I dont think he would. This is a crime built on deceipt. I find it implausible that someone carrying on this way for years suddenly says "you know what, I gotta be honest here".If the allegations were true? Don't you think he wouldn't let his close friend for all these years take on the accusers and the media in a way that would come back at him?
The more JB talks, the better?
It would be? Wouldnt it be hearsay? Been awhile since Crim Pro though...Bernie would not tell him because it would be admissable in court.
It would be? Wouldnt it be hearsay? Been awhile since Crim Pro though...
If they called JB to the stand to testify.
statement against interest - exception to heresayIt would be? Wouldnt it be hearsay? Been awhile since Crim Pro though...
You can use that against a defendant sitting in the courtroom? I thought types of statements (i.e. dying decs) were only available if Fine was unavailable (i.e. he died)?statement against interest - exception to heresay
If the allegations were true? Don't you think he wouldn't let his close friend for all these years take on the accusers and the media in a way that would come back at him?
The more JB talks, the better?[/quote]
I think JB has been advised to not say anything else. He as much as said so himself the other night.
It would be? Wouldnt it be hearsay? Been awhile since Crim Pro though...
Under NY law doesnt the declarant have to be unavailable though?An admission made to someone by Bernie would definitely be admissible in a proceeding against Bernie.
Its treatment would depend on which rules of evidence was being applied. Under NY law, the admission would be admissible as a hearsay exception. Under federal law (Federal Rules of Evidence), an admission by a party is excluded from the definition of hearsay. It's not an exception, it's just non-hearsay. (I don't remember which approach is followed most other jurisdictions.)
If the allegations were true? Don't you think he wouldn't let his close friend for all these years take on the accusers and the media in a way that would come back at him?
The more JB talks, the better?
Under NY law doesnt the declarant have to be unavailable though?
Sorry, I was referring to the statement against interest exception there (with respect to the comment about declarant unavailabiliy).No.
Think about it: the perp admits he committed the crime to the detective who's interrogating him. At trial, the officer's testimony is coming in (assuming it's not excluded for being coerced, etc.) and would be subject to cross examination.