1 1 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 2 FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ 3 BEFORE THE HONORABLE ROBERT B. ATACK 4 5 RICHARD QUIGLEY, et al., ) 6 Plaintiffs, ) ) 7 vs. ) Case No. CV155682 ) 8 CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL, ) et al., ) 9 Defendants. ) 10 11 12 REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS 13 SANTA CRUZ, CALIFORNIA 14 MAY 20, 2008 15 DEPARTMENT 5 16 17 APPEARANCES: 18 For the Plaintiff: WENDY LASCHER 19 Attorney at Law 20 21 For the Defendant: LILLIAN TABE Attorney at Law 22 KAREN HUSTER 23 Attorney at Law 24 25 Official Court Reporter DENISE S. GALLAGHER, RPR, CSR #9444 26 2 1 I N D E X 2 DATE: May 20, 2008 3 DIR CRS REDIR RECRS 4 Witness for the Plaintiffs: 5 JOSEPH W. CLIFF (Resumed) 6 By: Ms. Lascher 12 55 7 Ms. Huster 37 8 MARK TEMPLE 9 By: Ms. Lascher 61 86 10 Ms. Huster 78 11 STEPHEN VALDEZ (Under EC 776) 12 By: Ms. Lascher 87 133 13 Ms. Huster 119 14 Witness for the Defense: 15 ROBERTA TANGER 16 By: Ms. Huster 145 17 Ms. Tabe 149 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 3 1 E X H I B I T S 2 For In 3 Plaintiff's No. Description I.D. Evid. 4 2 (Previously identified) 22 5 3 2/28/07 letter 16 22 6 3-A Attachments to #3 43 139 7 4 3/1/07 letter 25 26 8 5 4/2/07 letter 27 28 9 6 4/17/07 letter 29 30 10 7 4/26/07 letter 31 31 11 11 Chapter 4 revised 4/06 90 91 12 12 Deposition notice 98 101 13 13 Rescheduled depo notice 98 102 14 14 2nd rescheduled depo notice 98 101 15 15 CHP bulletin 116 141 16 Defendant's No. 17 8 18-page attachment 44 54 18 9 1/8/07 letter 53 54 19 10 4/16/08 citation 86 86 20 16 12/31/96 CHP bulletin 120 127 21 17 Cover sheet 123 123 22 18 Helmet 130 23 18 Photos of helmet 151 151 24 25 26 4 1 May 20, 2008 Santa Cruz, California 2 P R O C E E D I N G S 3 THE COURT: Back on the record in the 4 matter of Quigley, et al., versus California Highway 5 Patrol, et al. Counsel are present. 6 And have all the documents that are going 7 to be utilized during the course of this trial, have 8 they now been provided to each side and have the 9 defendants had sufficient time to review those? 10 MS. HUSTER: Your Honor, we have been in 11 contact with the client and have been successful in 12 understanding and placing in context the majority of 13 the documents. 14 THE COURT: You have or have not? 15 MS. HUSTER: Pardon me? 16 THE COURT: You have or have not? 17 MS. HUSTER: Have. We have with the 18 majority of the documents. There are two exceptions. 19 One I think is just a simple oversight on plaintiffs' 20 counsel's part. We did not receive a photocopy of the 21 Cliff citation, and I'm sure that's easily corrected 22 this morning. 23 The only remaining document which we have 24 not been successful in putting in any kind of context 25 is the document which purports to be a letter from a 26 Captain McCreery in the Barstow area, Office of the 5 1 CHP, responding to Mr. Cliff regarding his complaint 2 in connection with the citation he received for a 3 helmet violation. I've placed phone calls to Captain 4 McCreery. Our concern is that all that has been 5 provided so far is a letter to Mr. Cliff saying, in 6 essence -- purporting to say, in essence, we received 7 your complaint, we investigated it and we found that 8 no further action is required. And that's all on the 9 face of the document that has been offered. It leads 10 us to believe that there was a complaint. We would 11 like to get our hands on the complaint. We would like 12 to take a look at whatever the subject of the 13 investigation was so that we can provide the Court 14 with the full story on what this purported letter 15 says. 16 Furthermore, as an evidentiary matter, we 17 have been unable to verify that this letter actually 18 is what it purports to be; that is, a letter from 19 Captain McCreery. Captain McCreery was in the Barstow 20 office. Currently he's in the Riverside office. We 21 have been playing back and forth phone messages, but 22 we certainly expect to hear from him today. 23 I think what I would propose as a 24 practical matter would be that Mr. Cliff not be 25 excused following his testimony pending our receipt of 26 that follow-up information. If we decide it's 6 1 necessary, we'd like to be able to discuss any related 2 documents which we receive from our clients about that 3 letter with Mr. Cliff. So that's what we propose with 4 respect to those documents. 5 I have some comments I would like to make 6 about the supplemental response and the motion from 7 this morning, but I think that's something the Court 8 doesn't want to hear about right now so I'll wait 9 and -- 10 THE COURT: I don't know what you're 11 talking about. 12 MS. LASCHER: May I -- 13 MS. HUSTER: Your Honor, may I explain? 14 THE COURT: Yes. 15 MS. HUSTER: This morning as I was driving 16 to court I received an e-mail message from Ms. 17 Lascher. I pulled over. I read it. Ms. Lascher is 18 submitting an additional brief at this time this 19 morning. I pulled over. I could not open the 20 attachment from my phone. I called Ms. Tabe at the 21 hotel. Fortunately she was still there. She 22 undertook to open the document that Ms. Lascher sent 23 at 8:00 o'clock this morning, printed it to bring it 24 to us. 25 I had a chance to read it in the past half 26 an hour and I would like to offer some arguments in 7 1 opposition to the Court considering any additional 2 supplemental briefing. The briefing also contains an 3 attachment, a document which has not yet been 4 produced. We would request additional time if the 5 Court is going to entertain this motion. We would 6 like to request additional time again for the purpose 7 of figuring out what this document is. We have never 8 seen it before. 9 But backing up, I would like the 10 opportunity to argue that the motion is untimely and 11 should not be considered at all. However, I'm not 12 sure if the Court wants to hear that at this time. 13 THE COURT: Okay. Well, I just received 14 this and didn't know what you were talking about. And 15 I'll read it and determine if this looks like 16 plaintiffs' counsel is trying to reopen defendant's 17 motion in limine number 1 that the Court has already 18 ruled on. I'll look at it and see if there's any 19 basis to reopen the argument in that regard. 20 MS. HUSTER: Thank you, Your Honor. If 21 the Court is interested, I have prepared an argument 22 in opposition as best I could within the last hour on 23 that subject, and I would like to present it if the 24 Court is inclined to consider reopening the issue. 25 Thank you. 26 THE COURT: Okay. 8 1 MS. LASCHER: Your Honor, with respect to 2 the second matter first, it's not a request to reopen 3 the motion in limine. It's a request to question the 4 CHP witnesses concerning the premise of that motion. 5 I don't believe there is a factual foundation for the 6 motion. I did not intend the Court to consider it 7 this morning because I don't think it would be 8 relevant until we get to the testimony of the CHP 9 witness. But I tried as the Court instructed to give 10 counsel as much notice as possible and that's why I 11 served it by e-mail. 12 I, again, after court yesterday and after 13 the developments yesterday contacted people to see if 14 I could find out any more information to shed light on 15 the motion in limine. So I propose that we let that 16 wait until the Court has had a chance to look at the 17 motion and until this afternoon. 18 I do want to comment on counsel's 19 assertion that it's improper to submit any more 20 briefing. My understanding -- 21 THE COURT: I don't think you need to 22 comment on that. 23 MS. LASCHER: May I -- 24 THE COURT: Please sit down. 25 MS. LASCHER: Thank you, Your Honor. May 26 I comment, Your Honor, on the -- 9 1 THE COURT: Please sit down. 2 (A brief interruption.) 3 THE COURT: Go ahead. You may continue. 4 MS. LASCHER: Thank you, Your Honor. On 5 the matter of the exhibits and the Sergeant McCreery 6 letter in particular, I actually do have the complaint 7 that was filed. The reason I didn't provide it is I 8 did not intend to introduce it in evidence. I didn't 9 think it was relevant because the issue that I wanted 10 to raise only is that a CHP commander was discussing 11 his interpretation of what's required to comply with 12 the helmet law. 13 THE COURT: Okay. 14 MS. LASCHER: I'm happy to provide counsel 15 a copy of that and the Court. Finally, counsel -- 16 THE COURT: Okay. I want you to provide 17 counsel with a copy of that, please. 18 MS. LASCHER: Sure. 19 THE COURT: Now, anything further? 20 MS. LASCHER: Yes. Counsel commented on 21 an oversight in not providing a copy of the citation 22 of Mr. Cliff. That is the document that yesterday 23 morning I handed to the clerk and the Court said the 24 clerk would take care of making copies of it. I don't 25 have that anymore because the clerk has my copy of it, 26 but I -- 10 1 THE COURT: Is that marked as an exhibit? 2 MS. LASCHER: It's marked as Exhibit 1. 3 THE COURT: Okay. And if the clerk will 4 make a copy of that for the defense. 5 MS. LASCHER: Sure. I appreciate it. 6 THE COURT: I offered yesterday to do that 7 as to all the exhibits and it was not taken. 8 MS. LASCHER: But, Your Honor, I didn't -- 9 THE COURT: Ma'am, I don't want to argue 10 about it. I told you clearly what I expected to 11 happen and it didn't happen and that's delayed this 12 trial. 13 We will not be in session Thursday or 14 Friday because I have to be somewhere else. I 15 anticipated this would be completed by Wednesday, so I 16 don't know if we're going to complete this this week 17 or not because of my need to be somewhere else on 18 Thursday, so I just want you to know that at this 19 point. Okay. 20 MS. LASCHER: Thank you, Your Honor. 21 THE COURT: Anything further before we 22 recall the witness and continue the trial? 