Hearsay?

[Charles Collins]

On page 178 of ?Truth Withheld? by James T. Tague, he states that in a preliminary hearing to determine whether there were grounds to bring Clay Shaw to trial, that the defense tried to introduce the 26 volumes of the Warren Report in their defense. But it was denied as hearsay.

I am guessing that the reason for this has to do with the requirements of how evidence has to be introduced. But I would like to know what the legal scholars have to say about this. Do we have any knowledgeable legal eagles here that want to respond?

[Martin Weidmann]

On page 178 of ?Truth Withheld? by James T. Teague, he states that in a preliminary hearing to determine whether there were grounds to bring Clay Shaw to trial, that the defense tried to introduce the 26 volumes of the Warren Report in their defense. But it was denied as hearsay.

I am guessing that the reason for this has to do with the requirements of how evidence has to be introduced. But I would like to know what the legal scholars have to say about this. Do we have any knowledgeable legal eagles here that want to respond?

The most obvious reason seems to me to be that the opinion of a commission, presented in the way of a conclusion, is by definition argumentative and thus not evidence related to the crime nor does it constitute proof.

[Charles Collins]

The most obvious reason seems to me to be that the opinion of a commission, presented in the way of a conclusion, is by definition argumentative and thus not evidence related to the crime nor does it constitute proof.

The 26 volumes include more than an opinion. They catalog the physical evidence and include the sworn testimony of many witnesses.

[Martin Weidmann]

The 26 volumes include more than an opinion. They catalog the physical evidence and include the sworn testimony of many witnesses.

And yet is was ruled hearsay!

There is no guarantee that the 26 volumes contain all the available evidence and it would express an opinion if only certain evidence was included.

But even if the 26 volumes themselves are not the issue, the report that is based on them is.

[Charles Collins]

And yet is was ruled hearsay!

There is no guarantee that the 26 volumes contain all the available evidence and it would express an opinion if only certain evidence was included.

But even if the 26 volumes themselves are not the issue, the report that is based on them is.

I am happy that you distinguished the difference between the report and the 26 volumes. The claim in Teague?s book says the 26 volumes were ruled as hearsay and didn?t say anything about the report.

[Martin Weidmann]

I am happy that you distinguished the difference between the report and the 26 volumes. The claim in Teague?s book says the 26 volumes were ruled as hearsay and didn?t say anything about the report.

Really?

the defense tried to introduce the 26 volumes of the Warren Report in their defense.

I guess it just depends how you interpret those words.

[Charles Collins]

Really?

the defense tried to introduce the 26 volumes of the Warren Report in their defense.

I guess it just depends how you interpret those words.

Here is the sentence as written in the book:

?The Defense tried to introduce the 26 volumes of the Warren Report in their defense, but it was denied as hearsay.?

I certainly interpreted it that way. The 26 volumes were published separately and in support of the report.

[Martin Weidmann]

Here is the sentence as written in the book:

?The Defense tried to introduce the 26 volumes of the Warren Report in their defense, but it was denied as hearsay.?

I certainly interpreted it that way. The 26 volumes were published separately and in support of the report.

To me the "26 volumes of the Warren Report" means the whole package, including the report itself, but I'm more than happy to simply agree to disagree on that.

Selectively gathered evidence published in 26 volumes is also an expression of an opinion.