The Exclusionary Rule of Evidence
Constitution. This is to imply that any type of evidence accumulated from searches or seizure infringing upon the Fourth Amendment can't be exhibited in court amid the trial of the criminal. Therefore the exclusionary rule is aimed at protecting citizens from illegal searches or seizures and even abuse of constitutional rights of citizens by police officers and other government agents. In that case, based on the exclusionary rule, the court suppresses all evidence that is obtained through unconstitutional conducts such as unlawful searches of seizures (Maclin, 2013). Benefits of the exclusionary rule The exclusionary rule is highly beneficial as it ensures that citizens’ rights are respected even if they are deemed to be criminals. For instance, a car accident reconstruction model is a good example of demonstrative evidence.
An accident reconstruction model basically involves a process of recreating the accident scene with the help of an expert witness and it’s mainly used in personal injury cases or even when there are difficulties determine who was at fault in the accident. Another good example of demonstrative evidence is photographs. Generally, photographs happen to be among the most widely recognized kinds of demonstrative proof as they are intense and persuasive in the brain of the jury. Photographs are considered as demonstrative evidence as they are easy to admit into evidence. Thus, to ensure absolute adherence, police officers ought to get rid of such misconducts (The Exclusionary Rule and the Fruit of the Poisonous Tree Doctrine. (n. d. Ramifications and results in case of violation In the case that the “Fruit of the Poisonous Tree” is violated, then the evidence that is traced to such violation cannot be used against a criminal in court.
In this case, the judge has the right to eliminate implicating proof from a criminal's preliminary if there was any offense in getting the evidence. The idea behind the court's displeasure with issues like the Christian Burial Speech. In issues like The Christian Burial Speech, the court's displeasure arises in the case that the police officers violate the rights of a murder suspect to guidance generally by trying endeavors to evoke implicating explanations from the criminal without conducting literal interrogations. In the Christian Burial Speech case (Brewer v. Williams), William was captured, summoned and resolved to imprison in Davenport, Lowa for murdering a 10-year old girl in Des Moines, Lowa. On the trip back to Des Moines, the cops who were to go with William were under orders not to acquire any information from him until the point when his lawyer was available to counsel him.
For instance, in a divorce case involving division of assets where equalization is the most appropriate verdict the judge can make, it might shock the conscience of the court if an excessive verdict is provided and one of the members given a bigger share of the assets when the judge is swayed by emotionally draining evidence. In the case, the court has to intervene and look for a remedy for the excessive verdict. Instruction that coercion is a clear violation of the constitution. Coercion is basically an infringement of the constitution as it’s generally an act by a human(s) against the will of another person. The person’s right to freedom is violated. Routledge Publishers. Laurence T. The Constitution, coercion, and bribery at the Roberts Court.
From $10 to earn access
Only on Studyloop