No announcement yet.

Elwood officer in trouble...what do you guys think about this?


300x250 Mobile

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Elwood officer in trouble...what do you guys think about this?

    Initial article...

    Article the next day featuring the Chief's reaction...

    What do you guys think? Does this seem politically motivated? (something to note because it was not included, Officer Caldwell was suspended for an entire month way back in February or March over this ordeal.)

  • #2
    Well, I have no idea what is going on in this case, so who knows. However, after reading what it was about, wanted to let folks know that both video and audio taped recordings are going to become extremely important after the first of the year. There is now going to be a new trial rule mandating recordings in some instances.

    Rule 617. Unrecorded Statements During Custodial Interrogation
    (a) In a felony criminal prosecution, evidence of a statement made by a person during a Custodial Interrogation in a Place of Detention shall not be admitted against the person unless an Electronic Recording of the statement was made, preserved, and is available at trial, except upon clear and convincing proof of any one of the following:
    (1) The statement was part of a routine processing or "booking" of the person; or
    (2) Before or during a Custodial Interrogation, the person agreed to respond to questions only if his or her Statements were not Electronically Recorded, provided that such agreement and its surrounding colloquy is Electronically Recorded or documented in writing; or
    (3) The law enforcement officers conducting the Custodial Interrogation in good faith failed to make an Electronic Recording because the officers inadvertently failed to operate the recording equipment properly, or without the knowledge of any of said officers the recording equipment malfunctioned or stopped operating; or
    (4) The statement was made during a custodial interrogation that both occurred in, and was conducted by officers of, a jurisdiction outside Indiana; or
    (5) The law enforcement officers conducting or observing the Custodial Interrogation reasonably believed that the crime for which the person was being investigated was not a felony under Indiana law; or
    (6) The statement was spontaneous and not made in response to a question; or
    (7) Substantial exigent circumstances existed which prevented the making of, or rendered it not feasible to make, an Electronic Recording of the Custodial Interrogation, or prevent its preservation and availability at trial.
    (b) For purposes of this rule, "Electronic Recording" means an audio-video recording that includes at least not only the visible images of the person being interviewed but also the voices of said person and the interrogating officers; "Custodial Interrogation" means an interview conducted by law enforcement during which a reasonable person would consider himself or herself to be in custody; "Place of Detention" means a jail, law enforcement agency station house, or any other stationary or mobile building owned or operated by a law enforcement agency at which persons are detained in connection with criminal investigations.
    (c) The Electronic Recording must be a complete, authentic, accurate, unaltered, and continuous record of a Custodial Interrogation.
    (d) This Rule is in addition to, and does not diminish, any other requirement of law regarding the admissibility of a person's statements.

    This goes live Jan. 1st, 2011!!

    Here is the complete court ruling:


    MR300x250 Tablet


    What's Going On


    There are currently 2020 users online. 135 members and 1885 guests.

    Most users ever online was 158,966 at 04:57 AM on 01-16-2021.

    Welcome Ad