Years before Ann Metternich decided to close Victoria's Bridal and Formal Wear last October, she was accused of stealing from a tuxedo supplier.
And her trial on that charge resumes this morning before Cole County Circuit Judge Dan Green.
A Cole County grand jury indicted Metternich in October 2010 on a single charge of theft for stealing property worth at least $500 but not more than $25,000. The indictment remained suppressed until Dec. 27, 2012, according to the docket entries available online at www.courts.mo.gov/casenet.
The charge is a Class C felony, with a maximum prison sentence - if there's a conviction - of no more than seven years.
Originally scheduled as a jury trial, Metternich waived her right to a jury last month, and repeated that waiver at the beginning of the trial Monday afternoon.
Green is hearing the evidence and will decide whether it leads to Metternich's conviction or a not guilty finding.
Her defense attorney, Daniel Hunt, reserved his right to make an opening statement later, but Prosecutor Mark Richardson began the trial by outlining the accusation that Metternich failed to return a "large number" of tuxedos she'd rented from the Minnesota-based Anderson Formal Wear company, and how that company's "sting" operation led to them reporting the case to Jefferson City's police.
Then-Detective Chad Stiefferman testified Monday that, after Anderson officials contacted the police, "several of us set up surveillance" of the Victoria's Bridal store, 722 Jefferson St., and watched on Feb. 8, 2010, as Anderson representatives rented a tuxedo from Victoria's, then took it to the police station to determine if the clothing was on the company's list of non-returned items.
Stiefferman said the stakeout was to be sure that the clothing was inside the store, and not delivered to the store after it was ordered.
Dennis Gerber, who worked for Anderson's Formal Wear for 33 years, was the company's Kansas City, Kansas-based general manager and vice president during the reported thefts, he testified Monday.
Victoria's Bridal opened in 1992, and Metternich bought the store in 2000.
"We started a business relationship with Ann Metternich in 2000, and previously had worked with Angie and Vickie, the previous owners," Gerber testified Monday afternoon. "(The thefts) started prior to 2008 - this was a gradual progression."
Like their formal wear competitors, Anderson's uses a bar code to identify each individual piece of clothing that's rented.
"The bar code is scanned when it goes in or out of our building," Gerber told Green.
But, when items rented to Metternich's store didn't come back and she was asked about their being missing, Gerber testified, "She had insisted for a couple of years that she had returned them. ... She would tell me, "I've turned the store upside down and cannot find these items.'"
Gerber added: "She refused to pay late charges and replacement charges because she said she had returned them."
He said Metternich had the same message when asked if she had received an order that was supposed to be delivered to a business in Odessa.
Eventually, he said, a company audit determined that Metternich had not returned "hundreds, hundreds of items. We decided the only way we knew for sure (that she had kept them) was that we would actually have to shop her store, and see if we could rent or buy something that was on the list."
Three different times, using two different men from the Kansas City area that Metternich didn't know, Gerber said, they rented or bought tuxedo coats or pants from the store, then matched the bar codes on the items with the numbers on the list of missing items - and determined they were on the list.
Hunt objected several times to the testimony from Gerber, Stiefferman and Marvin Norton - a friend of Gerber's who made two of the "sting" visits to the store. Hunt argued that much of what they said was hearsay, and not tied directly to the stealing charge.
The trial is scheduled to run through Wednesday, but Green said it might be finished this afternoon.
Because he's deciding the guilt or innocence, and not a jury, he said it's more likely he'll take the case under advisement and issue a ruling later.