How is "the bank says the tape shows..." not inadmissible hearsay?
With all due respect to concerns over the so-called "CSI Effect," there is no way in heck that I, as a juror, would vote to convict without seeing the tapes myself.
Reading the article, it doesn't look like she was tried and convicted. She entered a diversion program instead. It sounds like the prosecutor's office is handling it honorably, though. They are agreeing to refund her the money she paid to enter diversion and $10/hr for the 40 hours of community service she did. Good for them.
The article also says she failed a polygraph test. Big surprise.
2 comments:
How is "the bank says the tape shows..." not inadmissible hearsay?
With all due respect to concerns over the so-called "CSI Effect," there is no way in heck that I, as a juror, would vote to convict without seeing the tapes myself.
Reading the article, it doesn't look like she was tried and convicted. She entered a diversion program instead. It sounds like the prosecutor's office is handling it honorably, though. They are agreeing to refund her the money she paid to enter diversion and $10/hr for the 40 hours of community service she did. Good for them.
The article also says she failed a polygraph test. Big surprise.
Post a Comment