Tastries trial: Witnesses testify about cake procedures | News

But one such instance was caught by Miller, leading her to deny a wedding cake to a lesbian couple. The women then sought legal redress under California law.

Miller is accused by the Department of Fair Employment and Housing of violating the California Unruh Civil Rights Act after she denied a wedding cake to lesbian couple Mireya and Eileen Rodriguez-Del Rio in 2017. A Kern County judge sided with Miller in 2018, saying her First Amendment rights are protected against the state’s desire to create an accessible marketplace. An appeals court overturned the ruling, and the department sued Miller again.

Judge Eric Bradshaw must make the final decision because the proceedings are part of a bench trial with no jury. The first day of trial, during which opening statements were delivered, was Monday.

Former and current employees testified Tuesday about Miller’s cake-making policies and processes. Plaintiff Mireya Rodriguez-Del Rio also took the stand to share her experiences once she was denied a wedding cake.

Tastries manager Rosemary Perez testified customers typically choose the tiers, flavors, icing and other components of the cake. If a customer also provides a picture to the bakers, then that design will be emulated, she said under direct examination by Gregory Mann, senior staff counsel with the DFEH.

The Rodriguez-Del Rios first contacted Perez to buy a wedding cake at Tastries. They sought a cake with three tiers and white buttercream frosting, Perez testified. A picture shown during trial showed a cake sought by the pair without writing and frosting swirled on the cake’s side.

Perez said there was no screaming or profanity when Miller denied them the cake and diverted the couple to another bakery. She added the couple did not appear to be happy with Miller.

Perez also testified that no matter the cake’s design, the bakery will deny cakes that celebrate same-sex marriages. The cake represents a celebration of that union, she added.

Testimony also centered around Miller’s recipes. Perez said Miller used boxed mixes but would also add other ingredients. Another witness said she only uses a box mix.

Mary Johnson, a former Tastries employee, disagreed with Miller’s views on gay rights. She noted most cakes were made from boxed mixes while there were some made from scratch. Frosting was also store bought, Johnson testified under direct examination by DFEH lawyer Soyeon Mesinas.

The cake sought by the Rodriguez-Del Rios was similar to a display cake at Tastries, she testified.

Johnson also noted it is hard to differentiate between a cake for another occasion and a wedding cake. In the modern day, there are wedding cakes that are colorful and have a plethora of designs, she said.

Johnson said under cross-examination by Paul Jonna that perfecting cakes is an artistic endeavor. But she also noted Miller should be forced to make a cake regardless of the message because she is providing a service.

Under a brief redirect examination by Mesinas, Johnson said a business is not serving a customer if its owner refers them to another bakery.

Tuesday also saw plaintiff Mireya Rodriguez-Del Rio take the stand. Rodriguez-Del Rio testified that they originally planned to get married in October 2017, but the November 2016 election sprouted fears that their rights would be stripped, Mireya Rodriguez-Del Rio said.

The couple had an intimate ceremony in December 2016, but then started planning for a bigger party to exchange vows in front of their friends and extended family members.

Mireya Rodriguez-Del Rio decided that Tastries Bakery should be the vendor for her wedding. Their interactions with Perez were all pleasant, Rodriguez-Del Rio said.

When the women showed up again for their tasting, Perez apologized and referred them to Miller, according to Rodriguez-Del Rio’s testimony. Miller, after asking questions about their order, told them she doesn’t condone same sex marriage. She referred them to Gimme Some Sugar.

Mireya Rodriguez-Del Rio said she was shocked and didn’t raise her voice. After, she testified, her emotions came pouring out.

Witness testimony is scheduled to continue Wednesday.