In In re Heather H. (1988) 200 Cal.App.3d 91, counsel were absent when the four-year-old witness was questioned in camera without having been sworn. (Heather H., supra, 200 Cal.App.3d at p. 96.) Without counsel, "there could be no waiver imputed to the minor," and the unsworn testimony was inadmissible. (Ibid.) Heather H. stands for the proposition that " 'when . . . there is no waiver and an unsworn witness is permitted to give material testimony, a ground for new trial exists.' " (Ibid.)