IS WHETHER THE EXCLUSIONARY RULE SHOULD BE Abolished

Is whether the exclusionary rule should be ablolished



Is whether the exclusionary rule should be ablolished

The exclusionary rule often means the rule that illegally gathered evidence that can not be used in criminal proceedings. Exclusionary rules are few exceptions, such as when data is used to impeach the testimony of the defendant and when the evidence was collected in a good faith belief that the process was legitimate. (Stojkovic, Kalinich, and Klofas p. 300, 2003) So I take it also means that any evidence gathered during a criminal investigation or after the crime has been committed, and gathering evidence in an illegal way and not properly due a process can not be used during the trial the defendants. And it could be a key element, which is certainly a lot of criminal walk freely and commit more crimes.

The exclusionary rule is the court made rule. This means that it was not created by statute enacted by legislatures, but rather from the U.S. Supreme Court. The exclusionary rule concerns in government courts by virtue of the Fourth Amendment. The court ruled that it would apply in state courts, although be an appropriate Fourteenth Amendment. (Bill of Rights, first ten amendments, applies to the federal government. Fourteenth Amendment, the court makes the most of protection in the Bill of Rights applicable to the actions of states.) (Hall, 2004)

The exclusionary rule has been since the early 1900's. Before the rule approach, no evidence is admissible in criminal proceedings if the judge found the evidence to be relevant. The manner in which evidence was seized was not the issue. The situation began to change in 1914 when the U.S. Supreme Court has developed a way to meet the Fourth Amendment. In Weeks v. United States, 232 U.S. 383, ...