Apparently, the younger Boston Marathon bomber scrawled a note into the hull of the boat he was hiding in when they captured him. The note is almost certainly constitutes an admissible statement of his participation in the April 15 attack
And according to an unidentified source with law enforcement, "the portion of the boat’s interior on which Mr. Tsarnaev had written would likely be cut from the hull and presented in court as evidence should he go to trial."
That seems a little over the top.
The owner of the boat has suffered enough, hasn't he? Is it really necessary to hack the poor man's boat to pieces to get the incriminating note into evidence? If so, our legal system's requirements of proof are out of whack.
Even if the boat note was the single critical piece of evidence needed to convict Tsarnaev, you have to wonder why they can't just take a picture of the note and use that at trial. Well, you'd wonder that only if you hadn't gone to law school, and learned always to suppress common sense.