was under it, leading to a strong suspicion it was Smart's remains. Paul and Ruben Flores are scheduled to be arraigned on October 20.
    10/20/21Update: Paul & Ruben Flores both plead not guilty, the trial date is set for April 25th. Both defendants waived their rights to a speedy jury trial, which typically happens within 60 days of a defendant's arraignment. It was not discussed if the trial will be held in San Luis Obispo County or moved to another location. The defense & the prosecution will meet with the judge for a pretrial conference on 12/6/21 via Zoom. And a readiness conference hearing on 4/6/21.
     
    Kapua, LinasK, raininginparis and 5 others like this.
  15. missslaurenlady

    missslaurenlady Member

    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    74
    Trophy Points:
    13
  16. Niner

    Niner Long time Websleuther

    Messages:
    60,006
    Likes Received:
    178,007
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Wednesday, December 8th:
    *Chambers Conference Hearing for both (Private meet with attorneys & Judge/no public allowed) (@ 8:30am PT) - CA - Kristin Denise Smart (19) (missing May 25, 1996 while walking back to her dorm from a off campus frat party at Cal Poly, reported missing on May 26, 1996, San Luis Obispo, still missing) – *Paul Ruben Flores (19 @ time of crime/44/now 45) arrested & charged (4/13/21) & arraigned (10/20/21) with 1st degree murder. Plead not guilty. No bond.
    *Ruben Ricardo Flores (55 @ time of crime/80) arrested & charged (4/13/21) & arraigned (10/20/21) with accessory to murder after the fact. Plead not guilty. $250K bond. Bond was lower to $50K. Has posted bond (4/22/21), out of jail.
    Trial set to begin on 4/25/22.
    Case & court info from 5/17/21 to 9/20/21 reference post #44 here:
    Still Missing - CA - Kristin Smart, 19, San Luis Obispo, 25 May 1996 *arrests* #3

    9/22/21 Update: Judge Craig van Rooyen ruled Wednesday morning that there is sufficient evidence to move the case forward to trial. The judge's ruling followed a month & a half-long preliminary hearing which began on Monday, Aug. 2, & included testimony from more than two dozen witnesses, including current & former detectives, former friends & acquaintances of both Paul & Kristin, cadaver dog handlers & soil experts. The judge based his decision on the standard of probable cause, which is a lesser standard of proof that will be used by a jury in trial. The judge said, among the convincing evidence for him, was how Paul minimized his contact with Kristin the night of the party & how he was aware of her level of intoxication. He also brought up how Paul admitted he lied about getting a black eye while playing basketball around the time of Kristin's disappearance & then said he got it while repairing a car stereo. The judge said his lies showed his "consciousness of guilt." Judge Van Rooyen also brought up the four cadaver dogs that independently alerted to Paul's dorm room in June 1996 & how the defense did not call any expert witnesses to refute the science behind human remains detection. Lastly, the judge touched on the recent excavations at Ruben's Arroyo Grande home. While two dogs displayed a change of behavior while under the deck, that's not proof human remains were there, the judge said, but he pointed to how archaeologists & ground-penetrating radar surveyed under the deck & found an anomaly the size of a human body. Plus, soil staining under the deck tested positive for human blood. The judge said, "nothing links it definitively to Ms. Smart" since no DNA was detected, but it leads to a reasonable suspicion that she was buried there. The judge wrapped up his decision by pointing out how Ruben was protective of the deck & had knowledge of what was under it, leading to a strong suspicion it was Smart's remains. Paul and Ruben Flores are scheduled to be arraigned on October 20.
    10/20/21 Update: Paul & Ruben Flores both plead not guilty, the trial date is set for April 25th. Both defendants waived their rights to a speedy jury trial, which typically happens within 60 days of a defendant's arraignment. It was not discussed if the trial will be held in San Luis Obispo County or moved to another location. The defense & the prosecution will meet with the judge for a pretrial conference on 12/6/21 via Zoom. And a readiness conference hearing on 4/6/21.

    12/6/21 Update: On Monday, Paul Flores, along with his father Ruben Flores appeared during a Zoom meeting, along with their attorneys, as well as Deputy District Attorney Chris Peuvrelle. Judge Van Rooyen was not able to attend the hearing since was working another jury trial at the courthouse. In his place, Judge Jacquelyn Duffy presided over the hearing, which lasted about 30 minutes. The proceeding was scheduled as a status check in the case, to make sure it was still on track to meet previously scheduled court dates, including the start of the trial. Paul Flores defense attorney Robert Sanger indicated there was an issue with discovery, the sharing of evidence with the prosecution. He added he was working with Peuvrelle 7 the District Attorney's office to help resolve the issue. A chambers conference meeting between the attorneys 7 Judge van Rooyen was scheduled for this Wednesday, 12/8/21 at 8:30am. The conference will be private & off-the-record, so the public will not be able to hear what takes place. DA Peuvrelle asked Judge Duffy to consider pushing back the tentative 1/21/22 start date of the "995 hearing," since he is scheduled to work a month-long case that begins 1/10/22. A 995 hearing is a motion asking the court to consider dismissing the ruling made during the preliminary hearing to move to a jury trial. When the trial date was set in October, Defense attorney Sanger announced he intends to file a 995 motion. At the time, he indicated the motion would be filed sometime before 2/17/21. All of the attorneys announced they are working on other cases at the same time around 1/21/22, so Judge Duffy requested they speak with Judge van Rooyen to determine scheduling. Judge Duffy also confirmed a trial readiness conference remains in place for 4/6/22.
     
  17. missslaurenlady

    missslaurenlady Member

    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    74
    Trophy Points:
    13
    Any word on if the outcome of this chambers conference will be reported to the general public (though the actual discussions in real-time were, of course, private)? My thinking here is that just because the real-time discussions were private doesn't mean that the outcome is/was necessarily ordered to be private... especially around issues like an agreed upon date of the 995 hearing (if they decided upon a date, that is), etc...

    Thoughts? Thanks :)
     
    Markybug and Niner like this.
  18. Kristin Esq.

    Kristin Esq. Verified Attorney

    Messages:
    1,248
    Likes Received:
    9,652
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Just leaving a note so I can get notified here! Interested in seeing the trial next year.
     
  19. BoyThatsWeird

    BoyThatsWeird Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    105
    Likes Received:
    964
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Any word on if this trial will be televised?
     
  20. Kristin Esq.

    Kristin Esq. Verified Attorney

    Messages:
    1,248
    Likes Received:
    9,652
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I haven't found anything definitive either way.
     

Share This Page



  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice