Document Type

Article

Publication Date

2027

Source Publication

Georgetown Law Journal

Abstract

Technological advances in documenting police encounters with the public have outpaced evidentiary hearsay rules. Specifically, the rapid adoption of body-worn cameras (BWCs), fueled by racial justice and police reform advocates, has produced previously unavailable, vivid, and timely recordings of IPV victims’ accounts of abuse. Unfortunately, state and federal rules governing hearsay often prevent juries from considering these out-of-court statements. Such restrictions carry particular force in IPV cases, where victims frequently recant or decline to testify at trial due to abuser manipulation or distrust of the criminal justice system.

Courts and legislatures have eased some evidentiary restrictions in IPV cases in recognition of the persistent problem of victim nonparticipation. Nevertheless, existing doctrine has not fully addressed how hearsay rules should apply to victims’ statements captured on BWCs in IPV investigations.

This Article offers two proposals to close that gap. First, policymakers should alter existing hearsay exemptions and exceptions, including prior inconsistent statements, statements of identification, and excited utterances to more readily encompass accounts of IPV victims recorded on BWCs. Second, legislators should enact a specific hearsay exception designed to admit these recordings. Together, the two reforms allow evidentiary doctrine to appropriately modernize with the burgeoning use of BWCs in IPV prosecutions.

Download

Share

COinS