Commonwealth v. Dravecz

Concurring Opinion by

Mr. Justice Eagen :

For almost a century testimony of “tacit admission” was admissible in evidence in the courts of this Commonwealth as proof of an implied acquiescence on the part of the accused in the truth of the charges made against him. See Commonwealth ex rel. Shadd v. Myers, 423 Pa. 82, 85, 223 A. 2d 296, 298 (1966), and cases cited therein.

Despite criticism of this practice from varied sources,1 Pennsylvania continued to adhere to the rule and, stamped with the imprimatur of time, it became a well established evidentiary rubric. The rule had some currency in…