Expert testifies rape tape unedited

Lolita Harper

A Newport Beach Police Department videographer provided key testimony

for the prosecution on Thursday in the case of three teenagers

accused of raping an unconscious 16-year-old girl, saying the time

coding on a videotape that captured the incident showed it was not

tampered with or edited after the fact.

Kendra Duerst, who has been employed by the Newport Beach Police

Department for seven years, was the ninth witness in a hearing to

authenticate the videotape that shows the three defendants -- Gregory

Haidl, Kyle Nachreiner and Keith Spann -- penetrating the girl with a

bottle, a can, a cigarette and pool cue. The alleged attack took

place in the Corona del Mar home of Orange County Assistant Sheriff

Don Haidl, the father of Gregory Haidl.

Defense attorneys contend the tape is missing 17 minutes and 38

seconds of footage and that it has been altered.

Gregory Haidl, 18, and Nachreiner and Spann, both 19, face 24

felony counts, which could mean 55 years of jail time. The tape --

allegedly filmed by the defendants -- is a key piece of evidence. The

defense is on its second attempt to get it thrown out as evidence.

Superior Court Judge Francisco Briseno said the attorneys needed

to do three things for the motions filed: establish a chain of

custody of the camcorder and videotape from the time it was found in

a Newport Beach rental house to its possession by the district

attorney’s office; to authenticate the tape found with the tape

currently in possession by the prosecution, which will be shown to

the jury; and then entertain a motion to exclude the tape from

evidence.

“This is the first evidence regarding analysis to determine

whether the tape was edited or not,” Prosecutor Dan Hess said. “We

have more evidence to show that it was the original tape.”

Duerst was asked by Newport Beach investigators on Oct. 9, 2002,

to make copies of the original video and then enhance those digital

copies so that the color could be lightened and the time sequence

would be shown, she said.

During that process, her computer software, which she described as

“high end,” was able to activate the time coding device that is

inherent on the tape, she said. From the hours, minutes, seconds and

frame increment designations that were lifted from the tape, Duerst

said she could tell the tape had not been edited.

If the tape had been tampered with, the coding would not be

continuous and would jump from the time coding at the point that the

edit was made to the time coding at the point it was complete,

creating a gap in the numerical sequence, she said.

“The code was continuous,” Duerst said. “It had not been edited.”

Her blow to the defense came after a full day of tedious testimony

from five other witnesses, and defense attorney John D. Barnett asked

for the evening to prepare to cross-examine Duerst.

“We had no reports and had not been provided with previous

information that she would be giving testimony of this type,” Barnett

said.

Barnett declined to comment about what portion of Duerst’s

testimony caught he and his colleagues off guard.

“We’ll talk about that tomorrow,” Barnett said.

Hess couldn’t help but smile about Duerst’s statement, saying it

was the first of many hard facts prosecutors will show in this case.

The defense team has not even said what they contend is missing from

that videotape, nor have they outlined verification of any tampering.

“[They haven’t even clarified what their evidence is or what they

say was found on that tape,” Hess said in regard to “artifacts”

defense experts say prove tampering.

Duerst is expected back on the witness stand at 10:30 a.m. this

morning for cross-examination, and then defense attorneys are

expected to call their witnesses.

* LOLITA HARPER is the community forum editor. She also writes

columns Wednesdays and Fridays. She may be reached at (949) 574-4275

or by e-mail at lolita.harper@latimes.com.