23 MS. HUSTER: Well, Your Honor, I apologize 24 for belaboring the point of these documents that just 25 have been provided. I thank counsel for providing 26 what appears to be the underlying complaint that Mr. 11 1 Cliff, the upcoming witness, submitted. However, I 2 believe that defendants -- in the interest of 3 fairness, the defendants should be allowed a chance to 4 look at its own client's file with respect to this 5 complaint so that we can verify that this is a true 6 and correct copy, so we can see what defendants did 7 with respect to the receipt and the investigation of 8 this complaint -- 9 THE COURT: Well, if you want to look at 10 the original, you may, and compare it with a copy if 11 that's the concern, okay? 12 MS. HUSTER: Thank you, Your Honor. 13 THE COURT: Is the witness ready to be 14 recalled? 15 MS. LASCHER: Your Honor, while he's 16 coming into the room, I thought I heard counsel say 17 that they had obtained documents that they intend to 18 use. I've received no documents since the discovery 19 process. 20 THE COURT: Counsel, I have requested both 21 of you to exchange documents that you anticipate to 22 utilize during this trial if there are any, and I do 23 not want this to continue if there are documents that 24 have not been provided, so both sides are to exchange 25 documents that you intend to have marked as an 26 exhibit, okay? 12 1 MS. HUSTER: Your Honor -- 2 THE COURT: Yes. 3 MS. HUSTER: -- the documents that I 4 envision the possibility of using today with respect 5 to Mr. Cliff's testimony would be used solely for the 6 purpose of impeaching what I think Mr. Cliff might 7 say. So I would argue that since we don't know what 8 Mr. Cliff is going to say, I can't say whether I will 9 need to produce these documents in advance. If the 10 Court wants me to provide to Ms. Lascher what I think 11 will be impeaching evidence prior to Mr. Cliff's 12 testimony, I'll do that, but I don't think it's -- 13 THE COURT: No, if it's for impeachment 14 purposes only you need not provide it. 15 MS. HUSTER: Thank you, Your Honor. 16 THE COURT: Please call the witness in. 17 Mr. Cliff, if you'll come forward. You 18 are under oath. Have a seat. 19 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. 20 JOSEPH W. CLIFF 21 called as a witness on behalf of 22 the Plaintiff, having been previously sworn, was 23 examined and testified as follows: 24 DIRECT EXAMINATION (Resumed) 25 BY MS. LASCHER: 26 Q. Good morning, Mr. Cliff. 13 1 A. Good morning. 2 Q. When you were stopped in July of 2006, the 3 citation you testified about yesterday -- 4 A. Uh-huh. 5 Q. -- what were you wearing on your head? 6 A. This helmet. 7 Q. And did you have that helmet in court with you 8 yesterday? 9 A. Yes, ma'am. 10 Q. Did you leave immediately after the court 11 adjourned? 12 A. Yes, I did. 13 Q. Did you ride your motorcycle here yesterday? 14 A. Yes, I did. 15 Q. Was that the helmet you were wearing on your 16 motorcycle yesterday? 17 A. Yes, ma'am. 18 Q. And the helmet you are indicating is the one 19 you have there on the witness stand with you? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. Does that helmet have a DOT symbol on it? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. Can you describe the symbol for the record, 24 please? 25 A. It's a white label that has the initials D-O-T. 26 Looks like it's well worn. 14 1 Q. The approximate size of that label, please? 2 A. It's probably maybe an inch by three-quarters 3 of an inch. 4 Q. Thank you. I believe you had before you a 5 document -- excuse me. Do you have Exhibit 2? 6 THE COURT: Now, was this the same helmet 7 that you were wearing on July 2006? 8 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. Yes, sir. 9 THE COURT: Okay. 10 BY MS. LASCHER: 11 Q. Do you recognize Exhibit 2? 12 A. Yes. It's a document I created for the Public 13 Records Act. 14 Q. The copy that I handed you I believe is 15 unsigned? 16 A. That's true. 17 Q. Did you sign the one that you sent to the 18 Highway Patrol? 19 A. No. Well, I signed it when I sent it to them, 20 but I don't have a copy of it. 21 Q. You did not retain a copy of it as signed? 22 A. No, but I'm sure I signed it. 23 Q. But you do recognize this as the document you 24 signed? 25 A. Yes. 26 MS. HUSTER: Objection; lacks foundation. 15 1 THE COURT: Overruled. 2 BY MS. LASCHER: 3 Q. Did you receive a letter in response to Exhibit 4 2? 5 A. Several of them. 6 Q. Do you recall the first response that you 7 received? 8 A. The first response was -- 9 Q. What's the date of the response that you 10 received? 11 A. Well, the first response was a telephone call 12 on 2/27/07. 13 Q. And during that telephone call, was that a call 14 that someone made to you? 15 A. Yes. The CHP called me. 16 Q. Did the person who called identify her or 17 himself? 18 A. I just have a note here and I'm not sure of the 19 name or even if I spelled it correctly. It looks like 20 Allege (phonetic) maybe. 21 THE COURT: Do you recall the name or not? 22 THE WITNESS: No. 23 BY MS. LASCHER: 24 Q. Do you need the note to refresh your 25 recollection about the call? 26 A. I have a note here in my folder. 16 1 MS. LASCHER: Can you testify -- why don't 2 you close your folder and we'll get your best 3 recollection without looking at the note. 4 Your Honor, I've previously provided 5 counsel a letter from the Department of Highway Patrol 6 dated February 28th, 2007. I would like to have that 7 marked as Exhibit 3. 8 THE COURT: It will be so marked. 9 (Plaintiff's Exhibit 3 marked for 10 identification.) 11 BY MS. LASCHER: 12 Q. Mr. Cliff, during the phone call that you 13 received from the person whose name you're not too 14 sure of, what did that person say to you? 15 MS. HUSTER: Objection; hearsay not 16 knowing who this person is. 17 THE COURT: Sustained. 18 MS. LASCHER: Your Honor, I'm not offering 19 it for the truth of what was stated. I just want to 20 get the context of the conversation and provide the 21 basis of how -- of the meaning of this letter in that 22 context. 23 MS. HUSTER: Goes to the truth of the 24 matter. Objection. 25 THE COURT: It's hearsay. You can try and 26 lay a foundation if you wish. 17 1 BY MS. LASCHER: 2 Q. Mr. Cliff, do you recall what that person -- 3 who that person identified themselves as or what he 4 said his name was? 5 A. I'm not sure. It was quite some time ago at 6 this point in time. It was a late telephone call in 7 the afternoon as I was heading out the door. 8 Q. Did the -- let me hand you what has been marked 9 as Plaintiff's Exhibit 3 and ask you to take a look at 10 that. Do you recognize Exhibit 3? 11 A. Yes, I do. 12 Q. Can you describe Exhibit 3, what you recognize? 13 A. It's a response from the CHP regarding my 14 public records inquiry request. 15 Q. You looked at page 3 of this document? 16 A. Uh-huh. 17 Q. Do you see that it's a rather large and 18 sideways piece of paper? 19 A. Yes. I had the original document scanned in a 20 scanner at work by one of my employees, and this is 21 how it turned out. 22 Q. Were there any other documents that were 23 provided to you with this letter? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. What was provided to you with this letter? 26 MS. HUSTER: Objection; secondary evidence 18 1 rule. 2 MS. LASCHER: Your Honor, I am merely 3 asking -- 4 THE COURT: Just a minute. When we have 5 an objection, let me rule on it before you start 6 arguing. Do you understand? 7 MS. LASCHER: Sure. You don't want to 8 hear the argument before you rule? 9 THE COURT: No, I do not. 10 MS. LASCHER: Thank you, Your Honor. 11 THE COURT: Overruled. You may continue. 12 THE WITNESS: I received a variety of 13 documents. One, the California Vehicle Code Section 14 27802. Federal motor vehicle safety standard 218. I 15 received a brochure, CHP bulletin 970 entitled 16 "Motorcycle helmets; legal versus novelty." The 17 Highway Patrol manual 100.68, Chapter 4. 18 MS. HUSTER: Objection; the witness is 19 testifying from some notes. 20 THE COURT: I'm sorry. What is the 21 objection? 22 MS. HUSTER: The witness is testifying 23 from a folder of information. 24 THE WITNESS: No. This is from the 25 responsive letter from the CHP. 26 MS. HUSTER: Are you talking -- 19 1 THE COURT: Counsel, what is the 2 objection? 3 MS. HUSTER: The objection is that the 4 witness is reading something rather than giving 5 testimony. 6 THE COURT: The question was what did he 7 receive with this response letter; is that correct? 8 THE WITNESS: Correct, yes. 9 THE COURT: And are they attached to this 10 letter today, those same attachments? 11 THE WITNESS: They -- yes, they are. 12 MS. HUSTER: Your Honor, the objection -- 13 THE COURT: Is there anything missing from 14 Exhibit 3 that you received on or about February 28th, 15 2007 in response to your letter? 16 MS. HUSTER: Well, the things I don't have 17 with me today are the Vehicle Code Section and FMS 18 218. 19 THE COURT: What happened to those? 20 THE WITNESS: Well, I have them at home 21 but I didn't bring them. It's fairly common 22 documents. 23 THE COURT: I'm not asking if they're 24 common or not. I'm just asking you were they attached 25 to the -- 26 THE WITNESS: Yes. 20 1 THE COURT: -- original letter? 2 THE WITNESS: Yes. 3 THE COURT: Do you have the original 4 letter here today? 5 THE WITNESS: No. I have this copy of the 6 original letter. 7 THE COURT: You may proceed. 8 BY MS. LASCHER: 9 Q. Do you have -- may I have the letter back? 10 A. Sure. 11 Q. Do you have a copy of the brochure 970, 12 publication 970 -- 13 A. I believe I do. 14 Q. -- with you today? 15 Did you provide that to me yesterday? 16 A. No. 17 MS. HUSTER: Objection, Your Honor. I was 18 not provided with publication 970 yesterday. 19 THE COURT: All right. It's noted. 20 MS. LASCHER: Defendant offers Exhibit 21 2 -- I mean plaintiffs offer Exhibit 2 and Exhibit 3. 22 THE COURT: Any objection? 23 MS. HUSTER: Exhibit 2 and Exhibit 3? 24 THE COURT: Yes. 25 MS. HUSTER: Your Honor, when the 26 plaintiffs provided us with documents yesterday they 21 1 were unmarked, so we don't know what she's referring 2 to when she says Exhibit 3. 3 THE COURT: Do you want to take a look at 4 them? 5 MS. HUSTER: Yes, sir. Thank you. 6 THE COURT: Would you hand -- where are 7 the exhibits, please? 8 MS. LASCHER: Exhibit -- I thought I 9 handed them back to the clerk a moment ago. Does the 10 witness still have Exhibit 2? 11 THE COURT: Would you hand the exhibits to 12 the clerk after they are marked, make sure they get 13 back to his desk so we don't lose them. Have we found 14 them? 15 THE BAILIFF: That's Exhibit 2, sir. 16 THE CLERK: Here's Exhibit 3. 17 MS. HUSTER: Your Honor, may I have thirty 18 seconds to indicate on the documents that I was 19 provided which counsel has labeled as what so that 20 when she is examining the witness on the exhibits, I 21 know what she's talking about? 22 THE COURT: Look at them. Go ahead. 23 MS. HUSTER: All right. 24 THE COURT: I thought these were shown to 25 you before she marked them? 26 MS. HUSTER: They were, but I don't know 22 1 what the -- they haven't been labeled as exhibits. 2 THE COURT: Yes. That's what was asked. 3 MS. HUSTER: Thank you. 4 THE COURT: Is there any objection that 5 Plaintiff's Exhibits 2 and 3 come into evidence? 6 MS. HUSTER: No. 7 THE COURT: Okay. They're in evidence. 8 (Plaintiff's Exhibits 2 & 3 received in 9 evidence.) 10 BY MS. LASCHER: 11 Q. Mr. Cliff, did you subsequently make a 12 complaint to the Highway Patrol concerning a citation 13 you received? 14 A. Yes, I did. 15 Q. What citation -- about whom did you complain? 16 A. The citing officer, Officer Cortinez. 17 Q. Did this concern the citation you received in 18 July 2006 or a different citation? 19 A. Exactly, the 2006 citation. 20 Q. Did you put that complaint in writing? 21 A. Yes, I did. 22 Q. Did you submit it to someone? 23 A. Yes, I did. 24 Q. To whom did you submit it? 25 A. The CHP Internal Affairs Division in 26 Sacramento. 23 1 Q. Did you subsequently receive a response to your 2 complaint? 3 A. Yes, I did. 4 Q. Was it by telephone or in writing? 5 A. In writing. 6 Q. Do you recall the approximate date that you 7 received the response -- 8 A. January -- 9 Q. -- without consulting your notes? I'm sorry. 10 A. Oh, sorry. January 16th. 11 Q. Did you have any subsequent correspondence 12 concerning that complaint with the CHP after January 13 16th? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. Can you describe just the correspondence in 16 terms of what you -- to whom did you write and what 17 did you receive in return? 18 A. I received a letter from the CHP in Barstow 19 that asked me to sign a form acknowledging that I was 20 filing a complaint against an officer, which I signed 21 and returned. 22 Q. Approximately when did you receive the letter 23 from the CHP in Barstow? 24 A. Oh, late January or early February. 25 Q. Did you -- do you recall receiving a letter in 26 March of 2007 concerning the same incident and the 24 1 same complaint? 2 A. I -- 3 MS. HUSTER: Objection; leading. 4 THE COURT: Sustained. 5 THE WITNESS: I did -- 6 THE COURT: Sustained. 7 BY MS. LASCHER: 8 Q. Let me ask it a different way. Do you recall 9 any other correspondence -- what correspondence did 10 you receive after you returned -- I'm sorry. Did you 11 return the complaint form that the CHP asked you to 12 return? 13 A. Yes, I did. 14 Q. What correspondence took place concerning this 15 complaint after you returned that form? 16 MS. HUSTER: Objection; leading. 17 THE COURT: I'm sorry? 18 MS. HUSTER: Objection; leading. 19 THE COURT: Overruled. 20 MS. HUSTER: Suggests an answer. 21 THE WITNESS: I received a response from 22 the commander of the Barstow area regarding my 23 complaint. 24 BY MS. LASCHER: 25 Q. Do you recall the approximate date you received 26 that response? 25 1 A. I could tell you in there, but somewhere around 2 March I would say. 3 MS. LASCHER: Your Honor, I've previously 4 provided counsel a copy of the letter from Captain 5 McCreery dated March 1, 2007. I would like to have 6 that marked as Exhibit 4. 7 THE COURT: It will be so marked for 8 identification only. 9 MS. LASCHER: For identification. 10 (Plaintiff's Exhibit 4 marked for 11 identification.) 12 BY MS. LASCHER: 13 Q. Mr. Cliff, I'm handing you what has been marked 14 as Exhibit 4. And ask if you can take a look and see 15 if you recognize it? 16 A. Yes, ma'am. 17 Q. What is that document? 18 A. It is a responsive letter from T.M. McCreery, 19 captain, commander of the Barstow area, to my 20 complaint against Officer Cortinez. 21 Q. Is it the original or a copy? 22 A. It's the original. Well, it's a copy of the 23 original. 24 Q. Did you receive it on or about shortly after 25 the date indicated on the letter? 26 A. Yes, I did. 26 1 MS. LASCHER: Thank you. Plaintiffs offer 2 Exhibit 4. 3 THE COURT: Any objection? 4 MS. HUSTER: No objection. This is the 5 document that we have been unable to follow up on so 6 far, so we're just asking in connection with the 7 document that Mr. Cliff not be excused pending our 8 ability to cross-examine him on this document once we 9 are in contact with our client. 10 THE COURT: No objection. The exhibit is 11 in evidence, 4. 12 MS. HUSTER: Thank you, Your Honor. 13 (Plaintiff's Exhibit 4 received in 14 evidence.) 15 BY MS. LASCHER: 16 Q. Mr. Cliff, do you recall correspondence 17 subsequent -- with the CHP subsequent to the letter 18 from Commander McCreery concerning the same incident? 19 A. No. 20 Q. Did you -- at any time have you ever written to 21 the general counsel of the CHP? 22 A. Yes, regarding the Public Records Act. 23 Q. If you remember, did you make an inquiry about 24 the Public Records Act? 25 A. I made inquiry with the Public Records Act. 26 It's one of the exhibits. And a gentleman named 27 1 Rothman, I believe, responded, and I wasn't clear as 2 to his responses so I subsequently wrote another 3 responsive letter to him. 4 MS. LASCHER: Your Honor, I'm going to ask 5 the clerk to mark a document dated April 2, 2007 as 6 Plaintiff's Exhibit 5 for identification. 7 THE COURT: So marked as 5. 8 MS. LASCHER: This is a document that I 9 previously provided to defense counsel. 10 (Plaintiff's Exhibit 5 marked for 11 identification.) 12 BY MS. LASCHER: 13 Q. Mr. Cliff, I'm going to show you what has been 14 marked as Plaintiff's Exhibit 5 for identification. 15 Ask if you recognize that letter, that copy? 16 A. Yes. This is my responsive letter. 17 Q. So when you say this is your responsive letter, 18 you mean this is the letter you wrote back to the -- 19 concerning the Public Records Act? 20 A. Yes. This is the response to CHP's letter of 21 February 28th. 22 Q. There is no signature on the copy of the letter 23 that's marked as Exhibit 5. Do you recognize that? 24 A. Yes. This is just my copy. 25 Q. Did you sign the original? 26 A. Yes, ma'am. 28 1 Q. And you sent the original to the CHP? 2 A. Yes, ma'am. 3 Q. On or about April 2, 2007? 4 A. Yes. 5 MS. LASCHER: Thank you. Plaintiffs will 6 offer Exhibit 5 in evidence. 7 THE COURT: Any objection? 8 MS. HUSTER: Objection; lacks foundation. 9 But if the witness would just testify that it's the 10 identical letter to what he signed, then there would 11 be a foundation. 12 THE COURT: Is this a copy of the letter 13 that you sent to -- 14 THE WITNESS: Yes, it's an exact copy of 15 the letter I sent. 16 MS. HUSTER: No objection. 17 (Plaintiff's Exhibit 5 received in 18 evidence.) 19 BY MS. LASCHER: 20 Q. After you sent your letter of April 2, did you 21 receive a response from the CHP? 22 A. Yes, I did. 23 Q. Do you remember who wrote -- who responded to 24 your letter of April 2? 25 A. I believe it was Rothman. 26 MS. LASCHER: Your Honor, I would like to 29 1 have marked as Plaintiff's Exhibit 6 a letter dated 2 April 17, 2007 that I previously provided counsel. 3 THE COURT: It will be so marked as 4 Exhibit 6 for identification. 5 (Plaintiff's Exhibit 6 marked for 6 identification.) 7 BY MS. LASCHER: 8 Q. Mr. Cliff, I'm handing you what has been marked 9 Exhibit 6 for identification. I would ask do you 10 recognize it? 11 A. Do I recognize the letter? Yes. 12 Q. Do you recognize that letter? 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. Is that the letter you received in response to 15 your April 2 Public Records Act letter? 16 A. I don't believe so, no. 17 Q. What do you recognize this as? 18 A. I recognize this as -- okay. It is the first 19 response to my, let's say, April 2nd letter. It is my 20 first response, yes. 21 Q. So you do recognize it as a response? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. Did you receive it on or shortly after the 24 date -- the date of April 17th? 25 A. Yes, I did. 26 MS. LASCHER: Thank you. Plaintiffs will 30 1 offer Exhibit 6 in evidence. 2 THE COURT: Any objection? 3 MS. HUSTER: No objection. 4 THE COURT: No objection? 5 MS. HUSTER: No objection, Your Honor. 6 THE COURT: All right. It's in evidence. 7 (Plaintiff's Exhibit 6 received in 8 evidence.) 9 BY MS. LASCHER: 10 Q. And after you received Exhibit 6, Mr. Cliff, 11 did you have any subsequent conversations with the CHP 12 by telephone concerning that letter? 13 A. No. 14 Q. Did you write to the CHP concerning that Public 15 Records Act request or that letter after you received 16 Exhibit 6? 17 A. No. 18 Q. Did you subsequently receive any further 19 documents concerning the Public Records Act? 20 A. Yes. I received one more document from Mr. 21 Rothman. 22 Q. What was the nature of the document? 23 A. It was basically that they couldn't add any 24 other information to my follow-up request. 25 MS. LASCHER: Your Honor, I would like to 26 ask the clerk to mark for identification a letter 31 1 dated -- a copy of a letter dated April 17, 2007 that 2 I previously provided defense counsel. 3 THE COURT: This is another letter dated 4 April 17? 5 MS. LASCHER: I'm sorry. April 26th. I 6 misspoke. 7 MS. HUSTER: No objection. 8 (Plaintiff's Exhibit 7 marked for 9 identification.) 10 BY MS. LASCHER: 11 Q. And, Mr. Cliff, I'm going to show you what has 12 been marked as Plaintiff's Exhibit 7 for 13 identification. Ask if you recognize that? 14 A. Yes. 15 MS. LASCHER: Plaintiff's offer Exhibit 7 16 in evidence. 17 THE COURT: Any objection? 18 MS. HUSTER: No objection, Your Honor. 19 THE COURT: It's in evidence. 20 (Plaintiff's Exhibit 7 received in 21 evidence.) 22 BY MS. LASCHER: 23 Q. Mr. Cliff -- actually, sorry. Could you take a 24 look at the second-to-last paragraph of this letter? 25 A. Starting with "To reiterate"? 26 Q. Yes. 32 1 A. (Witness reviews documents.) Yes. 2 Q. Does that paragraph -- would you read it to the 3 Court, please? 4 A. "To reiterate, from the April 17th, 2007 5 correspondence, please direct questions regarding 6 compliance of any specific helmet or helmet type to 7 your local area office where they are trained to 8 assist the public with such matters." 9 MS. LASCHER: Thank you. 10 Your Honor, excuse me, but I forgot. Did 11 I offer Exhibit 7 into evidence? 12 THE COURT: Yes. That's why we allowed 13 you to have him read it, I think. 14 MS. LASCHER: Thank you, Your Honor. 15 BY MS. LASCHER: 16 Q. Mr. Cliff, did you direct any questions to your 17 local area office? 18 A. No, ma'am, I didn't. 19 Q. Thank you. Apart from your citation that you 20 received in July 2006 that led to all this 21 correspondence, have you been cited by the California 22 Highway Patrol for a helmet law violation any other -- 23 on any other occasion after 2005? 24 A. No. 25 THE COURT: I'm sorry. What was the date? 26 MS. LASCHER: July 2006, which was the 33 1 subject of Exhibit 1. 2 THE COURT: Right. So no other time after 3 2005 -- 4 THE WITNESS: No, sir. 5 THE COURT: -- have you been cited? 6 THE WITNESS: No, sir. 7 THE COURT: Did that citation, did you go 8 to court on that? 9 THE WITNESS: Yes, I did. 10 THE COURT: And were you successful? 11 THE WITNESS: Yes, I was. 12 THE COURT: Okay. Did the officer who was 13 involved in that show up at the time of trial? 14 THE WITNESS: No, sir. 15 THE COURT: Was it dismissed for lack of 16 prosecution? 17 THE WITNESS: Uh-huh. 18 THE COURT: You're indicating "yes"? 19 THE WITNESS: Yes. 20 BY MS. LASCHER: 21 Q. At the time you were cited in July of 2006, was 22 any other person riding with you? 23 A. My wife was with me on her own motorcycle. 24 Q. And was your wife stopped by the CHP at the 25 time? 26 A. Yes, ma'am. 34 1 Q. Was it by the same officer? 2 A. By the same officers. 3 Q. Did you hear the conversation between the 4 officers and your wife? 5 A. Yes, I did. 6 Q. What did you hear the officers say to your 7 wife? 8 A. Well, it was basically the same comment 9 directed to both of us from Officer Cortinez, that we 10 were not wearing DOT-approved helmets. 11 Q. Was your wife also cited? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. Did your wife go to court on the citation? 14 A. She did a written trial by declaration. 15 Q. And what happened with respect to that 16 citation? 17 A. The Court dismissed the charges against her. 18 THE COURT: Who was the manufacturer of 19 the helmet that you were wearing on July of 2006 when 20 you received the citation? 21 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry, I don't know 22 actually who made the helmet. I do have the original 23 receipt. 24 THE COURT: That isn't the helmet that you 25 were wearing? 26 THE WITNESS: Excuse me, Your Honor? 35 1 THE COURT: Is that the helmet in front of 2 you that you were wearing on July of 2006? 3 THE WITNESS: Yes, it was. 4 THE COURT: Is there any indication who 5 manufactured that helmet? 6 THE WITNESS: No, I don't think there's 7 anything left. This is a fairly old helmet. 8 THE COURT: It has a star in the front. 9 Is that a CHP emblem? 10 THE WITNESS: No. I live in Morgan Hill. 11 That's my Morgan Hill Junior Police badge. 12 THE COURT: Okay. And what else do you 13 have on that helmet? 14 THE WITNESS: A sticker that says "Helmet 15 laws suck." 16 THE COURT: Okay. Any other notations 17 other than the DOT in the back? 18 THE WITNESS: There's a strip in the back 19 called a rumble strip that's supposed to be -- well, 20 aerodynamically improve the ride of the helmet, I 21 guess. 22 THE COURT: Was that on the helmet when 23 you purchased it? 24 THE WITNESS: No. 25 THE COURT: Did you add that to it? 26 THE WITNESS: Yes, I did. 36 1 THE COURT: How long ago did you buy that 2 helmet? 3 THE WITNESS: 1992. 4 THE COURT: And you don't -- where did you 5 buy the helmet, sir? 6 THE WITNESS: From a company called 7 McClusky's Custom Motorcycles. 8 THE COURT: But you don't know who 9 manufactured that helmet? 10 THE WITNESS: I do not. 11 THE COURT: Okay. 12 BY MS. LASCHER: 13 Q. Mr. Cliff, do you have the receipt for your 14 purchase of that helmet with you? 15 A. Yes, I do. 16 Q. If you were to look at the receipt, would it 17 indicate who manufactured it? 18 A. It doesn't say. 19 Q. Apart from the correspondence you had with the 20 Highway Patrol concerning the Public Records Act, and 21 apart from your conversation with Officer Cortinez, 22 have you at any time since 2005 made any other 23 inquiries of the CHP for guidance concerning 24 compliance with the helmet act? 25 A. I have not. 26 MS. LASCHER: I have no further questions 37 1 at this time. 2 THE COURT: Cross-examination. 3 MS. HUSTER: Yes. Thank you, Your Honor. 4 CROSS-EXAMINATION 5 BY MS. HUSTER: 6 Q. Good morning, Mr. Cliff. 7 A. Good morning. 8 Q. I'm Karen Huster. I represent the defendants 9 in this matter. May I have a look at your helmet? 10 A. Sure. 11 Q. Thank you. Mr. Cliff, have I looked -- to your 12 knowledge, have I had a chance to see this helmet 13 prior to right now? 14 A. No. 15 Q. No. Okay. And other than the modification -- 16 I'm sorry. I'll go back. Other than the modification 17 that you already described, this -- 18 THE COURT: You may stand over there. 19 It's fine with me. 20 MS. HUSTER: Okay. 21 THE COURT: So you're not racing around 22 the courtroom here. You can also walk through the 23 well. It doesn't matter. Just don't stand in front 24 of each other so you can't see the witness. That's 25 all I've asked for. 26 MS. LASCHER: Thank you, Your Honor. 38 1 MS. HUSTER: Thank you, Your Honor. 2 Madam reporter, is it all right if I stand 3 behind you? 4 THE REPORTER: Uh-huh. 5 BY MS. HUSTER: 6 Q. So, Mr. Cliff, other than the modification that 7 you've already noted that you added to the helmet, 8 this rubber or plastic strip to the top -- 9 A. Uh-huh. 10 Q. -- have you done anything else to the helmet 11 since you purchased it? 12 A. Other than the Morgan Hill Police badge. 13 Q. Besides adding the Morgan Hill Police badge 14 sticker and besides adding the "Helmet laws suck" 15 sticker? 16 A. Uh-huh. Other than that, it came just as it 17 is. 18 Q. And this DOT sticker here on the helmet was 19 present at the time that you were cited in July of 20 2007? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. Okay. 23 A. No. 2006. 24 Q. Excuse me. 2006. Thank you. 25 THE COURT: Was the DOT sticker on the 26 helmet when you purchased it? 39 1 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir, it was. 2 THE COURT: Okay. 3 BY MS. HUSTER: 4 Q. So just to be clear, the only modifications 5 you've made to this helmet are adding a piece of 6 plastic to the top? 7 A. Uh-huh. 8 Q. And adding two stickers? 9 A. Correct. 10 Q. Other than that, it's not modified? 11 A. Correct. 12 Q. Okay. And I see that there's a thin lining on 13 the inside; is that correct? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Cliff. So, Mr. Cliff, 16 you testified that you sent a letter to the CHP on 17 February 9th of 2007, correct? 18 A. Which letter? 19 Q. The letter in which you describe that you 20 received a citation on July 2nd, 2006 and you 21 asked for information pursuant to the Public Records 22 Act. 23 A. Yes. 24 THE COURT: Are we referring to Exhibit 2? 25 MS. HUSTER: Yes, Your Honor. Thank you. 26 Exhibit 2. 40 1 BY MS. HUSTER: 2 Q. Mr. Cliff, you testified that you received 3 Plaintiff's 3, which is the February 28th, 2007 4 letter, to you from Mr. Rothman of the CHP, correct? 5 A. Correct. 6 Q. And page 3 of that letter makes reference to a 7 total of 18 pages of attachments, correct? 8 A. Correct. 9 Q. Okay. And you didn't provide those 18 pages of 10 attachments today, did you? 11 A. No. 12 Q. Okay. You testified earlier that you left out 13 some pages, correct? 14 A. Correct. 15 Q. Okay. And a couple things you testified that 16 you left out was portions of the Vehicle Code that Mr. 17 Rothman provided you, correct? 18 A. Correct. 19 Q. Is there anything else that you left out? 20 A. The Federal motor vehicle safety standard. 21 Q. Anything else? 22 A. That's about it, I think. 23 Q. Are you sure? 24 A. There was one document he added about a list of 25 helmets that's FMVSS 218, helmet safety data. 26 Q. So you left that out? 41 1 A. Left that out of what? 2 Q. Left that out of what you provided for the 3 trial today, correct? 4 A. Well, I don't think I got that far in reading 5 this before I got to that point. 6 Q. Well, Mr. Cliff, Mr. Rothman's letter refers to 7 a total of 18 pages of attachments that you were 8 provided along with his response to you, correct? 9 A. Correct. 10 Q. And what you provided to the Court today in 11 trial was two pages of the 18 pages of attachments, 12 correct? 13 A. Well, I guess so. I provided the form, the 970 14 form, and now we just discussed the FMVSS 218 safety 15 data. 16 Q. Anything else that you left out? 17 A. Not that I'm aware of. 18 Q. Are you sure? 19 A. Sounds like there is the way you're asking. 20 Q. Do you know one way or the other whether you 21 left out anything other than what you have already 22 identified that you left out? 23 A. Did I mention the HPM 100.68? 24 Q. Well, I'll let the record reflect as to whether 25 you left that out or not. 26 A. I think I did mention that. 42 1 Q. All right. And did you leave out these 2 documents because you don't have them anymore? 3 A. No. I just didn't bring them with me. I do 4 have them at home. 5 THE COURT: You have two of them, though, 6 in front of you right now, don't you? 7 THE WITNESS: I do have this and this and 8 I have the HPM policy. 9 BY MS. HUSTER: 10 Q. So you chose to withhold those documents, 11 correct? 12 A. Correct. 13 THE COURT: Shall we have those marked as 14 Exhibit 3-A so that we have those as part of the 15 record? We have three out of the four attachments; is 16 that correct? 