Fruit of the poisonous tree is any evidence obtained as a result of a violation of the accused's rights. It is important because it forces police to respect your Fourth Amendments rights or they can lose important evidence.
The legal doctrine established to control police misconduct is called "qualified immunity." This doctrine protects government officials, including police officers, from being held personally liable for civil damages as long as their actions did not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights.
The fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine is an extension of the Exclusionary Rule that applies to indirect evidence obtained through a Fourth Amendment illegal search and seizure.There are several exceptions to both the Exclusionary Rule and the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine:Independent Source Doctrine: Evidence discovered in part from an independent, untainted source. [Murray v. United States,(1988)]Inevitable Discovery Rule: the evidence would have been found despite the unconstitutional action. [Nix v. William, (1984)]Attenuated Connection Principle: The chain of cause and effect is too attenuated to tie directly to the unconstitutional action. [Wong Sun v. United States, (1963)]Good Faith Rule: A search warrant not based on probable cause was issued, but acted upon in good faith by government agents. [US v. Leon, (1984).]
It is known as the 'Exclusionary Rule' - more commonly referred to as the "Fruit of the Poisoned Tree Doctrine." See below link:
The Monroe Doctrine
nova net answer: it sought to contain the spread of communism
It prevented European colonization and intervention in the Western Hemisphere.
The rule by providing that evidence obtained bt illegal means may nonethless be admissible if the connection between the evidence and the illegal means is sufficiently remote. This is an exception to the "Fruits-of-the-Poisonous-Tree doctrine.
true
The "fruit of the poisonous tree" is a legal doctrine that prohibits the use in a criminal trial of any evidence that was obtained by means of an illegal arrest, an unauthorized search or from an illegal interrogation by any law enforcement body. "The fruit of the poisonous tree" is therefore a metaphor. The illegal arrest, search and interrogation would be the poisonous tree. The evidence derived by any of those means would be the fruit from the poisonous tree. For a good discussion on this doctrine see the link provided below.
It is called the exclusionary rule (originating in 1769 England, it was not tested until 1886 in the United States: Boyd VS United States and a strong federal stance on the issue in 1914: Weeks VS United States).
The doctrine you are referring to is called the "attenuation doctrine." It provides that evidence collected through unlawful or unconstitutional means can be admissible in court if the connection between the illegal action and the evidence is weak enough that it becomes "attenuated" or distant. The court will weigh factors such as the passage of time, intervening events, and voluntariness of consent when applying this doctrine.
No. During that war it was US doctrine to utilize chemical warfare only for retaliation; the US would not use it first. Biological warfare was not US doctrine. Not to be used. The US reserved the right to "first strike" with nuclear weapons.