Others may think the exclusionary rule should not be used to enforce the Fourth Amendment. They feel at times it is necessary for the exclusionary rule to not be used. I can understand their position because they are looking at putting the accused defendant behind bars and make sure they are punished to the fullest. At times without the exclusionary rule, the case in court can succeed and get the result the prosecution and maybe even what the public want. Sometimes people feel the defendant has too many rights and has more benefits, which could help them get away with criminal activity.
Cost and Benefits When determining the cost/benefit analysis to the exclusionary rule, one must take into consideration the outcome. This can be done by using critical thinking. Does the end justify the means? “The cost is that the exclusionary rule (cost to society) keeps evidence from the jury and makes it more difficult and more impossible to obtain a conviction (because of the loss of the evidence or the necessity of a retrial)” (Cost Benefit Analysis To The Exclusionary Rule, 2011). When officer conduct a search of a person’s house without following proper procedure the evidence that is obtained may not be admissible in court, the result is criminals go free.
But in contrast there are very different at the same time. The crime control model is used in the criminal justice system for the prevention of crime. The crime control does not exclude that is possible to make a mistake, but based on the circumstances of the laws, the person is considered guilty until her or she is proven innocent. This model is based on old fashion laws which allow rapid and speedy convictions despite the mitigating factors of the case and the victim. The results, of the crime control model are wrongful convictions, being over-turned and this is a major downfall in the criminal justice system.
What are the problems with non-interrogatory forms of evidence? Choose two forms of non-interrogatory evidence to discuss. Having enough evidence is key in charging, prosecution and finally conviction of criminals, unfortunately most cases result in the police needing and wanting more evidence. Due to insufficient evidence the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) will not be pursued cases further, even if the police believe they have the right suspect. However there are other types of evidence collection apart from that of questioning, which falls under the title of non-interrogatory forms of evidence such as surveillance and scientific evidence.
MIDTERM 1 Running Head: MIDTERM Midterm Project Search and Seizure Linda Branstrom Kaplan University CJ 299: Associates Capstone in Criminal Justice Professor Terry Campbell April 22, 2012 MIDTERM 2 Abstract It is firmly ingrained in our system of law that searches conducted outside the judicial process, without prior approval by judge or magistrate, are per se unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment, subject to only a few specifically established exceptions. The courts have outlined a number of exceptions to the warrant requirement including but not limited to, consent searches, searches of vehicles and, inventory searches. One exception the court has expressly and repeatedly refused to recognize is a general
Exclusionary Rule Evaluation From the Fifth Amendment comes the Exclusionary Rule which affirms that no entities or things may be used and showed in court if taken unlawfully or without appropriate search warrant. Public citizens are well-known with the idea that they have a right to confidentiality, and cannot be investigated devoid of a warrant. Nevertheless, not many people comprehend how the exclusionary rule, which is what truly imposes this right, defends us. The rationale and purpose of Exclusionary Rule discourage police delinquency. Exclusionary Rule is also grounded in Fourth Amendment and it is projected to guard people from prohibited searches and seizures.
I feel as if the US needs to be more careful with their way of getting such law enforcement officers. Not that their way of selecting officers in today’s world isn’t enough there just needs to be more added to it. In conclusion the movie “US Marshals” conveys multiple levels of criminal behavior. Not only from a criminal running away from law enforcement but rogue cops also committing criminal acts. Before anyone is sent to jail and there is suspicion about the case their needs to be detective work done so that the system doesn’t make the wrong
False testimony, exaggerated statistics and laboratory fraud have led to wrongful conviction in several states. Since forensic evidence is offered by "experts," jurors routinely give it much more weight than other evidence. But when misconduct occurs, the weight is misplaced. In some instances, labs or their personnel have allied themselves with police and prosecutors, rather than prioritizing the search for truth. Other times, criminalists lacking the requisite knowledge have embellished findings and eluded detection because judges and juries lacked background in the relevant sciences, themselves.
The very nature of police of criminal investigation in and of itself fosters and causes police discretion. The biggest advantages of police discretion is the interpretation of the law. Running Header: Police Discretion 3 Criminal law “has attempted to establish those forms of conduct which its members desire to be declared criminal” (Goldstein 1977). These laws are so many time written in very broad terms that vaguely define crimes which leaves the individual officer to decide if the criminal activity they are investigating meets the elements of the criminal code and to which extent. The written law simply does not cover all aspects of behavior that police officers will encounter (Wortley, 2003).
We have witnessed in this century, the growth of sophisticated crime. Here, question is, whether existing periphery of extradition norms are competent enough to combat such a kind of sophistication? As mentioned earlier, extradition should be seen with a diverse view. Not all demands of extradition can be genuine, but also we have to kept in mind that most of them are genuine demand so in fist instance the question of human right arises and in the latter, the issue of state sovereignty stands. If we examine closer, the purpose of extradition we are left that, is to prevent criminals who flee from a jurisdiction to escape from punishment for criminal offence they have been accused or convicted of.