James Deuce

So I was thinking a bit about how the courts work...because I was watching a movie about law and how it's dealt. Anyway they touched on the exclusionary rule. Basically it says that evidence is void if it is obtained by invading the persons constitutional rights. I think only the United States goes by this rule.

I think it's a bad thing, that evidence that whoever finds could be the evidence that puts the person(s) behind bars. I know some of you know more about this than me, but say if they found a dead body in the persons house and it was the body of why they were going to court, lets say murder, would it still be used if it was obtained illegally?

What's your stance?

Assassin™

It's definitely a good thing. I happen to be fond of my civil liberties. The Bill of Rights were put there for a reason, and they apply to everyone, even criminals. It is a legal technicality which may result in a person guilty of a crime to not be found guilty in court, but again, that's the whole concept behind our justice system: the burden of proof is on the state, and our constitutional rights may not be violated solely to admit damning evidence in a trial.

There are some exceptions you may not be aware though which would kind of defeat your exemplary scenario. First of all, in all likelihood, if someone is on trial for murder, either a body will have already been found, or there would be some other evidence that would convincingly suggest that they were complicit in a murder, otherwise they would have never been charged. Secondly, there are other direct exceptions, such as; if someone is charged with murder, the police would have the right and legal justification to search their home. Even under the exclusionary rule, this entails that even if a murder charge had not yet been brought, and the police illegally searched their home and found a dead body, that evidence would be admissible in a trial because it is reasonable to assume the body would have later been found as a result of a warranted search.

If you were instead suggesting that it was just a civilian who entered the home illegally and found the body, that would also be an exception to the rule and the evidence would be admissible, as the rule only applies to the government.

Suffy

Canada has this rule it's entrenched in our charter of rights in freedoms which is apart of our charter.

And I actually entirely with Assassin, I'd rather a murderer be on the street roaming my area than have 1984 Orwellian police state happening where everything is monitored, I have nothing to hide but I do not want you searching, because if you search for dirt that's what you are going to find.

__________________

James Deuce

Ah, I see, thanks for clearing that up. Yeah I wasn't quite sure of how it exactly worked and all the technicallites of it. After reading that I would probably say it's a good law. And Suffy, didn't know it was used in Canada, interesting.

Suffy

It's used in most other western "devoloped" countries.

__________________