4th Amendment ruling allows wrongfully obtained evidence

[Vladimir]

So we're becoming more like the UK now? I thought the common complaint was that the opposite is true!

[rory_20_uk]

It's a tough issue IMO.

The term is so broad that it could almost theoretically allow anything to be admitted - illegal wire taps, illegal searches etc etc.

And if the police submit evidence that they've illegally entered the suspects house, are they not admitting to a crime?

Then is that in turn OK as long as they found something (massive incentive to find something - anything - to ensure the department isn't sued), or are the police immune can go into anyone's palce or car whenever they feel like it as long as they say they're looking for something).

In cases where all but one form was signed in duplicate not triplicate and due to this the druglord gets away with the 300kg of coke I'm happy with this. It's the other areas that are far more grey. Very transparent oversight is needed - else police powers are almost without limit.

[Tribesman]

The conservative majority

Conservatives eh

[LittleGrizzly]

An overpowered police force is far more terrifying than your average drug dealer...

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

In cases where all but one form was signed in duplicate not triplicate and due to this the druglord gets away with the 300kg of coke I'm happy with this. It's the other areas that are far more grey. Very transparent oversight is needed - else police powers are almost without limit.

This would be my view as well. So the judgement should have included stipulations that it be a clerical technicality.

[KukriKhan]

I'm probably totally wrong but, to this old nose, this ruling smells like "paving the way" for disposing of Gitmo cases in US domestic courts, after that place is closed and we can't pawn any more detainees off on UK/Oz.

Trouble is, of course, as with all these post 9-11 extraordinary measures, how do you undo them later?

[ICantSpellDawg]

Good, now it is as open-ended as a the rest of the amendments. Welcome to our nightmare.

It sounds to me like the burden is reduced slightly for law enforcement. It doesn't make sense that not including a middle name on a warrant means that an incriminating seizure done under that warrant should be thrown out.

Let not pretend that that the US legal system doesn't go out of its way to protect people who are legitimately in the wrong. This will just adjust the balance back in favor of those whom crimes have been commited against. Unless that crime was commited by the government, in which case this will aggravate the situation more thoroughtly.

We'll se how it works and take issue with it if it proves to be a source primarily ofcorruption in law enforcement rather than a rational reduction in absurd warrant requirements after they have been issued.

Judge - "I'm sorry, officer, but this warrant named the defendant as a double-ended dildo salesman - this is clearly a quad-ender and therefore the seizure is void. He goes free. Better luck next time"

[rory_20_uk]

I'm probably totally wrong but, to this old nose, this ruling smells like "paving the way" for disposing of Gitmo cases in US domestic courts, after that place is closed and we can't pawn any more detainees off on UK/Oz.

Trouble is, of course, as with all these post 9-11 extraordinary measures, how do you undo them later?

It would make the trials a lot easier - try 'em, find most guilty, sentence them to time served. The gordian knot is cut, the whole mess has been legalised.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I think Kukri may be on to something, but it's important to remember that the "gitmo" crowd will mostly be executed, I believe.

[spmetla]

Well I'm against it, I don't want the police to be encouraged to make 'mistakes.'

[Lord Winter]

I think Kukri may be on to something, but it's important to remember that the "gitmo" crowd will mostly be executed, I believe.

Doubt it, it would be political suicide.