:tyou: JB: is bringing up his previous objections HHJP: we have done that at the Frye hearing, all you have to do is object. The state has to lay a foundation like they do with all witnesses, we don't do a mini Frye hearing we all ready did that. JB: no of course...we need to do some voir dire...we are intitiled to voir dire the witness to see if the witness meets the qualifications. HHJP: if they did not have qualifications...but we are not going to have a mini Frye hearing. I will note your motion. To exclude the post mortum banding and the unreliablity of scientific...or some defect in the predicate I will allow you to voir dire but we already had a frye hearing. JB: we feel that voir dire the witness at that time would help the jury...methodology employed. HHJP: an expert may testify with their opinions...that is what that talks about, correct? JB: ? HHJP: okay JB: am I not allowed to voir dire the witness or will the court give me some type of indication? HHJP: what are you trying to voir dire the witness on? JB: methodology... HHJP: we had a frye hearing on that...no. Unless she testifies to something totally different as to her qualifications...as I remember you did not have any objections during the frye hearing. Your objections were based on the idea this was new and novel evidence. We have established you cannot have a mini frye hearing. JB: her qualifications she was questioned about that, we maintain our position. HHJP: you can maintain your position. I have ruled. If they don't lay a predicate and the witness testifies...and for whatever reason...I have ruled and we have wasted enough time on that. Let's bring in the jury.