« Racists Behind Anti - Immigration Initiative in Arizona: Abernathy Responds 2 |
Main
| Inmate hopes new trial ends 13-year struggle »
Tuesday
Aug172004
Tuesday, August 17, 2004 at 03:50AM
Harshly criticizing the use of unrecorded
criminal confessions, the state's highest court on Monday strongly
discouraged police from taking statements without having a
tape-recorder rolling. While stopping just short of requiring police to
record all interrogations, the Supreme Judicial Court said that when
police fail to record them, defendants will be entitled to a judge's
instruction that the jury should weigh unrecorded statements "with
great caution and care." In a divided, 4-3 ruling, the court overturned
an arson conviction in a case that relied heavily on the defendant's
unrecorded statements. Valerio DiGiambattista was convicted of burning
down a Newton house owned by his former landlord in 1998. But the high
court said DiGiambattista's confession should have been suppressed
because police used trickery to obtain it and implied that he would
receive leniency if he confessed. [more ]