17 THE WITNESS: Well, we have three out of 18 five. 19 THE COURT: Three out of five? 20 THE WITNESS: Three out of five, correct. 21 THE COURT: And the two that are missing 22 you did not bring today are what? 23 THE WITNESS: The California Vehicle Code 24 Section and the Federal motor vehicle safety standard 25 218, which is a fairly -- 26 THE COURT: Let's have that marked as a 43 1 group Exhibit 3-A so that we have at least three out 2 of the five attachments. Would you hand those to the 3 clerk. 4 (Plaintiff's Exhibit 3-A marked for 5 identification.) 6 MS. LASCHER: Your Honor, may I examine 7 him in conjunction with cross-examination? 8 THE COURT: In a moment, as soon as 9 cross-examination is completed. I just want to make 10 sure we have a complete record of what's going on 11 here. And we are missing two exhibits that were 12 apparently attached to the CHP letter response of 13 February 28th, 2007. We now have at least marked as 14 3-A three of those attachments that Mr. Cliff brought 15 to court. 16 Okay. Further questions. 17 MS. HUSTER: Your Honor, I have a document 18 I would like to show the witness. 19 THE COURT: All right. 20 MS. HUSTER: Give counsel a copy. 21 BY MS. HUSTER: 22 Q. Mr. Cliff, I'm going to represent to you that 23 this is a document which I received yesterday evening 24 from the CHP. Could you please take as much time as 25 you need to review it and tell me if in fact this is 26 the complete record, including the 18 pages of 44 1 attachments that you were given by Mr. Rothman on or 2 about February 28th of 2007? 3 A. (Witness reviews documents.) Yes, I would say 4 that's accurate. 5 MS. HUSTER: Thank you, Mr. Cliff. 6 May I have this marked, please, Your 7 Honor? 8 THE COURT: Marked next in order, 9 Defendant's 8. 10 (Defendant's Exhibit 8 marked for 11 identification.) 12 MS. HUSTER: I'm going to hand this back 13 to Mr. Cliff now. 14 BY MS. HUSTER: 15 Q. Mr. Cliff, do you see, following Mr. Rothman's 16 February 28th letter to you, the 18 pages of 17 attachments? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. All right. Do you recognize the first page of 20 the attachment? 21 A. It looks like a copy of the California Vehicle 22 Code. 23 Q. Okay. And you were provided that, correct? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. But you didn't bring it today? 26 A. Correct. 45 1 Q. Okay. Page 2, do you recognize this document? 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. What is it? 4 A. It's the one we entered into evidence. It's an 5 FMVSS 218 helmet test data. 6 Q. So you had this document but it wasn't provided 7 to defendants yesterday, correct? 8 A. Correct. 9 Q. The same with the following page, page 2 of the 10 FMVSS 218? 11 A. Correct. 12 Q. You had that document but you didn't provide it 13 yesterday, correct? 14 A. Correct. 15 Q. Okay. The next page, it's a page entitled 16 "Footnote." Do you see that? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. You were provided that by Mr. Rothman on or 19 about February 28th of 2007, correct? 20 A. Yes, correct. 21 Q. And did you have possession of this document? 22 A. No, I don't have it with me. 23 Q. Right. But did you receive it from Mr. 24 Rothman? 25 A. Yes. 26 Q. And you didn't provide it, did you? 46 1 A. No. 2 Q. Okay. Next page, do you recognize this page? 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. What is it? 5 A. Federal motor vehicle safety standard 218. 6 Q. And this page includes a diagram, correct? 7 A. Correct. 8 Q. Mr. Rothman provided this to you on or about 9 February 28th, 2007, correct? 10 A. Yes, he did. 11 Q. Next page, it looks like page 2 of the same 12 document? 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. That is to say, motor vehicle safety standard 15 218 entitled "Motorcycle helmets," correct? 16 A. Correct. 17 Q. Okay. And Mr. Rothman provided that to you on 18 February 28th, 2007, correct? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. But you didn't give it to defendants? 21 A. No. 22 Q. Okay. The next page, do you recognize this 23 document? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. What is it? 26 A. It looks like the requirements for motorcycle 47 1 helmets for 218. 2 Q. Okay. And it explains information about the 3 helmet law, correct? 4 A. Correct. 5 Q. Mr. Rothman provided this to you on or about 6 February 28th of 2007, correct? 7 A. Correct. 8 Q. You didn't provide that yesterday either? 9 A. No. 10 MS. LASCHER: Your Honor, may I ask that 11 counsel be more specific about which page of the 12 document we're looking at right now? 13 MS. HUSTER: Well, I'm going through them 14 in order. 15 MS. LASCHER: I've lost track. I wonder 16 if I could just clarify what the paper says at the 17 top? 18 MS. HUSTER: Sure. Thank you, Counsel. 19 I'm sorry, Your Honor. May I respond directly? 20 THE COURT: You already have. Go ahead. 21 MS. HUSTER: Thank you. 22 BY MS. HUSTER: 23 Q. Mr. Cliff, the next page, do you recognize this 24 page? It's labeled in the upper right-hand corner as 25 16 of 28. 26 A. Yes. 48 1 Q. Okay. What is it? 2 A. More 218. 3 Q. More explanation of the helmet law provided to 4 you by Mr. Rothman on or about February 28th, 2007? 5 A. No, it's not the helmet law. It's on 6 manufacturing of a helmet. 7 Q. Information about helmets? 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. Okay. To help you understand what's required? 10 A. Well, to help me be an engineer and understand 11 what's required. 12 Q. This was provided to you by Mr. Rothman? 13 A. Yes, it was. 14 Q. Back in 2007? 15 A. Well, yes. 16 Q. And you didn't provide this to defendants? 17 A. No. 18 Q. Okay. Next page, do you recognize this page? 19 A. More of the same. 20 Q. More of the same. Okay. Same answer with 21 respect to having received this? 22 A. I received this entire document, and, no, I 23 didn't turn it over to the -- the plaintiffs, I guess. 24 MS. HUSTER: Okay. So, Your Honor, in 25 light of the witness's representation that he would 26 answer the same with respect to every page, I can 49 1 abbreviate this cross-examination if the Court is 2 satisfied that that answer is satisfactory with 3 respect to -- 4 THE COURT: It's quite clear that that's 5 going to be his answer, so I don't think we need to go 6 through this unless you think the exercise is of some 7 importance. 8 MS. HUSTER: Thank you, Your Honor. I'll 9 move on. 10 BY MS. HUSTER: 11 Q. Mr. Cliff, could you please look at the page 12 which is identified in the upper right-hand corner as 13 21 of 28. 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. Do you recognize this document? 16 A. Yes. 17 Q. What is it? 18 A. It's a CHP bulletin 970, "Legal versus 19 novelty." 20 Q. What causes you to characterize this document 21 as a bulletin? 22 A. Down in the lower left-hand corner, CHP 970. 23 Q. Does it say "bulletin;" yes or no? 24 A. Don't see bulletin. 25 Q. Okay. It's my understanding you testified with 26 respect to this entire document that you received it 50 1 from Mr. Rothman on or about February 28th? 2 A. Yes, I did. 3 Q. Okay. And then skipping forward to the page 4 labeled 26 of 28, the same document entitled -- well, 5 do you recognize this document? 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. What is it? 8 A. It's the Chapter 4, enforcement guidelines. 9 Q. Okay. And you did provide this, correct? 10 A. Yes, I did. 11 Q. In fact, this is the only attachment of 18 that 12 you provided, correct? 13 A. No. 14 Q. What else did you provide? 15 A. I provided the FMS 218 helmet test data. 16 Q. All right. Thank you. 17 A. I provided both the 970 -- or I don't know, 18 whatever -- documentation 970. 19 Q. You provided that to counsel? 20 A. No. Today to the Court. 21 Q. Okay. I would like to talk with you now about 22 your complaint to internal affairs of the CHP 23 regarding Officer Cortinez. 24 A. Uh-huh. 25 Q. Are you with me? 26 A. Uh-huh. 51 1 Q. Okay. You offered -- you discussed today the 2 text of a letter that you sent on January 8th of 2007 3 which you say is the actual complaint that you 4 submitted about Officer Cortinez, correct? 5 THE COURT: Are we referring to an 6 exhibit? 7 MS. HUSTER: I don't believe it's been 8 entered as an exhibit. 9 THE COURT: I don't think it has either. 10 THE WITNESS: No, it hasn't. And I don't 11 know that I have a copy anymore. I had one this 12 morning, but -- 13 MS. HUSTER: Okay. Your Honor, at this 14 time I would like to request leave to recall Mr. Cliff 15 with respect to this letter. 16 THE COURT: Well, he has a copy of it 17 right here, he said. 18 THE WITNESS: I had it here this morning. 19 MS. HUSTER: He said he doesn't have a 20 copy. 21 THE COURT: Where is this letter? 22 MS. HUSTER: Well, I have one because it 23 was handed to me fifteen minutes ago. I'm trying to 24 examine the witness on a document I received fifteen 25 minutes ago. 26 MS. LASCHER: I did not submit it. I did 52 1 not intend to offer it in evidence. I didn't give 2 them a copy because it was not my intention to offer 3 it in evidence. 4 THE COURT: Do you want a copy so we can 5 get through this faster? 6 MS. HUSTER: Well, I received a copy 7 fifteen minutes ago, and I would like an opportunity 8 to review it because it's related to the documents 9 that plaintiffs did offer in evidence. 10 THE COURT: How long is this letter? 11 MS. HUSTER: Eight pages. 12 THE COURT: How much time do you need to 13 review it? 14 MS. HUSTER: I could take fifteen minutes. 15 THE COURT: All right. We'll take a 16 15-minute break. You may step down, sir. 17 MS. HUSTER: Thank you, Your Honor. 18 MS. LASCHER: Your Honor, I don't have a 19 copy either. I gave counsel my only copy that Mr. 20 Cliff had. 21 THE COURT: Will the clerk make a copy 22 and -- off the record. 23 (Whereupon a short break was taken.) 24 THE COURT: All right. Back on the 25 record. Counsel are present, the parties, and the 26 witness has resumed the stand. 53 1 Further questions, please, on cross. 2 MS. HUSTER: Thank you, Your Honor. Your 3 Honor, I'd ask that this January 8th, 2007 letter be 4 marked as Defendant's 9. 