On March 8, through a unanimous ruling on Crawford v. Washington, the Supreme Court affirmed a defendant’s right to face and question accusers.More subtly, it also affirmed the power of victims of domestic violence to exercise control over their own cases -- specifically over whether or not to pursue charges.
What are the circumstances of Crawford v. Washington? Michael Crawford pleaded self-defense in stabbing a man he believed had attempted to rape his wife. His wife was present during the stabbing and at one point made a taped statement to the police in which she said that the victim may not have been armed. But, she invoked marital privilege to keep from testifying against her husband at trial. In her absence, the judge accepted the taped statement she'd made to the police as "reliable," even though the tape precluded cross-examination by the defense. Crawford was found guilty.
The Court held such "testimonial" statements are inadmissible unless the witness is subject to cross examination. Crawford overruled Ohio v. Roberts 448 U.S. 56 (1980), which had held that a statement from an unavailable witness could be admitted if it was deemed trustworthy.
Both prosecutors and defense attorneys are struggling with the scope of the new rule, and some members of the criminal defense bar say it is the most important new case in decades. The rest of the story above is here, or you can read the Court's opinion here.