Some top prosecutors in Nevada are proposing a law to be enacted that would allow prosecutors to present hearsay at a preliminary hearing or to a grand jury. If enacted, the law would thoroughly alter the criminal process in Nevada. It would mean that victims would not be subject to cross-examination or need to testify. This would allow for a police officer to read a report of the victim’s statement into record, and a justice of the peace could decide probable cause “based solely on hearsay evidence”. The public is divisive on the issue.
Calling it the “victim’s rights bill”, those for the law argue that not only would it save the state money, but help battle crime and assist victims. With Nevada being such a high tourism area, those for the law forsee hundreds of thousands of dollars being saved by not having to bring the out of state victims back into the state. They also argue they would like to bring the state in line with others across the country. Hearsay is already allowed in 36 other states, including every state that borders Nevada.
However, many are against the proposed bill and for good reason. If the proposed bill gets pushed through it would effectively make a preliminary hearing a farce which is an important tool for both the prosecution and the defense to fairly evaluate the the strengths and weaknesses of their cases. Through the process of preliminary hearings more plea negotiations are reached and the system is less strained with less jury trials. If this bill goes through, the system will be burdened by more jury trials.
In addition, Over 200 local Defense Attorneys have recently threatened political retaliation against those supporting the bill. They will cease donations to political campaigns and stop “soliciting third parties” for anyone who advocates the bill for legislation. Their argument is that it takes away from the procedural rights litigants have had for years, and it will come at the citizens expense. They claim it’s a power move by the government to give more power to the district attorneys, and the judges will not have to do anything.
The division on the law seems to be clear. It’s between those who believe victim’s rights are infringed upon forcing them to testify and those who believe it’s the public’s rights infringed upon by them not. It becomes a question of on what grounds does law begin to break with the humane. Amendments to the bill are continuing to be made. Should it pass, law in Nevada could be changed forever.
