On 4/29/2023 12:31 PM, Rick wrote:
This situation came up in a current TV series. A woman admits to her teenage daughter that she killed a man. Unknown to both of them, the daughter has been going out with an undercover cop who is investigating
the murder. This brings up a couple of questions.
1) If the daughter admits to the cop (who she doesn't know is a cop)
that her mother killed the man, is such hearsay evidence even remotely admissible in court? Assume the cop is secretly recording the girl.
Would it make any difference if the girl knows it's a cop and
voluntarily gives him the information (effectively making a statement to
the police)? I'm thinking because it's hearsay, it wouldn't be
admissible in either case.
The cop would be double hearsay and not admissible at trial but probably
could be used for a warrant
The daughter would be hearsay but probably admissible under the rule's exceptions.
2) If the cop, either before or after the daughter makes the admission, plants a legally authorized wiretap on her and she goes home and the
mother admits on the wire that she killed the man, is that admissible?
A wiretap is for phones, etc. This is commonly called a wire. Probably admissible if a court authorized the bugging.
In this case it's not hearsay, since you'd have the mother's own words,
but it's also not under oath and sometimes people say things they don't really mean. But more importantly, what about her fifth amendment rights against self-incrimination?
5th amendment would not apply as long as they avoid the pitfall of
"custodial interrogation". The daughter becomes a "police agent" and her questioning after the suspect already told the police that she was
invoking her right to an attorney and/or her right to remain silent
would be a 5th amendment violation.
If the daughter goes in and says to mom "do we have any milk?" and mom
blurts out "I killed the SOB" that would probably be OK since there was
no question asked.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)