27 Years of Truth-in-Evidence: The Expectations and Consequences of Proposition 8's Most Controversial Provision

Abstract

INTRODUCTION Twenty-seven years ago, nearly three million California residents, 1 disillusioned by what they perceived as an unrelenting crime rate and a state judiciary that often neglected the rights of crime victims, headed to the polls and cast their vote in support of Proposition 8, a constitutional amendment creating a "victims' bill of rights."2 The initiative delineated a series of rights giving crime victims a stronger voice within the criminal justice system, and chief among them was the "Right to Truth-in-Evidence," which provided that with few exceptions, "relevant evidence shall not be excluded in any criminal proceeding." 3 From the moment it was incorporated within Proposition 8, it engendered a mass of speculation. Proponents and opponents, and scholars and