2 ms·

Much as I think there's a lot of quackery going on here, I think it's pretty clear that the dog handler is the one giving the evidence and being subject to cros

Much as I think there's a lot of quackery going on here, I think it's pretty clear that the dog handler is the one giving the evidence and being subject to cross-examination. The dog is just a tool that is being used to achieve an investigative purpose, like a DNA test or radar gun.

kolanos 5y ago
The dog handler's "evidence" cannot be based on the dog's behavior. We can't question the dog as to why it behaved the way it did. As such, it is a violation of the confrontation clause.