Ruminations
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2015
- Messages
- 2,647
- Reaction score
- 25,214
I learned from another case that in Idaho, spousal privilege means the accused, defendant spouse can invoke that privilege against a witness spouse in certain circumstances- such as the victim is not a child. So, for instance, if I saw my spouse rob a bank in Idaho, and heard my spouse later in the day complain about how little cash banks hold these days, and I I gave a deposition saying so, my accused spouse could keep that from trial even if I wanted to testify.Disclaiming FWIW I'm not an expert whatsoever.
I assume that anything which occurs within the timeframe of the marriage would be protected by spousal privilege regardless the current status of their divorce proceedings. I believe this would also include any discussions, revelations or "discoveries" made by either party within the timeframe of the marriage (such as knowledge of "personal interests" etc). Again JMO etc.
Considering the fact that other properties have changed hands recently, I do have to wonder what that could mean for the future of this case. Whether the property outside NY has anything to do with RH crimes and if AE selling it off is any indication as to her level of knowledge, whether this could have an impact or affect the limitations of spousal privilege etc. JMO.
IANAL, but I don't believe it works that way in NY. I believe the witness spouse can not be compelled to testify except in situations such as the victim is a child, but the accused spouse can't silence the witness spouse either.
In addition, when giving information to friends or to the press, lying is not a crime. So, there is no legal danger in saying something untruthful as a witness to anyone, including the press. There is only a problem saying something untruthful under oath, such as if one elected to testify.
The witness might be giving truthful statements. But there is nothing compelling her to do so.
MOO