Welcome to Omgili,
Omgili ( Oh My God I Love It ;) is a search engine for discussions. With Omgili you can find answers and solutions, debates, discussions, personal experiences, opinions and more... To learn more about Omgili click here.
This is a complete preview of the discussion as it was indexed by Omgili crawlers. Use this preview if the original discussion is unavailable.
Click here to view the original discussion.
[http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=66593&mode=lin...]
Click here to search for discussions with Omgili discussions search engine.
 |
US Supreme Court overturns California Hearsay Case Conviction - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community
The U.S. Supreme Court made a ruling on a California case, upheld by the California Supreme Court, involving a murder case where the suspect was convicted in part by hearsay testimony.
It ruled that the case violated the defendant's 6th amendmant rights.
The California Supreme Courts upholding of the conviction is "vacated and remanded" by the U.S.
Supreme Court.
The U.S.
Supreme Court did give some instruction on how they can interpret the 6th amendment and prosecute in a means that is constitutional.
I think it will take a while for all the legal experts to figure out how hearsay laws can be passed that don't violate the constitution.
This doesn't necessarily mean that Hearsay laws won't pass, but I think it is a set-back....for now.
I'm sure more will come in the news in the days following.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-6053.ZS.html
|
|
I read about the Supreme Court decision regarding the California hearsay law, and I think this will have major ramifications on the passage of the Illinois hearsay law.
It's my understanding that the Illinois hearsay law is patterned after the California law.
I suspect the Illinois law-makers will either vote the law down or will send it back for revision.
It could be a long time before the law would come up for approval, since the Illinois Legislature is going to be on break until November.
In any case, I don't think the grand jury will be able to wait for the passage of the hearsay law, as it may not happen.
They will have to indict DP on what they have.
|
|
I hope that somehow in some way all states are able to come up with some version of the heresay law.
It does not seem fair that a person can record their situation and perceived threats and that the law has to ignore it.
Especially when other evidence also points to the suspect.
And it esp. seems unfair if that suspect is thought to have killed to prevent the person from being a witness to another crime.
|
|
Quote: : I hope that somehow in some way all states are able to come up with some version of the heresay law.
It does not seem fair that a person can record their situation and perceived threats and that the law has to ignore it.
Especially when other evidence also points to the suspect.
And it esp. seems unfair if that suspect is thought to have killed to prevent the person from being a witness to another crime.
I agree. It would seem to me that the person is not available to be confronted by the defendant because the defendant has already confronted them and it ended in death.
I think that when women try to contact the LE over and over again and express they are in harm's way, as in Kathleen's case, then that should still be allowed to be presented.
|
|
|
Per the article that Fran posted in media, the hearsay law has now passed and is only waiting on the Govenor's signature.
|
|
Quote: : Per the article that Fran posted in media, the hearsay law has now passed and is only waiting on the Govenor's signature.
This is great news!
I hope the governor signs it asap!
And I hope the grand jury follows it with an indictment!
|
|
|
|