How has the evidence been used to dissuade a witness?

Here, the gang evidence was relevant to the underlying charge of dissuading a witness. As already discussed (see part III, ante), there was substantial evidence that Waters knew that defendant was a gang member; there was also substantial evidence that the people in the other cars were defendant's fellow gang members. The gang expert testified that gang members may threaten a witness by surrounding him or her, without making any verbal threat. Waters's awareness that defendant and his accomplices were gang members would make the threat more potent. Thus, the gang evidence was relevant to show the intent to dissuade. (See People v. Navarro (2013) 212 Cal.App.4th 1336, 1347.) It was also relevant to show that the attempted dissuasion was carried out by means of an implied threat of force or violence. (See Pen. Code, 136.1, subd. (c)(1).)