| | Ex Post: Confrontation Clause |
 | | Crawford, for those of you who have not yet taken Evidence, or forgotten what little you did know, established that any testimonial hearsay evidence was per se inadmissible as violative of the confrontation clause, regardless of whether or not it fell within a hearsay exception. |
 | | This test would exclude anything that resembled the historical abuses that Crawford appeared to state that the confrontation clause was originally designed to combat, specifically, inquisitorial abuses by the state such as Raliegh's Case. |
 | | The immediate danger corollary was advanced as the principle argument by the United States, and offered that statements made to police officers during the initial stage of their investigation were for the purpose of establishing the danger to the officer and the declarant, and was admissible. |
| expost.blogspot.com /2006/03/confrontation-clause.html (973 words) |