Difference between revisions of "Priest-Penitent Privilege"
From Criminal Defense Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search| Line 79: | Line 79: | ||
Citing Chambers v. Mississippi, Judge Chin concluded that if due process was at risk, the testimony could be admissible if it was "vital" to the defense, even if it was hearsay as long as it bore sufficient indicia of reliability. Because Fornes had repeated the confession four times to different parties, it had a high level of reliability. | Citing Chambers v. Mississippi, Judge Chin concluded that if due process was at risk, the testimony could be admissible if it was "vital" to the defense, even if it was hearsay as long as it bore sufficient indicia of reliability. Because Fornes had repeated the confession four times to different parties, it had a high level of reliability. | ||
| − | = | + | =Federal Rules of Evidence 506 - Communications to Clergymen== |
| − | |||
| − | + | [Not Enacted.] | |
| − | + | (a) Definitions. As used in this rule: | |
| − | + | (1) A "clergyman" is a minister, priest, rabbi, or other similar functionary of a religious organization, or an individual reasonably believed so to be by the person consulting him. | |
| − | + | (2) A communication is "confidential" if made privately and not intended for further disclosure except to other persons present in furtherance of the purpose of the communication. | |
| − | + | (b) General rule of privilege. A person has a privilege to refuse to disclose and to prevent another from disclosing a confidential communication by the person to a clergyman in his professional characters as a spiritual adviser. | |
| + | |||
| + | (c) Who may claim the privilege. The privilege may be claimed by the person, by his guardian or conservator, or by his personal representative if he is deceased. The clergyman may claim the privilege on behalf of the person. His authority so to do is presumed in the absence of evidence to the contrary. | ||
