in formalized testimonial materials, such as affidavits, depositions, prior testimony, or confessions,” and “statements that were made under circumstances which would lead an objective witness reasonably to believe that the statement would be available for use at a later trial,” fall within the “core class” of testimony. Id. at 51-52, 124 S.Ct. 1354. “Statements taken by police officers in the course of interrogations” are definitively “testimonial.” Id. at 52, 124 S.Ct. 1354. As the Crawford Court used the term “interrogation” in the “colloquial” and not “technical legal” sense, statements given in a formal interrogation setting at a police station and witness statements given to an investigating police officer are both considered “testimonial.” Id. at 53 n. 4, 124 S.Ct. 1354 (<HOLDING>), at 58 n. 8, 124 S.Ct. 1354 (characterizing
holding testimonial statements to include those involving a declarants knowing responses to structured questioning in an investigative environment holding witnesss formal signed written statement given at the police station one hour after the crime following structured police questioning was testimonial holding victims statement testimonial where it was elicited in response to structured police questioning pursuant to a police investigation holding antiassignment clause in structured settlement is enforceable holding that postmmmda statement knowingly given in response to structured police questioning was testimonial