Question

A defendant was charged with willfully failing to pay taxes. Before he was indicted, his wife filed for divorce. The defendant's wife's lawyer interviewed the defendant and tape-recorded the interview. During the interview, the defendant made several incriminating statements. After the interview ended, the lawyer had her paralegal transcribe the tape. The tape was later erased and reused in the regular course of business. The defendant filed a motion in limine, asking that the prosecutor be barred from using the transcript of the interview on the ground that it violated the best evidence rule because the original recording was not available. How should the court rule on the motion?

Answer 1

The court should consider if the transcript is a true and accurate representation of the original recording and that the recording was not maliciously destroyed to determine if the best evidence rule has been violated. Additionally, the court must ensure that the statements were made without self-incrimination during custodial interrogation.

Step-by-step explanation:

In considering the defendant's motion in limine to bar the use of a transcript due to a violation of the best evidence rule because the original recording was not available, the court must determine whether the transcript is an acceptable substitute for the original recording.

The best evidence rule generally dictates that the original piece of evidence should be provided if available. In this case, due to the original tape being erased and reused, the court might allow the transcript as evidence if it can be shown that the transcript is a true and accurate representation of the recording and that the recording was lost or destroyed without malicious intent. Furthermore, courts are also mindful of issues such as self-incrimination and ensuring that custodial interrogations adhere to required legal standards.