In St. Clair v. Commonwealth, the defendant spoke with his wife at various times on the telephone, during a time in which he was on the run, committing new murders and other crimes. The reviewing court rejected the government's argument that they were involved in a criminal conspiracy that was ongoing. Had there been an ongoing criminal conspiracy between the husband and wife, arguably, there would have been no privilege between the two. Why did the court hold that some of the discussions between the two were considered privileged under the husband-wife confidential communication privilege?

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The Answer of In St. Clair v. Commonwealth, the defendant spoke with his wife at various times on the telephone, during a time in which he was on the run, committing new murders and other crimes. The reviewing court rejected the government's argument that they were involved in a criminal conspiracy that was ongoing. Had there been an ongoing criminal conspiracy between the husband and wife, arguably, there would have been no privilege between the two. Why did the court hold that some of the discussions between the two were considered privileged under the husband-wife confidential communication privilege?

In St Clair V