Quote (ofthevoid @ Nov 8 2019 12:15pm)
If that's the case, from a legal point of view his information should be disregarded then no?
Shitty precedent to set where people can accuse someone of something and not have to be cross-examined.
His testimony wouldn't be admissible in a court, it's hearsay. However, the level of scrutiny given to people reporting potential wrongdoing is much lower than the level of scrutiny given to somebody making a claim to prove the point in question, as it should be. To have it otherwise would basically require police to ignore somebody coming in saying "John admitted to me in confidence that he was the one who murdered Adam last week".