The Supreme Court. We are just expanding what they are doing to allow for this reasonable mistake on the part of the police officer in gathering evidence. If he makes a reasonable mistake in good faith, that is subject to the same exclusionary rule possibility, but a third party, a judge, provides an objective standard and decides whether that comes in or not. But again, it allows for a reasonable mistake and does not punish society by excluding or keeping away that evidence from the jury.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the implications of a Supreme Court decision on police evidence gathering.
Share
More from Ed Bryant
the study of recent military conflicts and peacekeeping missions have led to two conclusions: First, in the case of major conflict, the massive presence of U.S. forces is necessary to defeat the aggressor or to contain the threat; second…
There are at least three avenues that people sentenced to the death penalty can travel. Of course, they have their natural State appeals. Then there is a habeas corpus procedure within the State, and then the Federal habeas corpus…
Mr. Chairman, this is a narrow amendment, one that I think is very appropriate and necessary, given the apparent loss of credibility that our judiciary system is suffering in this country. It is narrow in the sense that it amends the law…
I would just simply state that this is a very commonsense measure. Again, the States that are at issue here are asking the other States in this country to spend taxpayer money to reimburse their public hospitals for this type of treatment…





