Good for the Goose -- Should Illegally Acquired Evidence be Admissable in Court?

The Admissibility of Good Evidence Acquired Illegally by Private Citizens

“Police Lights,” by Peter Griffin.

If a person had good reason to believe that a violent crime was happening at his neighbor’s house then breaking in to the neighbor’s house would be justified. And even though they trespassed their testimony should be admissible in court.

If, on the other hand, a person broke in to their neighbor’s house without a good reason and discovered some crime their testimony should be admissible in court and they should receive the punishment for trespassing/breaking and entering.

That’s all pretty straight forward and I expect everyone agrees… now what if the person trespassing/breaking and entering is working for the government?

 

Why Should Good Evidence Collected by Government Agents Illegally be Inadmissible?

What happens is that government employees are not prosecuted and their discovery is not admissible in court (e.g the Tohoe spying). This accepted procedure enables two injustices.

All evidence should be allowed in Court and crimes committed by government employees should be prosecuted.

 

My Response on the Original Post

Mark I Rasskazov: I disagree. Because government is the institutionalization of force, we have to be extremely careful about the procedures associated with its use. I can envision a situation where black operations cells spring up that involve breaking and entering to get convictions, and, when caught, these agents merely get a slap on the wrist to appease the public, followed by bonuses and promotions under [other] pretexts. In other words, it’s a conflict of interest.

EDITOR’S NOTE: What do you think? Should evidence collected illegally by government agents be admissible in court, provided the government agents are properly chastised or punished? Or do you think, as I do, that this would create a conflict of interest resulting in widespread abuse? Reed is a Transegoist sympathizer; not a Transegoist — our syndication of his article does not indicate that he endorses the Transegoist philosophy.

 

Syndicated from Eternal Vigilance.

Good for the Goose -- Should Illegally Acquired Evidence be Admissable in Court?