Proposals have been made that evidence obtained illegally could be admitted in criminal trials while still holding the officer accountable for the improper seizure. This may be unrealistic. What do you think? Give an example to support your answer
What will be an ideal response?
I believe this would be unrealistic. For example, what jury would convict an officer
in a subsequent criminal case for improper seizure of evidence in a major drug trial
that resulted in the conviction of the accused?
You might also like to view...
The Philadelphia Society for Alleviating the Miseries of Public Prisons was involved with inmates to the extent that it provided:
A) religious instruction. B) more humane living conditions. C) vocational training. D) All of the above
A major concern of community policing is to convince middle management that community policing will:
A) reduce crime B) please the public C) be a permanent part of departmental policy D) control crime
When a crime requires a mens rea of specific intent, a person is culpable only if he or she voluntarily commits the underlying criminal act or acts
A. out of negligence or recklessness. B. by accident or carelessness. C. with the intent to achieve a particular result. D. by mistake.
What are the four reasons why, according to Sutherland, that the forces aligned to fight white-collar crime are weak? Are those forces still in play today? How was the public’s view about white-collar crime changed in recent years?
What will be an ideal response?