Ability To Confront Accuser Conflicts With Officer Safely

A couple of interesting cases concerning the US Constitution’s 6th Amendment confrontation clause are discussed in this fascinating article in the Nashua Telegraph.

The issues revolve around police officer’s who are currently engaged in potentially dangerous undercover assignments testifying in court as witnesses for the prosecution. In several cases noted, judges allowed the officers’ identities to be hidden by masks.

Defense attorneys in the cases argued that this means of testimony violated the defendant’s right to confront one’s accuser in open court, as described in the “Confrontation Clause” of the 6th amendment to the US Constitution, the right to “to be confronted with the witnesses against him”.

In this case, the New Hampshire Supreme Court ruled that the defendant’s rights were not violated, and only harmless error was committed, since the evidence was otherwise overwhelming against the defendant. But they did offer some guidelines for future cases for judges to balance these decisions and review them carefully on a case by case basis. It remains to be seen whether higher courts and possibly the US Supreme Court will take up this matter directly to make a more explicit ruling.

About David Matson