Illegal evidence, was grim prospects

From: Hal Finney (hal@finney.org)
Date: Wed Apr 10 2002 - 14:39:10 MDT

Harvey Newstrom wrote:
> Another faulty feedback mechanism that I advocate
> abolishing is the idea that evidence gathered illegally has to be thrown
> out of court. I say, go ahead and use the evidence to prosecute the
> criminal, and then also prosecute the person who illegally gathered the
> evidence. One crime shouldn't absolve another crime.

The problem with this proposal is that it removes the institutional
incentives to observe the law. If a criminal is caught and convicted as
a result of illegally gathered evidence, it is unlikely that society will
turn against the police agencies that made a mistake. People will tend to
look the other way, to ignore or forgive the problem. Few juries would
convict a policeman who overstepped the bounds of his search warrant,
if it helped him convict a violent criminal.

In contrast, under the present system, illegally gathered evidence cannot
be used. In many cases this will make the difference between success
and failure in prosecution. People will be furious with police agencies
who make this kind of mistake! The D.A. will be voted out of office,
the police chief fired.

The current policies align society's long-term interests with
the self-interest of the people charged with enforcing the laws.
It provides much better and more immediate feedback to the police
agencies. Relying on unpopular prosecutions of heroic police officers
will never work as well.

Hal

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:13:23 MST