High Court to Decide if Killer Can Bar Victim’s Prior Statements to Cop
The U.S. Supreme Court agreed Friday to decide whether statements previously made by a slain witness can be introduced against the man convicted of killing her.
Defendant Dwayne Giles claims the statements introduced at his trial violated his Sixth Amendment right to confrontation under the Supreme Court’s 2004 decision, Crawford v. Washington, the New York Times reports. The decision, which barred admission of testimonial evidence unless the person who made the statement can be cross-examined, led to a series of rulings upholding the rights of criminal defendants.
In Giles’ case, the California Supreme Court had ruled a police officer could testify that Giles’ girlfriend told him before her slaying that Giles had beaten and threatened her. The court had ruled that the testimony was permissible under the doctrine of “forfeiture by wrongdoing,” which does not allow people to profit from wrongful acts.
Giles had claimed at trial that he shot his girlfriend in self-defense, the Los Angeles Times reports. He said his victim’s statements should have been excluded because there was no proof he killed her to prevent her testimony.
