Waiver or forfeiture of the psychotherapist-patient privilege

United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667, pin? (1985) (both the Court and concurring and dissenting Justices refer to the "truth-seeking" function of a criminal trial).The determination of facts and the accurate determination of facts are important purposes of the process of proof and the law of evidence in America.

Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36, 68 (2004) ("Whatever else the term ['testimonial'] covers, it applies at a minimum to prior testimony at a preliminary hearing, before a grand jury, or at a former trial").If a statement was made in another judicial proceeding and the statement is offered against a defendant in a criminal trial, the statement - if offered to establish the statement is true - is "testimonial" and the statement is therefore subject to the right of confrontation guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Shanklin v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co., 369 F.3d 978, 990 (6th Cir. 2004) (holding, in plaintiff wife's wrongful death action against defendant railroad company, that the trial court properly admitted the officer's video deposition....Although the statement of a "speaking agent" can be imputed to an employee's employer or an agent's principal and can be a vicarious admission that is exempt from the prohibition against hearsay, such an employee or agent must in fact have been authorized by the employer or principal to speak on behalf of the employer or principal. This is necessary if the basis of the imputation of the employee's or agent's statement to the employer or principal is that the employee or agent was a "speaking agent."