Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Here in Illinois we have this ex-cop Drew Peterson,who has apparently killed off two of his wives-the first wife was first ruled an accident-found dead in her bathtub, later the case was reopened and declared a murder-the second wife has disappeared, haven't found a body, he claims she ran off with a boyfriend, leaving him. My question is should the state be able to use heresay evidence against him? The prosecuters want to use heresay testimony from the alleged victims sister for example where the sister claims she was told that the defendant would kill her, and other examples like this- testimony form the wife's priest etc. They passed legislation here in I llinois to allow it pending a judge declaring if it should be heard I believe. Although I think that this guy probably did kill his two wives, and I hope he goes to prison for it, I don't think that using heresay evidence is a good idea- just think of the possibilities for prosecuters looking for higher conviction numbers,railroading innocent defendents with this sort of "he said she said" information being allowed to be entered as evidence against someone-What would Perry Mason think?
Apparently the this law allows an exception to the hearsay rule, allowing only the testimony of the victim to be entered into trial. Frankly, I'm not sure how often this exception will be able to be used because it depends solely on the ability of a murder victim to remain alive lone enough to make a statement. Additionally the law requires the satisfaction of a three part test, and the admissibility of the testimony must still be deemed valid and relevant by the presiding judge. Is there room for prosecutorial misconduct, certainly, the question is how much and how often.
washingtonpost.com: Hearsay hearing for Drew Peterson comes to an end (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/19/AR2010021903436.html - broken link)
"The unprecedented hearing is easily the most extensive use of a state law allowing a judge to admit hearsay evidence in first-degree murder cases if prosecutors can prove a defendant may have killed a witness to prevent him or her from testifying. The law was passed after authorities named Peterson a suspect in the 2007 disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy, then exhumed Savio's body and reopened her death investigation."
The prosecuters want to use heresay testimony from the alleged victims sister for example where the sister claims she was told that the defendant would kill her, and other examples like this- testimony form the wife's priest etc.
If the sister took part in the conversation, its not hearsay. Its hearsay if she testifies about a conversation that someone else claims to have had with the missing wife..
Law Evidence based on the reports of others rather than the personal knowledge of a witness and therefore generally not admissible as testimony.
I don't have a copy of the Illinois Code handy, but I think those pieces of evidence would be admissible under the Federal Rules.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
