Exclusionary Law: Its Purpose, Exceptions, and Alternative Remedies

Analysis of Exclusionary Law
Student’s Name
University
Course
Professor
Date
Exclusionary Law
Exclusionary law is one of the most controversial laws that govern the criminal justice system in the country. It refers to the constitutional prohibition of unreasonable obtaining of evidence. This prevents evidence that has been obtained in a manner that violates the defendant’s rights from being admissible before a jury or in a court of law. Every individual has a right against self-incrimination, which provides that no person is to be forced to be a witness against himself (Wilson, 1986). No person shall be deprived of either his life, freedom, or property without proper following of the due process. Additionally, every person is entitled to counsel, which means that a defendant has the right to an attorney. If this is not possible, the government must provide one for them or pay for the legal fees. Essentially, any evidence that is obtained in clear violation of any of the rights mentioned above can be found to be inadmissible in a criminal court.
Purpose and Exceptions
The primary purpose for this rule in the Fourth Amendment of the Bill of Rights is to protect the suspect or defendant against incrimination by illegally or improperly obtained evidence. For example, a video or audio recording of a confession to a crime where it turns out that the suspect was forced or tortured into making the recording is inadmissible as evidence as it violates the suspect’s constitutional rights. However, some exceptions serve to regulate the exclusionary rule and limit the misuse of the rights guaranteed by the law. For example, evidence obtained from the search of a suspect by the prosecutor or police may be deemed inadmissible as it can be argued that the search infringes on the defendant’s constitutional right to privacy. However, suppose the evidence has been obtained by a private civilian or third party such as a private investigator. In that case, the evidence can pass in a court of law and be used in the prosecution (Wright, 2019). Police officers require a search warrant before they can perform an investigation inside a suspect’s property. Therefore, evidence obtained without the search warrant is considered null and void in a court of law. However, if police officers were to act on a defective search warrant, the evidence would still be admissible as it would be argued that the officers acted in good faith (Acker & Brody, 1999). Additionally, evidence obtained illegally but matching one obtained through another independent and legal means can be found to be admissible (Chemerinsky & Levenson, 2018).
Costs vs. Benefits of Exclusionary Law
The exclusionary law has received its share of love and ...