Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Justices May Further Restrict Domestic Violence Testimony

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
spindrifter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 12:20 PM
Original message
Justices May Further Restrict Domestic Violence Testimony
By David G. Savage, Times Staff Writer
March 20, 2006

<snip>

Today, the high court will hear the appeals of two men who were convicted of assaulting women based, in one case, on a recorded 911 call, and in the other, on a police officer's testimony of what the victim told him.

Over the last two decades, prosecutors in domestic violence and child abuse cases have relied heavily on testimony by police officers and counselors who interviewed the alleged victims when they could not or would not appear in court.

But those prosecutions have a formidable foe in Justice Antonin Scalia. He insists the Constitution guarantees all defendants a right to confront their accusers in court, and sees no basis for an exception in cases of domestic violence or child abuse.

Two years ago, Scalia wrote an opinion for the court that all but barred the use of out-of-court statements at trials when the witness is unavailable to testify.

The only sure test of whether "testimonial statements" are reliable, Scalia concluded, "is the one the Constitution actually prescribes: confrontation." The 6th Amendment, he noted, says: "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right … to be confronted with the witnesses against him."

<snip>

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-scotus20mar20,0,7146111.story?coll=la-home-nation

++++++++++++++++

An interesting predicament, pitting the Constitutional right to confront one's accusers against the desire to protect people who may be the victims of crimes. This goes much farther than domestic violence, which is the crime du jour, guaranteed to be easily understood by the people. This case, if it goes against the Confrontation right, will make it even easier to convict any of us on untested accusations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-20-06 12:32 PM
Response to Original message
1. interesting if the court rules his way
a key drug law will be thrown out in illinois where informants are shielded from cross examination defense attorneys. john doe search warrants will be illegal. my attorney was one of the people who got this policy put into law in illinois....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 07:42 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC