This is a child pornography case. The defendant was charged with distributing child pornography.
The video at issue was a video of his 2-year old grandson. At trial, the government called Banks's wife as a witness. Mrs. Banks primarily testified about her relationship with the minor child in the subject video. She testified that the child was her grandson, with whom she had a close relationship. Mrs. Banks also identified her husband's ring, watch and couch in the video.1 Mrs.
Banks was asked whether her husband had made any statements regarding a video involving their grandson. Over Banks's objection, Mrs. Banks testified that her husband had admitted to making the video and that he had done so to ensure that "nothing went on in changing the diaper because of past things."
Was the court's ruling, allowing the testimony, in error? Why or why not?

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

This question appears to be asking for a legal analysis of a hypothetical court case As a programmin... View the full answer