Should the Supreme Court have granted police officers the ability to use illegally obtained evidence in court?

  • Yes, I believe that anything and everything should be used to prosecute someone

    If anybody commits a crime, they should be punished for it -- It's quite simple. All evidence should be used, regardless of how it was obtained. If there is anything that shows a person committed any wrong-doings, it 100% should be used. Imagine what would happen if somebody got off free because certain evidence -- that would 100% prove the crime -- was not able to be used because it was obtained illegally. Better to be safe than sorry.

  • Illegal evidence is illegal no matter which way you slice it

    Police officers need a search warrant before they can get evidence from a crime scene. The Supreme Court made the unfortunate decision to skirt this decision by allowing the police to use evidence obtained through underhanded means in the courtroom. This warps normal legal proceedings and gives police officers the freedom to do whatever they want - even if that's illegal.

  • No, police officers need to follow the laws of evidence collection

    The Supreme Court needs to hold on to the legal methods of obtaining evidence by police officers. Citizens need the protection of police officers but we can not give up our rights for privacy. Police officers need to follow the legal protocol for obtaining evidence or we all loose our freedoms.

  • They are there to protect and serve.

    The police sometimes forget that it is their job to protect and to serve the community. They are not super cops and they do not need to resort to excessive uses of violence in minor altercations. Unless your life is truly in danger then you have no reason to resort to such methods.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.