Re:Illinois first state to tell police they can't lie to min...
by lhorie on Friday July 16, 2021 @01:00PM
(#27858356)
IANAL but my understanding is that there are specific criteria for what is admissible and what isn't. For example, there are very specific heuristics for determining whether something is hearsay. What I'm saying is that there should be a clear cut list of criteria regarding which circumstances are admissible (e.g. was the confession made freely or was there coercion/promises/negotiations/etc involved, was the conversation recorded/unadulterated, etc) and that this list should be properly followed to disqualify potential foul play, just as is done w/ hearsay.
So, the defendant saying those magic words should automatically erase any statements the defendant made, whether or not the magic words are true? Or should perhaps, both the claim of inducement and the other statements remain in evidence, with the trier of fact deciding on the weight to give each?