Dream Girls trial

By CHRIS BRISTOL

YAKIMA HERALD-REPUBLIC

How bare was the barista's behind? That's the question a jurywill wrestle with today in the G-string trial of a Yakima coffeestand owner and one of her employees.

With testimony wrapped up Thursday, closing arguments areexpected today in Yakima Municipal Court, where Dream Girls ownerCheryl Clark and barista Alyssa Hernandez are on trial for allegedlyviolating the city's new indecent exposure ordinance.

Clark and Hernandez face up to 90 days in jail and fines of up to$1,000 each if the jury finds they violated the new ordinance, whichthe City Council amended in 2009 in reaction to complaints about theproliferation of coffee stands featuring scantily clad baristas.

So-called sexpresso stands were the roast of the town that yearbut have been eclipsed by the furor that continues to brew over aproposed strip club on South First Street.

After an arduous jury selection process that featured plenty ofphilosophical drama, the trial itself became a simple he-said-she-said affair, pitting the word of two police officers againstHernandez and a co-worker.

Taking the stand first, officers Ryan Pepper and Erik Horbatkotestified they cited Hernandez when they dropped by Dream Girls ondowntown Yakima Avenue the afternoon of Jan. 6, 2010, as part of awider-ranging "compliance check."

Both officers said they were in full uniform but not so ofHernandez, who they testified was wearing a two-piece outfit thatconsisted of a bustier or corset from the waist up and a thong or G-string from the waist down.

"It looked like underwear," said Pepper.

Regardless of what it's called -- "dental floss" is alsomentioned in the ordinance -- such a garment is strictly illegal asprimary workwear under the amended indecent exposure ordinance, bywhich the City Council sought to clarify what kind of clothing isallowed in public.

Under the ordinance, anyone wearing only see-through apparel or aG-string -- regardless of whether they are working at a coffee stand-- could be prosecuted.

That sounds simple enough, but an important part of the ordinanceis the obtuse concept of "cleavage of the buttocks," which theofficers tried to explain by way of crude drawings showing theorientation of the G-string in relation to the cheeky defining lineof the buttocks.

None of it really matters, however, if the jury sides withHernandez, 22, who testified that she was in fact wearing a pair ofself-described "booty shorts" over the G-string on the day inquestion.

Co-worker Alicia Perez said the same thing, as did Clark, whoalso testified she found the new ordinance confusing.

"I read it. I didn't understand it," she said.

Clark also submitted as evidence a three-piece outfit she sayswas the one worn by Hernandez that day. It consisted of a corset, aG-string and a panty-like garment she said were Hernandez's bootyshorts.

It was unclear from her testimony whether Clark actually knewwhat Hernandez was wearing, as she wasn't in the stand at the time.She arrived a few minutes afterwards and was cited after she toldthe officers that she provides the "costumes" of her employees.

The he-said-she-said nature of the testimony promises to be a keyfacet of closing arguments, because the officers did not take photosof Hernandez or seize the offending garment.

After hours of testimony, Judge Susan Woodard sent the exhaustedjury home at 7 p.m. with instructions to return at 11 this morning.

Big jury trials are nearly unheard of in municipal court, andWoodard took pains to warn the panel not to read the newspaper,listen to the radio or surf the Internet.

She also warned jurors not to drive by Dream Girls on their wayhome. "There's other ways home," she said.

Chris Bristol can be reached at 509-577-7748 orcbristol@yakimaherald.com.