It has to do with the rules of evidence. A denial of murder falls squarely under the hearsay rules. However, an admission to murder falls under an exception to hearsay as a statement contrary to one's own interest. The reason for this is the assumption that one does not have a reason to make a statement against his own interest unless that statement is true. There are several exceptions to hearsay. Another interesting one is "excited utterance." That is a statement made in the heat of the moment that something dramatic or exciting happens. The rules of evidence presume that person will not lie when making such a statement, though the reality of people has often proved opposite.
I'm mainly saying you should stop asking self explanatory questions. If I lie and say I have a pet unicorn 1000 times would you believe me? If I then admit I do not actually own a pet unicorn would you question the possibility that I actually might own a unicorn? In the case of the guy murdering someone else I'm sure they have more proof than they guy admitting it once while under surveillance. They probably have things such as motive, no alibi, physical evidence of some sort, or something else. If you add all the other evidence they have I'm sure his self admission of guilt puts that final nail in the coffin.
Now, in future if you could possibly take the 2-3 seconds it takes to think of things not mentioned in the article you half read I'm sure you will save us all having to answer questions your average 9 year old could answer.
That and please next time link the actual article rather than give us your word as to what happened in it.
If you're going with not guilty everyone in the court room obviously assumes you're going to say you didn't do it so why do you need a recording to say it too?!
This depends on country. In Belgium you can spend money.You can't spend money behind bars.
What the hell...if denying you committed a crime would get you off the charges nobody would ever go to jail, it isn't proof that you didn't do it, admitting you did it is not proof either but why would someone admit to something they didn't do, when that would make them go to jail?
Every time I hear or read about a murder, I make a point of recording myself saying I didn't do it. It must work because I have yet to be tried for murder.
What bothers me is that people want to find someone guilty of a crime when a person refuses to cooperate with the police. Nothing you say can help you in court. It can only hurt you. Therefore, it is best to simply not say anything.
Because of society . We are the only animals on the planet that punish for wrong doing and society is all about agreements on what is right and what is wrong.
You need to know or at least admit that you have done is wrong in order to be punished so that everyone can have a clear conscience .
Judge: "Did you kill this man?"
Bad Guy: "No. I did not kill him."
Judge: *Bangs Gavel* "Dismissed. This man did not kill him. Case closed."
"Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.” - General James Mattis