LEGAL HOUSE OF CARDS (FROM RESOLVED - THAT US LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES SHOULD BE GIVEN SIGNIFICANTLY GREATER FREEDOM IN THE INVESTIGATION AND/OR PROSECUTION OF FELONY CRIME, 1977 - SEE NCJ-49061

• NCJ Number: 49064
• Author(s): A M ROSENBLATT; J C ROSENBLATT
• Date Published: 1977
• Length: 6 pages
• Corporate Author: Library of Congress
• Publication Format: Document
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: REPRINTED FROM HARPER'S, V 225, (JULY 1977), P 18-21

Annotation

THE EXCLUSIONARY RULE, WHICH FORBIDS THE USE OF ANY EVIDENCE AGAINST AN ACCUSED PERSON WHICH THE POLICE HAVE ACQUIRED WHILE VIOLATING CONSTITUTIONAL STANDARDS, IS SEEN AS DAMAGING TO THE PURSUIT OF JUSTICE.

Abstract

THE EXCLUSIONARY RULE, WHICH EMERGED OUT OF A CONCERN FOR CITIZENS' RIGHTS, TOO OFTEN INTERFERES WITH THE CONVICTION OF AN UNDENIABLY GUILTY SUSPECT. THE RESULT IS THE RELEASE OF POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS PERSONS BACK INTO SOCIETY AND A DEPLETION OF THE DETERRENT EFFECT OF PUNISHMENT ON CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR. IRONICALLY, THE RULE -- INTENDED TO CURB ABUSE OF POLICE POWER -- HAS OFTEN LED TO POLICE PERJURY IN TRIALS WHERE BOTH THE DEFENDANT AND THE POLICE OFFICERS INVOLVED ARE EXAMINED FOR WRONGFUL BEHAVIOR. THE EXCLUSIONARY RULE AS IT EXISTS DOES NOT DISTINGUISH BETWEEN BLUNDER AND MALICE ON THE PART OF THE POLICE OFFICER. IS IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE EXCLUSIONARY RULE BE REMOVED. (DAG)