5 THE COURT: It will be marked for 6 identification, the letter dated January 8th, 2007. 7 (Defendant's Exhibit 9 marked for 8 identification.) 9 BY MS. HUSTER: 10 Q. Mr. Cliff, I'm handing you what has been marked 11 as Defendant's 9. Can you identify this document? 12 A. Yes. It's a complaint letter I wrote on 13 Officer Cortinez. 14 Q. And did you cause this letter to be delivered 15 to the CHP Bureau of Internal Affairs? 16 A. Yes, I did. 17 MS. HUSTER: All right. Your Honor, I'd 18 like to ask at this time that Defendant's 8 and 9 be 19 moved into evidence. 20 THE COURT: Any objection? 21 MS. LASCHER: No objection, Your Honor. 22 THE COURT: Okay. They will be in 23 evidence. 24 MS. LASCHER: Oh, pardon me. With respect 25 to Exhibit 8, I just need clarification. There was 26 discussion of a -- I believe Exhibit 8 was the letter 54 1 of -- 2 THE COURT: It's the full response by CHP 3 apparently to the previous letter and it's dated 4 February 28th, 2007. It's the same as Exhibit 3 of 5 3-A except it includes all of the exhibits based on 6 the witness's testimony. 7 MS. LASCHER: Your Honor, except for the 8 last two pages of the document that was handed to me 9 appear to be letters written on April 17 and April 10 26th, 2007. I think this may be -- and the cover 11 sheet is the CHP file. I think this might be the CHP 12 general counsel's entire file rather than merely a 13 February 28 letter. 14 MS. HUSTER: Your Honor, I can represent 15 that the last two pages are the follow-up letters that 16 Mr. Rothman sent to Mr. Cliff that have already been 17 introduced by plaintiff's counsel. 18 MS. LASCHER: I have no objection. I just 19 wanted to clarify what this document is. 20 THE COURT: So apparently it includes 21 Exhibit 6 and 7 that's already in evidence. So why 22 we're having the duplication I don't know, but we are. 23 Okay. Any further objection? 8 and 9 will be in 24 evidence. 25 (Defendant's Exhibits 8 & 9 received in 26 evidence.) 55 1 MS. HUSTER: Thank you, Your Honor. Your 2 Honor, at this time I'm willing to -- at this time I 3 would like to ask that Mr. Cliff not be excused 4 pending our ability to find out more about the 5 investigation that is the subject of the letter from 6 Captain McCreery that we were delivered yesterday. I 7 believe we can have this resolved certainly by 1:30. 8 THE COURT: All right. Is that 9 understood, Mr. Cliff? 10 THE WITNESS: That's fine. 11 THE COURT: You are to be on call here at 12 least until early this afternoon. 13 THE WITNESS: Fine. 14 THE COURT: Thank you very much for being 15 here. Any further -- 16 MS. LASCHER: May I -- 17 THE COURT: -- redirect? 18 MS. LASCHER: Yes, Your Honor. 19 REDIRECT EXAMINATION 20 BY MS. LASCHER: 21 Q. Mr. Cliff, am I your attorney? 22 A. No, ma'am. 23 Q. So when you answered the question -- did you 24 hear counsel ask you a question about providing 25 something to your counsel? 26 A. Yes. 56 1 Q. Was that referring to me, your answer to that 2 question? 3 A. I assumed she had mis-thought that you were my 4 counsel. 5 Q. Thank you. Did you provide me any of the 6 attachments that were offered in evidence as Exhibit 7 3-A when you provided me the documents yesterday? 8 A. No, ma'am. 9 Q. Did you bring them with you yesterday? 10 A. No. 11 Q. Why did you not bring them with you? 12 A. Well, 218 is a fairly thick document and a 13 standard form, and it's the same with the Vehicle 14 Code. 15 Q. When you -- 16 A. In my opinion, I didn't think I needed to bring 17 them. 18 Q. Let me show you Exhibit 8. I'd like to ask you 19 to take a look at the document marked -- the pages 20 marked 10 and 11 of 28. 21 A. All right. 22 Q. Do you understand what those pages represent? 23 A. Looks like a listing of helmets that either 24 passed or failed testing in 2006. 25 Q. When was your helmet purchased? 26 A. 1992. 57 1 Q. Okay. And do you know from looking at this, 2 pages 10, 11 or 12, why those helmets failed the 3 testing? 4 A. Why they failed the testing? This is footnotes 5 here. 6 Q. Apart from that, do you have any other 7 understanding of why they failed? 8 A. I have no idea. 9 Q. Now I'd like to ask you to take a look at page 10 16 of 28. 11 A. All right. 12 Q. Take a look at the paragraph marked S7.1.1. 13 A. All right. 14 Q. Do you understand what that means? 15 A. No idea. 16 Q. Could you take a look at page 17 of 28, the 17 paragraph marked S7.2.4 I guess is what it says. 18 THE COURT: Are these pages actually 19 marked? 20 MS. LASCHER: In the upper right-hand 21 corner. I believe this is a fax and the fax marking 22 is what I'm referring to. 23 THE COURT: And what page are you on now? 24 MS. LASCHER: 17 of 28. 25 BY MS. LASCHER: 26 Q. Take a look at paragraph S7.2.4 in the 58 1 right-hand column. 2 A. Uh-huh. 3 Q. Do you understand what that means? 4 A. Looks like part of the testing procedure. 5 Q. If you examine all of the documents starting 6 with page 10 of 28 and going through page 20 of 28 7 that was provided you by Mr. Rothman, does that assist 8 you in determining what motorcycle helmet would 9 satisfy the CHP? 10 A. No, I would have no idea. 11 MS. LASCHER: Thank you. I have no 12 further questions on redirect. 13 THE COURT: Would you take a look at page 14 26 of 28. 15 THE WITNESS: I don't have it anymore. 16 Thank you. Okay. The Chapter 4? 17 THE COURT: Yes. And looking at the last 18 paragraph as to motorcycle helmet requirements, could 19 you read that to yourself, subdivision 2 of A. 20 THE WITNESS: I'm not quite sure -- 21 THE COURT: The bottom paragraph, sir. 22 THE WITNESS: "A motorcycle safety 23 helmet"? 24 THE COURT: Yes. 25 THE WITNESS: "A motorcycle safety 26 helmet" -- 59 1 THE COURT: Just read it to yourself, 2 please. 3 THE WITNESS: Oh. (Reviews documents.) 4 Okay. 5 THE COURT: Is there anything about that 6 paragraph that you do not understand? 7 THE WITNESS: No, I understand that 8 paragraph. 9 THE COURT: Okay. 10 MS. LASCHER: May I have one more 11 question, Your Honor, in light of Your Honor's 12 question? 13 THE COURT: Sure. 14 BY MS. LASCHER: 15 Q. Would you take a look at page 25 of 28 also. 16 A. (Witness reviews documents.) 17 Q. Does it appear to you that pages 25 and 26 are 18 out of order in the attachment? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. Would you look on page 25 of 28 at paragraph 21 C4. 22 A. Okay. 23 Q. And specifically subparagraph B. 24 A. Okay. 25 Q. Do you know what the phrase "Helmets which are 26 obviously not motorcycle helmets" means in the context 60 1 of that CHP policy? 2 THE COURT: Well, do you want to finish 3 reading the statement there so he gets the context? 4 MS. LASCHER: I'm sorry. Do you want to 5 read that aloud? 6 THE COURT: Well, if you're going to have 7 him -- you did start to read it. "Obviously not 8 motorcycle helmets such as styrofoam, bicycle helmets 9 or football helmets," right? 10 MS. LASCHER: Correct. 11 THE WITNESS: Correct. 12 THE COURT: Do you know what that means, 13 sir? 14 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. 15 THE COURT: Okay. 16 MS. LASCHER: If -- no further questions. 17 THE COURT: Any other questions of this 18 witness? 19 MS. HUSTER: No, Your Honor. 20 THE COURT: No? 21 MS. HUSTER: No, Your Honor. 22 THE COURT: All right. Thank you, Mr. 23 Cliff, for being here today. If you'll just leave all 24 the exhibits right there on the table. Thank you. 25 THE WITNESS: Thank you. 26 THE COURT: Next witness. 61 1 MS. LASCHER: Plaintiffs will call Mark 2 Temple. 3 THE COURT: All right. Sir, if you'll 4 come forward and be sworn in. Raise your right hand. 5 MARK TEMPLE 6 called as a witness on behalf of 7 the Plaintiff, having been first duly sworn, was 8 examined and testified as follows: 9 THE COURT: Your witness. 10 DIRECT EXAMINATION 11 BY MS. LASCHER: 12 Q. Mr. Temple, would you state and spell your name 13 for the record, please. 14 A. Mark Temple, last name is T-e-m-p-l-e. 15 Q. What is your occupation, Mr. Temple? 16 A. I'm in construction. 17 Q. Do you ride a motorcycle? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. How long have you been riding motorcycles? 20 A. 36 years. 21 Q. Did you come here by motorcycle today? 22 A. No. 23 Q. Since 2005 have you been stopped by the CHP in 24 connection with your motorcycle helmet? 25 A. Yeah. All the stops, not just tickets but 26 stops? 62 1 Q. First I want to inquire about stops. 2 A. All right. Yeah. Inspections and everything. 3 Q. Okay. 4 A. Yes, I -- yes or no answer? 5 Q. Yes or no answer. 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. Approximately how many times since 2005? 8 A. I would say approximately ten times. 9 Q. On how many of those ten occasions that you 10 were stopped by CHP for your motorcycle helmet -- 11 well, let me go back. At the time you were stopped 12 were you told the reason you were stopped? 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. What were you told? 15 MS. HUSTER: Objection; cumulative. I'm 16 sorry. The witness is testifying as to all ten stops. 17 MS. LASCHER: I'll withdraw the question 18 and rephrase it. 19 BY MS. LASCHER: 20 Q. Can you recall the -- the last time you were 21 stopped by the CHP concerning your motorcycle helmet? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. What were you told the reason you were stopped? 24 A. I was told that my helmet was not DOT approved. 25 Q. Approximately when did that stop occur? 26 A. That was April of 2007. 63 1 Q. Were you cited on that occasion? 2 A. Yes, I was. 3 Q. What was the violation you were cited for? 4 A. He cited me for 27803. 5 Q. Did you go to court on that violation? 6 A. Yes, I did. 7 Q. What county? 8 A. In Sacramento County. 9 Q. What happened in court? 10 A. The trial was rather lengthy. I find 11 Sacramento to be kind of an interesting -- 12 MS. HUSTER: Objection; calls for a 13 narrative, nonresponsive. 14 THE COURT: Sustained. It's 15 nonresponsive. 16 BY MS. LASCHER: 17 Q. You need to answer the question I asked you. 18 Were you -- was the citation dismissed or upheld? 19 A. Oh. A guilty verdict. 