Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In the law of criminal evidence, a confession is a statement by a suspect in crime which is adverse to that person. Some secondary authorities, such as Black's Law Dictionary, define a confession in more narrow terms, e.g. as "a statement admitting or acknowledging all facts necessary for conviction of a crime", which would be distinct from a mere admission of certain facts that, if true ...
The Judges' Rules are a set of guidelines about police and questioning and the acceptability of the resulting statements and confessions as evidence in court. Originally prepared for police in England, the Rules and their successor documents have become a part of legal procedure not just in Britain but in places as far afield as Jamaica, Zambia and Western Samoa where English law is followed.
For evidence to be admissible enough to be admitted, the party proffering the evidence must be able to show that the source of the evidence makes it so. If evidence is in the form of witness testimony, the party that introduces the evidence must lay the groundwork for the witness's credibility and knowledge.
Although a confession obtained in violation of Miranda is inadmissible, evidence obtained based on information in the confession is admissible. [28] For example, if police learn the identity of a witness through a confession that violates Miranda, the government may still use the witness's testimony at trial. [29]
In these circumstances, it would be open to the trial judge to exclude the evidence of the confession under Section 78(1) of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE), or under Section 73 PACE, or under common law, although in practice the confession would be excluded under section 76 PACE. [14]
The court held that if one of two persons, accused of having together committed the crime of murder, makes a voluntary confession in the presence of the other, without threat or coercion, the confession is admissible in evidence against both.
Erik Menéndez and Lyle Menéndez's murder case has played out in the public for over three decades from two high-profile trials to a life sentence — and now a renewed chance at freedom. After ...
Dickerson v. United States, 530 U.S. 428 (2000), [1] upheld the requirement that the Miranda warning be read to criminal suspects and struck down a federal statute that purported to overrule Miranda v. Arizona (1966). Dickerson is regarded as a significant example of a rare departure by the Court from the principle of party presentation. [2]