Dream Girls trial continued to Friday

YAKIMA, Wash. --  How bare was the barista’s behind? That’s the question a jury will wrestle with today in the G-string trial of a Yakima coffee stand owner and one of her employees.

With testimony wrapped up Thursday, closing arguments are expected today in Yakima Municipal Court, where Dream Girls owner Cheryl Clark and barista Alyssa Hernandez are on trial for allegedly violating 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, which the City Council amended in 2009 in reaction to complaints about the proliferation of coffee stands featuring scantily clad baristas.

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

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

Taking the stand first, officers Ryan Pepper and Erik Horbatko testified they cited Hernandez when they dropped by Dream Girls on downtown Yakima Avenue the afternoon of Jan. 6, 2010, as part of a wider-ranging "compliance check."

Both officers said they were in full uniform but not so of Hernandez, who they testified was wearing a two-piece outfit that consisted 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 also mentioned in the ordinance — such a garment is strictly illegal as primary workwear under the amended indecent exposure ordinance, by which the City Council sought to clarify what kind of clothing is allowed in public.

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

That sounds simple enough, but an important part of the ordinance is the obtuse concept of "cleavage of the buttocks," which the officers tried to explain by way of crude drawings showing the orientation of the G-string in relation to the cheeky defining line of the buttocks.

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

Co-worker Alicia Perez said the same thing, as did Clark, who also 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 says was the one worn by Hernandez that day. It consisted of a corset, a G-string and a panty-like garment she said were Hernandez’s booty shorts.

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

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

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

Big jury trials are nearly unheard of in municipal court, and Woodard 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 way home. "There’s other ways home," she said.

• Chris Bristol can be reached at 509-577-7748 or cbristol@yakimaherald.com.