20 Q. Is the helmet that you have next to you on the 21 witness stand the helmet that was involved in that 22 citation? 23 A. Yeah. 24 Q. Would that be true of any of the incidents 25 since 2005 that I ask you about? 26 A. Citations, yes. Inspections and stops, no. I 64 1 mean, I've had a couple of different ones that I -- 2 Q. Now, you're telling me, though, that you've had 3 six citations since 2005? Is that the number you gave 4 me? 5 A. Five. 6 Q. Five citations since 2005? 7 A. Five. 8 Q. Can you list the dates of those? 9 A. Well, okay. Those were CHP and other agencies, 10 allied agencies or whatever. 11 Q. How many CHP citations since 2005? 12 A. Two. 13 Q. Two CHP citations? 14 A. Correct. 15 Q. One was April 2007? 16 A. Yeah, April 2007. The other one was May of 17 '06. 18 Q. Okay. Before we get to those two citation 19 incidents, the other times when you were stopped by 20 the CHP with respect to your motorcycle helmet, on any 21 of those times did the officer give you any other 22 reason for stopping you except to inspect your helmet? 23 A. That's the only time I've ever been stopped 24 for -- you know, in decades, yeah. 25 Q. And what -- try to list them one at a time if 26 you can recall the dates. What comments were made 65 1 about your helmet during those non-citation stops? 2 A. Oh, okay. One officer -- let me see. I'll 3 work backwards, I guess. One officer just said that 4 it didn't look like anything he had ever seen that was 5 approved. The previous one to that said -- 6 THE COURT: Just a minute. On that 7 particular occasion were you cited by the officer? 8 THE WITNESS: No. I think she -- no. 9 THE COURT: You were not? 10 THE WITNESS: Correct. 11 THE COURT: What agency was involved in 12 that? 13 THE WITNESS: That was Sacramento Police 14 Department. 15 THE COURT: And when was that, if you 16 know? 17 THE WITNESS: That was -- that was also 18 April of -- that was, like, two days before the CHP 19 ticket that said it was not a DOT-approved helmet. 20 THE COURT: So that was April of 2007? 21 THE WITNESS: Yeah, that was also April of 22 '07, yeah. 23 THE COURT: Okay. 24 MS. HUSTER: Your Honor, objection to all 25 testimony which would go against the Court's in limine 26 ruling with respect to the allied law enforcement 66 1 agencies. 2 THE COURT: All right. Sustained. 3 BY MS. LASCHER: 4 Q. I intended to ask you only about times you were 5 stopped and inspected by the CHP since 2005. 6 A. Okay. 7 Q. Not all the other stops. 8 A. I apologize. Okay. So before that -- before 9 that it was a CHP officer. I can't remember what 10 month this was in, but he had said that it didn't look 11 legal and he wanted to look at it. He noted that the 12 stickers on the inside had fallen out. 13 Before that -- okay. So before that it was -- 14 okay. This was the guy that screamed at me and said 15 you're -- "Are you an anarchist or a constitutionalist? 16 Get a helmet." And he drove away. I said nothing, 17 gave him -- didn't give him my license. He didn't ask 18 for my license or anything. 19 Q. Were you wearing a helmet on that occasion? 20 A. Yes. It wasn't this one. That one wasn't this 21 one. Yes, I was wearing a helmet. 22 Q. Let's talk about the times you were cited, the 23 April 2007 first. On that occasion what did the 24 officer say when he pulled you over? 25 A. He said that my helmet -- he wanted to see the 26 inside of my helmet. He notified me that they were -- 67 1 that the DOT sticker did not appear to be a 2 federally-issued sticker and then the -- there was no 3 federally-issued stickers on the inside of it. And I 4 never heard that there were federally-issued stickers, 5 so I was asking him about -- I asked how do I get 6 those. 7 THE COURT: Is this the helmet that you 8 were riding with -- 9 THE WITNESS: Yeah. 10 THE COURT: -- and using on April 2007 11 when you were stopped by a CHP officer? 12 THE WITNESS: Yes. 13 THE COURT: Could I take a look at it? 14 Thank you. 15 THE WITNESS: Uh-huh. 16 MS. LASCHER: For the record, may I 17 indicate that the witness showed the Court a red, 18 white and blue helmet that's sitting on the witness 19 table. 20 BY MS. LASCHER: 21 Q. Does that helmet have a sticker on it, Mr. 22 Temple? 23 A. A few, yes. The DOT sticker, is that what you 24 mean? 25 Q. Could you describe the DOT sticker on that 26 helmet? 68 1 A. It's white with black letters, about a half an 2 inch tall by inch and a half wide. 3 Q. Thank you. 4 THE COURT: Are there other stickers on 5 the helmet that are right near that DOT sticker? 6 THE WITNESS: There are. Do you want me 7 to -- 8 THE COURT: Could you describe those for 9 us? 10 THE WITNESS: Sure. A rather tattered 11 Bush/Cheney '04 sticker, and then a little -- and 12 that's about an inch and a half by three and a half 13 inches. And then about a three-sixteenths inch tall 14 sticker by an inch and a half wide that says 15 "Republican." 16 THE COURT: Any other stickers on that 17 helmet? 18 THE WITNESS: That -- there's one that 19 says "I voted" on the front, an oval sticker that I 20 got from the -- when I voted. 21 THE COURT: Where did you purchase that 22 ticket -- that helmet? Excuse me. 23 THE WITNESS: This I got from a company 24 that is now out of business in Citrus Heights. The 25 company was called Cycle Sorcery. 26 THE COURT: And when did you purchase that 69 1 helmet, if you know? 2 THE WITNESS: That would be in the end of 3 2004. 4 THE COURT: Your witness. 5 MS. LASCHER: Thank you. 6 BY MS. LASCHER: 7 Q. Is that the helmet you were wearing in May 2006 8 as well as in April 2007? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. Do you recall on the April 2007 -- 11 A. Oh, I apologize. I'm going to say I made a 12 mistake. No, this is not the helmet I was wearing in 13 May of '06 with -- that's the CHP ticket you're 14 talking about, right? 15 Q. Correct. 16 A. Yeah, it was a different one. Actually, the 17 one I was wearing was bigger than this but the DOT 18 sticker had -- I took that off because I wanted to 19 paint it the color of my bike, so it didn't have a DOT 20 sticker on it. It had it on there when I got it, 21 but -- 22 Q. Okay. In the -- first let's finish with the 23 April 2007 citation. After you had the discussion 24 with the officer about the federally-issued stickers, 25 were there any other -- was there any other 26 conversation with the officer concerning your helmet? 70 1 A. He made comments having to do with what the 2 inside of the helmet was supposed to look like. 3 Q. What did he say about the inside of the helmet? 4 A. You know, I apologize. I'd have to think about 5 this for so long because there's been so many stops 6 and I've talked to so many officers, and sometimes it 7 kind of runs together. But I think this guy was the 8 one that said that the -- that the inside of the 9 helmet has to have certain components in it, and then 10 he was also pointing out that the label -- if there 11 had been a label inside, it would have been attached 12 so that it can't come out. And I think that's about 13 all he said about the inside of the helmet. 14 Q. Did he have any comments on the materials the 15 helmet should be made of? 16 A. No, not necessarily about the shell. He made 17 some -- he wanted to see how much it would flex, but 18 I -- he wanted to see it, so I handed it to him and he 19 was playing with it. 20 Q. On the May 6th stop, that was a stop in which 21 you had a helmet but had taken the sticker off so you 22 could paint the helmet the color of the bike? 23 A. Right. 24 Q. What did the officer say about the helmet on 25 that occasion? 26 A. He said it wasn't a helmet, it's not even a 71 1 helmet if it doesn't have a DOT sticker on it. 2 Q. Apart from the lack of DOT sticker, did he give 3 you any information about anything else concerning the 4 helmet that he felt was wrong with it? 5 A. He didn't want to really offer any. I tend to 6 want to know -- I asked him how do I -- what do I 7 need -- if this isn't a helmet, then what is? How do 8 I -- I don't want to violate the law, and I didn't 9 think I was, so how do I comply with it? And he said 10 he didn't know and he just -- I kind of thought that 11 was odd. Well, then if you don't know, how do you 12 know this one isn't? Then he always goes back to the 13 DOT sticker, so -- 14 Q. Have you -- do you recall anything else about 15 either of those traffic stops that you haven't told us 16 yet? 17 THE COURT: The one of April 2007 and May 18 of 2006 in which the CHP officers stopped you and 19 issued you a citation I think she's referring to. 20 MS. LASCHER: I am. Thank you for the 21 clarification. 22 THE WITNESS: Yeah. No, I think that's 23 about it. I think just with your question about -- 24 I'm not sure I made it clear on the April of '07 25 ticket. Kind of what I was trying to ask him was the 26 same thing as I asked the year before with the May '06 72 1 citation. If that's not -- you know, if that's not 2 DOT approved -- and he was talking about the Federal 3 stickers -- well, how do I get it? And he said he 4 didn't know anything. Nobody seems to know the 5 answers to the questions that you need to know, but 6 they know how to write a ticket. 7 BY MS. LASCHER: 8 Q. Have you asked any CHP lieutenants who were not 9 in the process of stopping you concerning your 10 motorcycle helmet for information about complying with 11 the helmet law? 12 A. Oh, yeah. I've -- 13 MS. HUSTER: Objection; vague as to time. 14 THE COURT: Sustained. 15 BY MS. LASCHER: 16 Q. At any time after 2005. 17 A. I've actually gone into the CHP substation 18 closest to my house because that seems to be where all 19 these officers are coming out of. This is where 20 they're working from that have these ideas about a 21 Department of Transportation approved helmet and 22 Federal stickers, and so I needed clarification and I 23 have actually gone in to talk to people and I talked 24 to a lieutenant that -- I actually just think I just 25 remembered his name. Linson (phonetic) sounds -- 26 comes to my mind. And he -- you know, I thought this 73 1 is a guy that's at the top of the chain so he would be 2 able to answer these questions, and he says he doesn't 3 know. I've had -- 4 Q. Before you go on with that answer, this was a 5 lieutenant in the CHP office closest to your home? 6 A. Yeah. Area 250 I think is what it's called. 