In People v. Adams (2004) 115 Cal.App.4th 243, the Court excluded evidence that a third party (Kallerup), the victim's " 'off and on' boyfriend with mental problems" (id. at p. 247), may have been involved in the charged rape, sodomy, and murder (id. at p. 250). The defendant's proffer included evidence that the victim and Kallerup "had a stormy and violent history" (ibid.); and the existence of similarly burned cigarette butts in both the victim's apartment and Kallerup's motel room, and crushed beer cans in the victim's carport and in Kallerup's motel room (id. at p. 251). There was DNA evidence from the victim from which Kallerup was eliminated as a donor and from which a comparison "against the criminal justice DNA database resulted in . . . a 'cold hit' to the defendant's DNA profile." (Id. at p. 248.) The Court rejected the defendant's claim of error, concluding that there was nothing directly linking Kallerup to the commission of the crimes: "The trial court correctly concluded that the evidence proffered by the defense was 'lacking sufficient direct or circumstantial evidentiary value or connection to link Mr. Kallerup to the actual perpetration of the crime or crimes.' The crushed beer cans found outside the carport were a different brand from the cans in Kallerup's motel room. The cigarette butts were found in the apartment, not at the crime scene which was in the carport. Furthermore, in the absence of fingerprint or DNA evidence linking the cigarette butts to an individual, they could have been left by any of the many individuals who had come to the victim's apartment. 'Exclusion of evidence that produces only speculative inferences is not an abuse of discretion.'In addition, Kallerup's history of violence toward the victim, without direct or circumstantial evidence linking Kallerup to the actual perpetration of the crime, was inadmissible under Evidence Code section 1101." (Id. at p. 253.)