The defense cannot cross examine, makes for great tabloid news but its not admissible.
The rules regarding testimony are more complex than you seem to realize.
I’m wondering... If it isn’t admissible in an actual court case (because she can’t be cross-examined), would it have been a tool during Grand Jury hearing?
“The defense cannot cross examine, makes for great tabloid news but its not admissible.”
Check your rules for exceptions to hearsay testimony.
It's been 25 years since I studied evidence. I recall, though, that dying declarations are not only admissible, but are one of the few exceptions to the hearsay rule. It could be that Elizabeth's death was not sufficiently imminent when the tape was made to qualify as a dying declaration, however. And like another poster said, even if it's not admissible as testimony she could have pointed authorities to other evidence or witnesses.
It's a little more complicated than that. Like all other hearsay evidence, the rule is no absolute. For example, the tape can be used to rebut testimony provided by the defense. If nothing else, the existence of a tape like this limits some of the options the defense may have.