7 Q. Thank you. The next -- other CHP officers 8 you've asked after 2005? 9 A. After 2005 I actually wrote a letter to that 10 area -- I think it was called a substation, that 250 11 substation asking those questions, but they had -- the 12 question of how do I -- I've got tickets from you 13 before. You said my helmet does not comply. How do I 14 comply? And that one, I've gotten a letter in 15 response saying that it's all right there in the 16 Vehicle Code and we're not going to answer any further 17 since it was -- it was after I had gotten a ticket and 18 I think they didn't want to answer because we were on 19 the opposing sides of a legal battle, so I didn't get 20 any answers from him either. 21 Q. Have you asked any other CHP personnel since 22 December 2005 for guidance in complying with the 23 helmet law? 24 A. Yeah. In fact, I've even -- 25 Q. Excuse me. Since the beginning of 2005. 26 A. Since the beginning, so it's January of 2005? 74 1 Q. Sure. 2 A. I make a habit of -- being the friendly guy 3 that I am, I will strike up a conversation with a 4 police officer if we happen to be in the same place, 5 in the same building. And, yeah, there's -- no one 6 really -- from what I've asked of people, their answer 7 is nobody really knows. There's no -- it's like they 8 get to use their imagination. 9 Q. Can you be more specific about who you've asked 10 when you say nobody really knows? 11 A. A female -- I didn't get her name. There was a 12 female CHP officer at a Fair Oaks -- that's a city 13 near where I live, Fair Oaks, like a city fair, and 14 they had blocked off the street, so I struck up a 15 conversation with her to see if -- and I wasn't even 16 on my motorcycle that day, but I wanted to know if she 17 had heard of any specific details relating to 18 enforcement practices. How do you tell if a guy is 19 violating the helmet law? 20 MS. HUSTER: Objection; hearsay. 21 THE COURT: Overruled. Next question. 22 THE WITNESS: And -- 23 BY MS. LASCHER: 24 Q. Did you get an answer from that CHP officer? 25 A. Yes. 26 Q. What did she say? 75 1 A. Yes. Her answer was there's these -- there 2 isn't a lot of ways to tell, but there's these guys 3 that ride around with these helmets that are illegal 4 and they have recording -- they have the capability of 5 recording the traffic stop, so we watch out for those 6 guys. And I figured she meant Bianco and Blanscet, 7 because I know they've been -- the CHP avoids them. 8 And it seems like that's -- it just seems like that 9 has been my experience too with being pulled over so 10 many times and it's just for an inspection. 11 Q. Well, let's go back to the female officer. I 12 just want to know if she gave you any other 13 information about how you can comply with the helmet 14 law? 15 A. Oh, no. No. And -- no. In fact, she was one 16 who said that because of things that she had heard, 17 that she just avoids helmet tickets so she doesn't -- 18 she just stays out of it. 19 Q. Have you asked any government agencies other 20 than the CHP for guidance in complying with the helmet 21 law? 22 MS. HUSTER: Objection; Court's in limine 23 ruling. 24 THE COURT: Sorry. What's the objection? 25 MS. HUSTER: Objection in light of the 26 Court's ruling on the motion in limine regarding other 76 1 law enforcement agencies other than CHP. It's also 2 vague as to time. 3 THE COURT: Sustained if that's the 4 substance of your question. 5 BY MS. LASCHER: 6 Q. Have you asked for a list of approved 7 motorcycle helmets or for a list of helmets that would 8 comply with the helmet law from any government agency, 9 not a police agency but any other kind of government 10 agency since January of 2005? 11 MS. HUSTER: Same objection. Withdrawn on 12 vague as to time. 13 THE COURT: You may answer the question. 14 Overruled. 15 THE WITNESS: Yes. I asked -- I wrote a 16 letter to the California Department of Consumer 17 Affairs because I figured since I -- being a consumer, 18 I figured maybe they would know. And the letter I got 19 in response was it appeared that she had done some 20 research and didn't just answer that she didn't know. 21 She had actually looked and said that there was no way 22 for her -- 23 MS. HUSTER: Objection; hearsay, secondary 24 evidence rule. 25 THE COURT: Sustained. 26 77 1 BY MS. LASCHER: 2 Q. Do you have a copy of the letter you received? 3 A. Not with me, no. 4 Q. Have you asked any other government agency for 5 guidance? 6 A. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. 7 Q. Did you receive any guidance from them? 8 A. They said -- 9 MS. HUSTER: Same objection. 10 THE COURT: You may answer the question 11 just as it's stated. 12 THE WITNESS: They said -- 13 THE COURT: No, not what they said. Did 14 you receive any response? 15 THE WITNESS: Oh, yes. I'm sorry. Yes, I 16 did. 17 BY MS. LASCHER: 18 Q. You brought a box and put it here on counsel 19 table today; is that correct? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. You brought this box. Can you describe the 22 box, please? 23 A. It's black and it's a box that a brand new 24 helmet comes in. 25 Q. Does it contain anything? 26 A. It contains a helmet, and the helmet is in a 78 1 soft little bag. 2 Q. Do you own this box and helmet? 3 A. No. I borrowed it from a person that I know 4 that runs a motorcycle store. 5 Q. What's the name of his store? 6 A. The name of the store is Indian Big Dog 7 Motorcycles of Citrus Heights. 8 Q. Did you make any changes to the helmet inside 9 the box -- 10 A. No. 11 Q. -- before you brought it here? 12 Did you make any changes to the box? 13 A. No. 14 MS. LASCHER: I have no further questions 15 at this time. 16 THE COURT: Cross-examination. 17 MS. HUSTER: Thank you, Your Honor. 18 CROSS-EXAMINATION 19 BY MS. HUSTER: 20 Q. Good morning, Mr. Temple. 21 A. Good morning. 22 Q. I'm Karen Huster. I represent the defendants. 23 May I look at your helmet, please? 24 A. Sure. 25 Q. Mr. Temple, is the helmet in the same condition 26 now that it was when you were cited in the one 79 1 citation you've already described in which you were 2 wearing this helmet? It looks the same now as when 3 you got the ticket? 4 A. Yeah. Oh, yes. 5 THE COURT: In April of 2007. 6 THE WITNESS: April of '07, yeah. 7 MS. HUSTER: Thank you. In April of 2007. 8 THE COURT: Yes, 2007. 9 MS. HUSTER: Thank you. 10 BY MS. HUSTER: 11 Q. And from the time that you purchased the 12 helmet, have you done anything to change it besides 13 put on stickers? 14 A. The stickers -- the stickers I put on and the 15 chrome trim. There was a black trim on it and I put a 16 chrome trim on instead. 17 Q. So you removed the trim? 18 A. Right. 19 Q. And replaced it with a different trim? 20 A. Yeah. 21 Q. Okay. Anything else you did to change the 22 helmet since you purchased it? 23 A. No, that's it. No, I take that back. Since 24 we've got to be really detailed about this, I added a 25 velcro strip so that the little flap won't flop around 26 and smack me in the cheek. 80 1 Q. So you added a piece of velcro to the strap? 2 A. A piece of velcro to the strap. 3 Q. But this was the original strap that was on the 4 helmet when you purchased it? 5 A. Correct. 6 Q. Okay. And you put all these stickers on the 7 helmet? 8 A. Which ones? 9 Q. The stickers that are here; the Republican 10 sticker, the DOT sticker, the Bush/Cheney sticker and 11 the "I voted" sticker? 12 A. No. 13 Q. Okay. Which -- did you put the "I voted" 14 sticker on the helmet? 15 A. Yeah, I put the "I voted" sticker on it. 16 Q. Did you put the Bush/Cheney sticker on? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. Okay. Did you put the DOT sticker on? 19 A. No. 20 Q. Okay. Did you put the Republican sticker on? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. Okay. Do you know who put the DOT sticker on? 23 A. No. You mean the person's name or what do you 24 mean? 25 Q. That's a good question. When you bought the 26 helmet did it have the DOT sticker on it? 81 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. I note that it's an irregular shape. It hasn't 3 been cut by a mold. It looks like it's been hand cut. 4 Do you notice that as well? 5 MS. LASCHER: Objection. What is the "it" 6 we're speaking of? 7 BY MS. HUSTER: 8 Q. The DOT sticker, see how it's not even? 9 A. Okay. The evenness of it, what do you mean? 10 Q. Well, for example, just for sake of comparison, 11 see your "I voted" sticker? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. See how it's evenly cut? It's obviously cut by 14 machine, not by hand, correct? 15 A. I would imagine. 16 Q. And then the DOT sticker is unevenly cut as if 17 cut by hand. Do you notice a difference? 18 A. Well, I see what you're talking about. I can't 19 surmise if that was done by hand or by machine or 20 whatever. I just figured that's the way it came. I 21 don't know who cuts them. 22 Q. Okay. So it's your testimony that when you 23 purchased this sticker that's the way it came? 24 A. I didn't purchase the sticker. 25 Q. I'm sorry. I misspoke. When you purchased the 26 helmet, and as you stated, the DOT sticker was 82 1 attached -- 2 A. Right. 3 Q. -- and that's how it came? 4 A. Uh-huh. 5 Q. Okay. Do you notice that your trim is falling 6 off? 7 A. Yeah. 8 Q. And do you know when it started falling off? 9 A. No, I really don't pay that much attention to 10 it. 11 Q. Do you notice there's a gap in the trim, that 12 it's not one intact piece? 13 A. Correct, yeah. I took that off my car to put 14 on there. 15 Q. The chrome piece, you mean? 16 A. Correct. 17 Q. Okay. So it's actually two pieces? 18 A. Right. 19 Q. Okay. Do you know whether the trim was falling 20 off at the time you were cited in April of 2007? 21 A. No, I have no idea. 22 Q. All right. Thank you, Mr. Temple. 23 A. Sure. 24 Q. Mr. Temple, have I had a chance to see the 25 helmet before today to your knowledge? 26 A. Yeah.