There are many controversial issues in the criminal justice system, but none more so than the use of the exclusionary rule to suppress evidence. This rule, based on protection offered under the Fourth Amendment against unreasonable search and seizure, has been in place at the federal level since 1914 and at the state level since 1961. (Scheb, 2008) There are both pros and cons to the continued use of the exclusionary rule, as well as some possible alternatives. Our system of justice is based on the idea of “separation of powers” that prevents any one branch from overstepping its powers. In line with this, the investigative department requests warrants to search for evidence, but they must be approved by the judicial branch.
The police officer arresting a person must tell that person what the charges against him are, of his right to remain silent and his right to an advocate. If the police officer does not do this, then the arrested person has the right or freedom to be released since his rights have been infringed. Furthermore, the arrested person has the right from double jeopardy which is the right not to have multiple trials conducted against him for
(Siegel & Worrall, 2010) all defendants have their right to their own counsel and even represent themselves then they waive their right to have an attorney. This is a very tricky subject because if that does happen to be your choice you run the risk of not understanding some of the material that is being covered including the lingo or not knowing what full options are available to you as a
There are 4 reasons why bail could be refused; if they believe the defendant will commit an offence while on bail, if they would interfere with any witnesses or the course of justice, if they need protection from anyone, and if they would surrender to bail. There are also factors to consider when granting bail such as; the seriousness and nature of the crime committed, the strength of the evidence against the person, the antecedents-family or social background and their previous bail record. The court and the police can impose conditions on bail and this is known as conditional bail. They have the power to impose a curfew - specified hours you are allowed, a report - to report to the police station regularly, reside - living at a certain address, surrender a passport and finally a
Handling evidence properly is one of the most crucial points of any investigation. Without even intentionally doing so, mishandling of evidence could mean a case thrown out of court. Some types of mishandling of evidence would be planting of evidence, removing evidence, not following the chain of custody and unlawfully obtaining evidence. Rape cases should involve specially trained individuals, if an untrained investigator was to handle a rape case the way a homicide case was handled even more issues can arise. Reducing Ethical Considerations From arrival at a crime scene the investigator must follow only the facts and remove any emotion from considerations.
What specifically needs to be told to them is: their right to remain silent, anything they say could be used against them in court, right to counsel, right to have counsel appointed to them. If these things are not said anything said by the arrestee during the interrogation will not stand in court. IV. Reasons: Each arrestee should be aware of their rights because without knowing them officials can bully the defendants into self criminalizing themselves. If they know their rights and have an attorney present they are able to tell their story without fear, and effectively.
In the 18th century most individuals were allowed to have his or her defense attorney present during criminal cases. There are certain fundamental rights that are safe guarded by the first set of eight amendments against the federal actions, and against those actions of the state by due process of law and the fourteenth amendment. Among these rights are fundamental rights of the accused individual to have aid from a counsel during criminal prosecutions. The rights of a defendant during a criminal trial to have aid from a counsel is a fundamental right that can lead to a petitioners trial and a fair trial, but a conviction without the aid of a counsel will violate the rights of that individual under the fourteenth amendment. Most of the time it is common for an individual to have assistance from a counsel offered to him or her in most cases, but it is not always necessary to have one.
If, at any time, the evidence is not given to the defense, any evidence that has been exposed to that point will be determined unvalid (Legal Information Institutue, n.d.). The Brady Rule allows for a fair trial and that the rights of the accused are not violated at any point of the
In my own opinion this causes many issues which can lead people to do immoral things and commit bad crimes, and be able to justify their actions by stating it was already determined for them to do it. With this idea you can’t be praised for doing good things or punished for doing bad as we did not choose to preform or commit these actions. Ted Honderich was a hard determinist and said all our choices, intentions and our actions are nothing more than effects from other past events that have already happened. David Hume would criticise this he argues against hard determinism and says we do have free will and moral responsibility, we are responsible for all our moral and non-moral actions regardless of whether they could have been determined by our past choices or values. John Hospers also thought all things were determined.
The due process can be described as a constitutional guarantee that all legal proceedings will be fair and that the suspect will be given notice of the proceedings and an opportunity to be heard before the government proposes to take away one’s life, liberty, or property ("Due Process Model Law & Legal Definition", 2013). The constitutional guarantee of the due process can be found in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution. The Fifth Amendment restricts the powers of the federal government and states that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without the due process of law and the fourteenth amendment limits the power of the states and says that no state can deprive any person of life, liberty, or