Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Evidence Rules topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council allows use of depositions with objections reserved; debate over hearsay and relevance continues
Summary
Counsel argued extensively over whether depositions taken in other proceedings could be used in the city's removal hearing; petitioners asserted a local rule allowing depositions, while respondents objected on hearsay and due‑process grounds; the tribunal permitted depositions with the respondent's right to renew objections when clips are offered.
A major procedural dispute at the hearing centered on the admissibility of depositions taken in other litigation. Respondent counsel argued those prior depositions were hearsay and embedded with hearsay, citing rules that ordinarily bar out‑of‑court statements unless exceptions apply; he also argued that tribunal members might have direct knowledge of disputed facts and therefore could not rely on prior testimony without violating due process.
Petitioners' counsel pointed to a specific local rule adopted by the tribunal on June 2 permitting "testimony, live or by deposition, ... presented under oath" and argued that sworn deposition testimony taken under oath with counsel present is sufficiently trustworthy to be considered; he noted federal courts had declined to block the proceedings. The panel voted to allow use of depositions subject to the respondent's right to object to specific clips or cuts when they are offered; individual hearsay and foundation objections were preserved for later rulings.
