Select Page

In the United States, a criminal suspect held in police custody may refuse to answer questions during an interrogation, but if a suspect waives this right, anything he says during questioning can be used as evidence against him at trial.  The government bears the burden of proving that the suspect waived these rights voluntarily and free of coercion.  The government traditionally satisfied its burden by presenting testimonial evidence that the police informed the suspect of his rights, that the suspect understood those rights, and that the suspect voluntarily spoke to the police.  In Commonwealth v. DiGiambattista, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) held that if the police fail to electronically record a suspect’s custodial interrogation and later proffer the statements as evidence at trial, a defendant may request, and will be granted, a jury instruction allowing the jury to weigh the voluntariness of the alleged statements with caution. . . .