Exclusionary Rule

The purpose of the Exclusionary Rule

The exclusionary rule was first introduced into the criminal justice system in 1914, during the case with Weeks versus the United States in the Supreme Court. The exclusionary rule is a part of the Fourth Amendment; it states as follow “that any evidence sized illegally by government officers cannot be introduced by the prosecution in a criminal trial to prove the defendant’s guilt.” For this “remedy” is not a part of the Fourth Amendment. In the beginning it was only allowed for the federal law enforcements because the Bill of Rights had not yet been incorporated in that era.
Cost of the exclusionary rule

The cost of the exclusionary rule is very much costly, it not only cost the courts time and the money, but it costs the people within the society, for the exclusionary rule keeps the evidence from the courts, which interns makes it more difficult and even more impossible for a conviction of the defendant. With the loss of the evidence could lead to a retrial or even the defendant walking away free. There are many people whom believe that the exclusionary rule should be abolished, because it should not be a means of controlling law enforcement, and they believe that “the ends justify the means”. Budiansky states in his article that “the exclusionary rule, along with its use of warrants, is “a process that lets criminals off on ‘technicalities’”. Ultimately, the exclusionary rule can be seen as an obstacle for the police, to make citizens feel safer and more in control of their privacy and protection. Both sides of the exclusionary rule however, can agree that police officers should not be excused from breaking the law, for “just” purposes. (Rothwax, 42) There are also many people who believe in the exclusionary rule, Supporters of the exclusionary rule say that it controls police conduct, it limits their authority and their power. Citizens have every right to feel protected in the privacy of their homes and without this...