LB 90 and the Confrontation Clause: The Use of Videotaped and In Camera Testimony in Criminal Trials to Accommodate Child Witnesses

Growing public awareness of the problems associated with the prosecution of sex abuse cases has led many states to alter their rules of evidence and criminal procedure. Part II of this Comment examines the content and history of LB 90, which now permits the use of videotaped testimony or in camera testimony of not only child victims of sexual abuse, but also of child victims or witnesses of other felonies, and compares it with similar statutes in other jurisdictions. Part III examines the Supreme Court\u27s analysis of the principles underlying the confrontation clause and focuses on how various states have dealt with in camera testimony in criminal trials, including a recent Nebraska decision. Part IV analyzes LB 90 to determine whether the in camera procedures meet the constitutional standards set forth by the Supreme Court concerning the confrontation clause. Part V examines the principles of the confrontation clause as set forth by the Supreme Court in cases where prior testimony was used at trial and focuses on methods various states have used to deal with challenges to the videotaping procedures. Finally, Part VI analyzes LB 90 to determine whether the bill meets the constitutional standards for admitting prior testimony in accordance with the defendant\u27s sixth amendment right to confrontation