In many Los Angeles cases, prosecutors are attempting to circumvent this fundamental right to confront their accuser. This right is a cornerstone of our legal system, empowering individuals to challenge the evidence presented against them. In a criminal case, when someone is a witness against somebody and their evidence is critical, material and crucial in order to prosecute and convict that person, that person has to come into court face-to-face and testify against the criminal defendant, otherwise their testimony is not allowed in. It's declared hearsay, but there are several exceptions to that rule.
For example, at a preliminary hearing in a felony criminal case in Los Angeles, witnesses — even material witnesses — are not required to attend the hearing. The prosecutor can use the detective to testify to what those witnesses told the detective or use police officers to testify to what those witnesses said.
It's their choice. That's Proposition 115, which — for the convenience of witnesses — lets them do that at a preliminary hearing in a felony case. However, if the same witness doesn't appear for trial, most of the time, that testimony will not be allowed in.
However, even this right is not absolute. The Crawford case in domestic violence cases has carved out an exception, allowing a wide range of testimony and evidence. For instance, a 9-1-1 tape can now be admitted as evidence, further complicating the right to face one's accuser.
Cross-Examination of Witnesses
They're releasing a bodycam video. I see prosecutors trying to get that in when their witness doesn't show up and is not present to be cross-examined. These are obviously all things that California criminal defense attorneys will argue against, as they are not being given the right for their client to face their accuser. You should be able to cross-examine that accuser.
The jury should be able to observe the person and determine whether they're lying when they're challenged on cross-examination. Therefore, these are all things that must be argued and vigorously fought for.
Otherwise, there's a recent case I saw federally where they were trying to let a pregnant witness, who was a material, crucial witness in the case, testify by way of two-way radio because she was seven months pregnant. The court overturned that verdict because it said you have to have a right to face your accuser.
We want the jury to see what the witness looks like, listen to them testify face-to-face, and, of course, be able to cross-examine them and observe their reactions to certain questions. There are certain things witnesses do. I hear all the time that when I do jury trials, we look at that witness. We didn't believe a word that they said.
Therefore, it is our collective responsibility, as a defense community, to stand firm and continue this fight. We must ensure that our clients have the right to face their accusers. As prosecutors and judges attempt to circumvent this right, we must stand firm and fight them at every single turn. Our determination and commitment to this cause will ensure that justice prevails.
If you find yourself in a situation where you're innocent and believe you have the right to face your accuser, and you're facing issues with that, don't hesitate to reach out. Legal representation is crucial in these situations, providing you with the support and guidance you need. We can sit down, discuss your circumstances, and I will do everything in my power to fight for your rights if you're dealing with a criminal case in Los Angeles.
