Evidence Criminal Trials, Hearings

Your IP address indicates you are posting from Jamaica.

My response is regarding US laws ONLY.

If you've gotten yourself into a pickle in Jamaica, I suggest you speak to a solicitor on the island nation.

This forum focuses primarily on US laws.

If a person confessed to something, or admitted to doing something in the presence of the police; it darn sure is admissible at trial.

The officer or officers who heard the admission can testify to what the person said.

There's no way around that, except one.

If the "finger of suspicion" had begun to be pointed at the person, he or she should have been "Mirandized".

That's extremely unusual these days that the police would be so remiss or sloppy NOT to properly "Mirandize" a suspect.

More than likely the admission was caught on tape.

Either the officer(s) will testify, and the taped admission will be allowed in at trial.

I suggest you discuss this with your lawyer, and ONLY your lawyer.

There's very little that can be done to remedy this issue online.

SILENCE is golden.

 

Just to add, if the admission is allowed via the officer testimony, the weight given to it is left to the jury. They could choose to cling to it or totally disregard it if given reason to doubt the officer.

 

It occurs to me that the word "police", when used as a noun often denotes singular or plural.

If the alleged admission was in the presence of two, three, four, or more police officers; that could be very troubling for the defendant at trial.