thompsonx
Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
|
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right ... to be confronted with the witnesses against him".
"Hearsay is a statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted."[1] Per Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2)(a), a statement made by a defendant is admissible as evidence only if it is inculpatory; exculpatory statements made to an investigator are hearsay and therefore may not be admitted as evidence in court, unless the defendant testifies.[3] When an out-of-court statement offered as evidence contains another out-of-court statement it is called double hearsay, and both layers of hearsay must be found separately admissible.[4]
There are several exceptions to the rule against hearsay in U.S. law.[1] Federal Rule of Evidence 803 lists the following:
Statement against interest
Present sense impressions and Excited utterances
Then existing mental, emotional, or physical condition[when defined as?]
Medical diagnosis or treatment
Recorded recollection
Records of regularly conducted activity
Public records and reports, as well as absence of entry in records
Records of vital statistics
Absence of public record or entry
Records of religious organizations
Marriage, baptismal, and similar certificates, and Family and Property records
Statements in documents affecting an interest in property
Statements in ancient documents the authenticity of which can be established.
Market reports, commercial publications
"Learned treatises"
Reputation concerning personal or family history, boundaries, or general history, or as to character
Judgment of previous conviction, and as to personal, family or general history, or boundaries.[1]
Also, some documents are self-authenticating under Rule 902, such as (1) domestic public documents under seal, (2) domestic public documents not under seal, but bearing a signature of a public officer, (3) foreign public documents, (4) certified copies of public records, (5) official publications, (6) newspapers and periodicals, (7) trade inscriptions and the like, (8) acknowledged documents (i.e. by a notary public), (9) commercial paper and related documents, (10) presumptions under Acts of Congress, (11) certified domestic records of regularly conducted activity, (12) certified foreign records of regularly conducted activity.[1]
In England and Wales, hearsay is generally admissible in civil proceedings,[5] but is only admissible in criminal proceedings if it falls within a statutory or a preserved common law exception,[6] all of the parties to the proceedings agree, or the court is satisfied that it is in the interests of justice that the evidence is admissible.[7]
We are not in england or wales so what is the point of this?
Section 116 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 provides that where a witness is unavailable, hearsay is admissible where a) the relevant person is dead; b) the relevant person is unfit to be a witness because of his bodily or mental condition; c) the relevant person is outside the UK and it is not reasonably practicable to secure his attendance; d) the relevant person cannot be found; e) through fear, the relevant person does not give oral evidence in the proceedings and the court gives leave for the statement to be given in evidence.
Is this the law in the usa?
The two main common law exceptions to the rule that hearsay is inadmissible are res gestae and confessions.
Have you a point for posting a wall of text that that confirms what I said?
|
RE: The US Bail System - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread