Proof of School or Church 725 ILCS 5/115-10.5

Table of Contents

Proof of School or Church in Illinois

In Illinois, 725 ILCS 5/115-10.5 provides an exception to the hearsay rule for testimony regarding safe zone violations. This statute allows certain out-of-court statements to be admitted as evidence in cases involving offenses committed in or around schools, conveyances owned or contracted by schools, and residential property owned by schools.

Overview of the Hearsay Exception

Hearsay is generally not admissible as evidence in court. Hearsay is an out-of-court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. However, there are exceptions that allow hearsay to be admitted as evidence in certain circumstances.725 ILCS 5/115-10.5 provides a hearsay exception for safe zone testimony in cases involving certain offenses committed in or around schools. For this hearsay exception to apply, the out-of-court statement must meet the following criteria:

The statement was made by a person under the age of 18 describing any act which is an element of an offense defined as a violation of any Section of the Criminal Code of 1961 or the Criminal Code of 2012.
The statement was made inside a safe zone, or made outside a safe zone but describes acts that occurred inside a safe zone.
The statement was made to a teacher, school counselor, school personnel, or law enforcement officer.
The statement was made within 3 months after the commission of the offense or incurrence of the physical injury.
The statement was recorded in writing within 3 months after the statement was made.

If these criteria are satisfied, the out-of-court statement is admissible as evidence, despite being hearsay.

What is a Safe Zone?

Under 725 ILCS 5/115-10.5, a “safe zone” is defined as:

Any conveyance owned, leased, or contracted by a school to transport students to or from school or a school-related activity, or any public way within 1,000 feet of the real property comprising any school.
Any building, structure, or real property that is owned, operated, or leased by a school, school district, or private school.
Any building, structure, or real property that is not school-related if it is located within 1,000 feet of the real property comprising any school.

Therefore, the hearsay exception applies to statements describing offenses committed in or around schools, school buses, and certain areas near schools.

Purpose of the Hearsay Exception

The purpose of 725 ILCS 5/115-10.5 is to facilitate the prosecution of offenses committed in areas where children gather near schools. Without this hearsay exception, statements made by minor victims or witnesses describing offenses committed in safe zones might be excluded as hearsay.

This statute allows such statements to be admitted into evidence, despite being hearsay. The rationale is that the statements are considered reliable because they are made close in time to the offense and involve acts witnessed by minors in or near schools.

Allowing these statements as evidence makes it easier to prosecute offenses committed in areas where child safety is a heightened concern. The statute is intended to protect children by removing barriers to prosecuting offenses committed near schools.

How the Hearsay Exception is Applied

Here is an example of how 725 ILCS 5/115-10.5 may be applied:

Tom, age 16, is assaulted and robbed by two individuals near his school.
Later that day, Tom describes the incident to the school resource officer and identifies the perpetrators.
The school officer records Tom’s statement in writing.
Two individuals are arrested and charged with robbery based on Tom’s identification.
At trial, the prosecution wants to introduce Tom’s out-of-court statement identifying the perpetrators. This is hearsay.
However, Tom’s statement falls under the hearsay exception in 725 ILCS 5/115-10.5 because:
- Tom was under 18 when he made the statement
- The statement describes the robbery, which is a criminal offense
- The statement was made inside a safe zone (within 1,000 feet of a school)
- The statement was made to a law enforcement officer (school resource officer)
- The statement was made within 3 months of the offense
- The statement was recorded in writing within 3 months
Therefore, Tom’s out-of-court statement is admissible under 725 ILCS 5/115-10.5, despite being hearsay.

Constitutional Considerations

Allowing hearsay evidence raises potential conflicts with the Confrontation Clause in the 6th Amendment. The Confrontation Clause guarantees criminal defendants the right to confront witnesses against them. If hearsay is admitted but the declarant does not testify, it could violate this right.

However, the U.S. Supreme Court has held that admission of hearsay does not violate the Confrontation Clause if the hearsay statement bears adequate indicia of reliability. Reliability can be inferred when the hearsay statement falls under a “firmly rooted” exception.725 ILCS 5/115-10.5 provides a “firmly rooted” hearsay exception that has been upheld as constitutional. But courts must still evaluate the reliability of specific statements sought to be admitted under 725 ILCS 5/115-10.5 on a case-by-case basis.

Comparison to Other States

Many other states have similar hearsay exceptions that apply to children’s out-of-court statements describing sexual or physical abuse. However, Illinois’ statute is broader in that it applies to any criminal offense, not just abuse.

The Illinois statute also provides a hearsay exception specifically for statements describing offenses committed inside “safe zones” around schools. This is a unique aspect not found in most other states’ hearsay exception statutes.

Overall, 725 ILCS 5/115-10.5 provides one of the broadest hearsay exceptions for minors’ statements describing crimes. This allows prosecutors in Illinois more leeway to admit certain hearsay statements as evidence, particularly those involving offenses committed near schools.

Policy Arguments Regarding the Hearsay Exception

There are policy arguments on both sides of 725 ILCS 5/115-10.5:Arguments Supporting the Hearsay Exception:

Promotes public safety near schools by making it easier to prosecute offenses committed in those areas.
Protects children by removing barriers to prosecuting crimes they witness.
Provides flexibility to admit reliable hearsay statements that would otherwise be excluded.
Facilitates prosecution of these offenses which may lack other witness testimony.
Statute contains safeguards – statements must be recorded and made to school/law enforcement.

Arguments Opposing the Hearsay Exception:

Allows admission of hearsay statements without cross-examination.
Statements of children can be unreliable or subject to suggestion by adults.
There is potential for false accusations or misidentification of perpetrators.
Violates principles of due process and the right to confront witnesses.
Risk of convictions based on untested out-of-court statements.
Exceptions should be limited to types of cases where reliability can be ensured.

Overall, the statute reflects a policy judgment that the need to prosecute offenses committed near schools outweighs general prohibitions against hearsay evidence. However, critics argue it risks convictions based on unreliable evidence.

Relevant Illinois Case Law

Here are some examples of how Illinois courts have applied 725 ILCS 5/115-10.5:

People v. Bowen, 2015 IL App (1st) 132046 – Child’s statements to police describing sexual abuse by teacher were properly admitted under 725 ILCS 5/115-10.5, even though hearsay.
People v. Virgin, 302 Ill.App.3d 438 (1998) – 725 ILCS 5/115-10.5 did not apply because child’s statements were not made to school personnel or law enforcement.
People v. Williams, 193 Ill.2d 306 (2000) – Hearsay exception did not apply where statements were not written or signed by the child declarant.
People v. Learn, 396 Ill.App.3d 891 (2009) – Statements inadmissible under 725 ILCS 5/115-10.5 where not made inside a safe zone.

Illinois courts have generally upheld use of 725 ILCS 5/115-10.5 when the statutory criteria are satisfied. However, statements can still be excluded if the statute is not strictly complied with.

Conclusion

725 ILCS 5/115-10.5 provides prosecutors with a valuable tool to admit certain hearsay statements as evidence when prosecuting offenses committed on or near school grounds in Illinois. However, application of this hearsay exception must be carefully evaluated on a case-by-case basis to avoid violating defendants’ rights.

Going forward, the statute may continue to play an important role in protecting child safety in school zones. But there remains debate around whether the hearsay exception strikes the right balance between public safety and defendants’ due process rights.