For the Court in Crawford v. Washington, the historic roots of the right of Confrontation were a rejection of such procedures, and a mandate that “testimonial” hearsay be inadmissible unless the original declarant was now in court or was now unavailable to testify and there had been the opportunity for cross-examination when the statement was made. The relevance of Crawford (and Raleigh’s travails) to forensics can be found in the 2009 Melendez-Diaz decision ...
What does this, and Sir Walter Raleigh, have to do with Barack Obama?
- right of confrontation,
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/jules_epstein/48/