State v. Cain
In State v. Cain, 223 Conn. 731, 613 A.2d 804 (1992), the Court concluded that "despite the fact that the language of Practice Book 749 (2) now 40-15 (2), read literally, would cover the tape recording of a 911 telephone call, it is not within the intent of that language to cover such a tape recording and that, therefore, a tape recording of a 911 telephone call is not a statement within the meaning of 40-15 (2) that is subject to preservation and to disclosure. . . ." State v. Cain, supra, at 738-39.
A "statement," as used in Practice Book 40-13, is defined in Practice Book 40-15 as: "(1) A written statement made by a person and signed or otherwise adopted or approved by such person; or
"(2) A stenographic, mechanical, electrical, or other recording, or a transcription thereof, which is a substantially verbatim recital of an oral statement made by a person and recorded contemporaneously with the making of such oral statement."
In Cain, the Court recognized that a rule requiring the preservation of every twenty-four hour tape would impose a heavy burden on municipalities.