Arrested for what?>
Hispanic friend of mine just got pulled over. . .
- Thread starter Jarod
- Start date
Diogenes
Nemo me impune lacessit
Quit lying, Brad.
countryboy
Verified User
Oh geez, you're one of these douchebags that harasses the police. Good fucking grief, get a fucking life loser.
TOP
Retired Teacher
What was illegal about stopping him...
What lockdowns?
TOP
Retired Teacher
What was illegal about stopping him... What did you tell the mayor that would give her cause to talk to him?
Bai Lan
Let It Rot
this is why you lost.
Stopping someone without a reason is illegal.
Diogenes
Nemo me impune lacessit
There were no lockdowns. You are a fool who fell for a lie.
T. A. Gardner
Thread Killer
Anecdote isn't evidence. Neither is hearsay.
For interfering with the lawful arrest of violent illegals who had deportation orders.
Research it yourself, slug.
Diogenes
Nemo me impune lacessit
Hearsay can be.
Hearsay is generally not admissible as evidence in a criminal case, but there are important exceptions depending on the jurisdiction and specific circumstances. Here's a breakdown:
What is Hearsay?
Hearsay is an out-of-court statement offered in court to prove the truth of the matter asserted. For example, if a witness testifies, "John told me he saw the crime," that statement is hearsay if it's being used to prove the crime occurred.
General Rule
In most legal systems, particularly under the Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE) in the United States or similar common law systems, hearsay is inadmissible unless it falls under a recognized exception. The primary reason is that hearsay is considered unreliable since the person who made the original statement (the declarant) is not available for cross-examination.
Exceptions to the Hearsay Rule
There are numerous exceptions where hearsay can be admissible in a criminal case. Some common examples include:
- Statements by the Defendant (Party Opponent): If the defendant made a statement, it can often be admitted as an "admission by a party opponent" (FRE 801(d)(2)). For example, a confession or incriminating statement by the defendant is not considered hearsay.
- Dying Declarations: In some cases, statements made by someone who believes they are about to die (e.g., identifying their killer) can be admitted if they pertain to the cause or circumstances of their death (FRE 804(b)(2)).
- Excited Utterances: Statements made under the stress or excitement of a startling event can be admissible (FRE 803(2)). For example, someone shouting, "He shot him!" immediately after witnessing a shooting.
- Present Sense Impressions: Statements describing an event or condition made while or immediately after the declarant perceived it (FRE 803(1)).
- Statements for Medical Diagnosis or Treatment: Statements made to medical professionals for the purpose of diagnosis or treatment can be admissible (FRE 803(4)).
- Prior Inconsistent Statements: If a witness's prior statement contradicts their current testimony, it may be admissible to challenge their credibility (FRE 801(d)(1)(A)).
- Business or Public Records: Certain records kept in the regular course of business or public duties may be admissible (FRE 803(6), 803(8)).
- Unavailability of the Declarant: If the person who made the statement is unavailable to testify (e.g., due to death, illness, or refusal to testify), certain hearsay statements may be admitted, such as prior testimony or statements against interest (FRE 804).
- Forfeiture by Wrongdoing: If the defendant caused the declarant's unavailability (e.g., by threatening or harming them), the court may allow hearsay evidence (FRE 804(b)(6)).
- Residual Exception: In rare cases, hearsay that doesn't fit into a specific exception may still be admitted if it has strong guarantees of trustworthiness (FRE 807).
Constitutional Considerations
In criminal cases, the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause in the U.S. Constitution guarantees the defendant the right to confront witnesses against them. This means that even if a hearsay statement falls under an exception, it may still be inadmissible if it is "testimonial" (e.g., statements made to police during an investigation) unless the declarant is available for cross-examination or the defendant had a prior opportunity to cross-examine them. This principle was established in cases like Crawford v. Washington (2004).
Variations by Jurisdiction
Rules about hearsay can vary significantly between jurisdictions. For example:
- In the U.S., the Federal Rules of Evidence or state-specific rules apply.
- In the UK, hearsay is governed by the Criminal Justice Act 2003, which allows hearsay under certain conditions, such as when it is in the interest of justice.
- In civil law systems (e.g., France, Germany), hearsay is often treated more leniently, as the focus is on the judge's evaluation of all available evidence rather than strict admissibility rules.
Practical Considerations
Even if hearsay is technically admissible, its reliability and weight are often scrutinized by judges and juries. Courts may also impose additional safeguards, such as requiring corroborating evidence, to ensure fairness.
Conclusion
Hearsay can be admissible in a criminal case if it falls under a recognized exception or meets specific legal criteria, but its use is strictly regulated to protect the rights of the accused. If you're dealing with a specific case, consulting a legal professional familiar with the relevant jurisdiction is essential, as the rules can be complex and context-dependent.
@Grok
One can be an activist without interfering with the lawful arrest of anyone.
Last edited:
Bai Lan
Let It Rot
so is demanding evidence of a medical procedure to conduct trade.
TOP
Retired Teacher
Yes...that's why I asked Jarod.
They were screaming to them to not open their doors.
They were warning the illegals that ICE was coming to arrest them.
They put the ICE agents lives at risk.
It was so egregious that A/G Pam Bondi said it was obstruction and that they would start arresting them.