Comments on: Cops coming round on videotaped interrogations http://apublicdefender.com/2008/04/24/cops-coming-round-on-videotaped-interrogations/ Tue, 14 Oct 2008 12:01:01 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 By: Gideon http://apublicdefender.com/2008/04/24/cops-coming-round-on-videotaped-interrogations/#comment-28027 Gideon Mon, 28 Apr 2008 15:34:57 +0000 http://apublicdefender.com/?p=1166#comment-28027 It'll be another 10 years before that idea begins to be debated here. There are some minor problems with that approach that need to be determined and ironed out first: such as what is "first contact"? What if the contact is made on the field? Not insurmountable, but surely questions that need to be answered and ironed out. It’ll be another 10 years before that idea begins to be debated here.

There are some minor problems with that approach that need to be determined and ironed out first: such as what is “first contact”? What if the contact is made on the field?

Not insurmountable, but surely questions that need to be answered and ironed out.

]]> By: LJS http://apublicdefender.com/2008/04/24/cops-coming-round-on-videotaped-interrogations/#comment-28026 LJS Mon, 28 Apr 2008 15:23:16 +0000 http://apublicdefender.com/?p=1166#comment-28026 The solution is UK style videotaping (required in the UK since 1984!) -- tape starts rolling as soon as any questioning begins (can't pre-interrogate or result is inadmissible). The solution is UK style videotaping (required in the UK since 1984!) — tape starts rolling as soon as any questioning begins (can’t pre-interrogate or result is inadmissible).

]]> By: SPO http://apublicdefender.com/2008/04/24/cops-coming-round-on-videotaped-interrogations/#comment-27754 SPO Sat, 26 Apr 2008 02:03:41 +0000 http://apublicdefender.com/?p=1166#comment-27754 No, since videotapes are not required by the Fourth Amendment. I oppose the exclusionary rule--at least as a matter of judge made law, as I don't believe it required by the Constitution. No, since videotapes are not required by the Fourth Amendment. I oppose the exclusionary rule–at least as a matter of judge made law, as I don’t believe it required by the Constitution.

]]> By: Greg Jones http://apublicdefender.com/2008/04/24/cops-coming-round-on-videotaped-interrogations/#comment-27727 Greg Jones Fri, 25 Apr 2008 21:21:51 +0000 http://apublicdefender.com/?p=1166#comment-27727 I practice in a small county-seat town in Michigan. The County Sheriff Department has had a video capacity for several years. The camera is inside a small dark globe, like a security camera, and is not readily visible. I get a compact disc of the interview along with the prosecutor. I practice in a small county-seat town in Michigan. The County Sheriff Department has had a video capacity for several years. The camera is inside a small dark globe, like a security camera, and is not readily visible. I get a compact disc of the interview along with the prosecutor.

]]> By: Miranda http://apublicdefender.com/2008/04/24/cops-coming-round-on-videotaped-interrogations/#comment-27694 Miranda Fri, 25 Apr 2008 13:12:52 +0000 http://apublicdefender.com/?p=1166#comment-27694 By "procedure", do you mean procedures mandated by the Fourth Amendment? By “procedure”, do you mean procedures mandated by the Fourth Amendment?

]]> By: SPO http://apublicdefender.com/2008/04/24/cops-coming-round-on-videotaped-interrogations/#comment-27587 SPO Thu, 24 Apr 2008 22:50:12 +0000 http://apublicdefender.com/?p=1166#comment-27587 I don't think you suppress probative evidence. I think that the fact that they didn't follow procedure goes to the weight, not the admissibility of evidence. I don’t think you suppress probative evidence. I think that the fact that they didn’t follow procedure goes to the weight, not the admissibility of evidence.

]]> By: Gideon http://apublicdefender.com/2008/04/24/cops-coming-round-on-videotaped-interrogations/#comment-27586 Gideon Thu, 24 Apr 2008 22:36:18 +0000 http://apublicdefender.com/?p=1166#comment-27586 This is not law school. This is not law school.

]]> By: Ruth http://apublicdefender.com/2008/04/24/cops-coming-round-on-videotaped-interrogations/#comment-27585 Ruth Thu, 24 Apr 2008 22:32:11 +0000 http://apublicdefender.com/?p=1166#comment-27585 is this where i ask about the admissibility of hearsay? is this where i ask about the admissibility of hearsay?

]]> By: Gideon http://apublicdefender.com/2008/04/24/cops-coming-round-on-videotaped-interrogations/#comment-27584 Gideon Thu, 24 Apr 2008 22:05:35 +0000 http://apublicdefender.com/?p=1166#comment-27584 Why don't you support suppression? What's the alternative? Why don’t you support suppression? What’s the alternative?

]]> By: SPO http://apublicdefender.com/2008/04/24/cops-coming-round-on-videotaped-interrogations/#comment-27572 SPO Thu, 24 Apr 2008 19:13:48 +0000 http://apublicdefender.com/?p=1166#comment-27572 Cops now love the cameras in highway patrol cars. Why wouldn't they love videotapes of confessions? I don't support suppression, but a good confession on videotape is worth its weight in gold to a prosecutor. Cops now love the cameras in highway patrol cars. Why wouldn’t they love videotapes of confessions? I don’t support suppression, but a good confession on videotape is worth its weight in gold to a prosecutor.

]]>