“ New York, 324 U.S. 401, 430-431, 65 S.Ct. 781, 89 L.Ed. 1029 (1945) :
'Due process does not permit one to be convicted upon his own coerced confession. It should not allow him to be convicted upon a confession wrung from another by coercion. A conviction supported only by such a confession could be not a variation of trial by ordeal.' Admission of Payne's trial testimony was, in my view, a violation of due process as it was cut from the same fabric that produced his original statement. ”

“ Richmond, 365 U.S. 534, 540-541, 81 S.Ct. 735, 5 L.Ed.2d 760 (1961) . Nor do I think it relevant that the coercion in this case was exerted against the chief state witness rather than the accused. As was said by Mr. Justice Rutledge, dissenting in Malinski v. ”