protection against double jeopardy
I do not think this is a protection again Double Jeopardy as this is a person not being able to be tried for the same crime twice.
It is the right to a fair and just trial. Illegally obtaining evidence can be altered (such as recording devices). Also, illegally obtaining evidence breaches a persons Human Rights set out in the European Convention for Human Rights as it would likely be a breach of their Right to Private Life (Article 8).
Generally, evidence that is not obtained properly and fairly is considered inadmissible
This statement is based on a person's constitutional right to protection against unreasonable search and seizure, as outlined in the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. It aims to prevent law enforcement from violating individuals' rights by obtaining evidence through unlawful means.
No, evidence obtained illegally, including letters that were opened without permission, is generally not admissible in court due to the exclusionary rule, which prohibits the use of illegally obtained evidence in legal proceedings.
The Warren Court
Hearsay
The exclusionary rule states that evidence obtained in an illegal search or seizure may not be introduced at trial. This rule is based on the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures.
It depends on how the photos were obtained. If the photos were taken in public or with permission, it may be legal to sell them. However, if the photos were obtained illegally, such as by trespassing or hacking, it would be illegal to sell them.
No, evidence obtained illegally, including letters that were opened without permission, is generally not admissible in court due to the exclusionary rule, which prohibits the use of illegally obtained evidence in legal proceedings.
The accused has the right to challenge the admissibility of any evidence used against them at trial. Whether an e-mail or any other evidence is "illegally obtained" is subject to the interpretation of the court, not the accused. If the court rules that evidence is obtained unlawfully, it can be suppressed at trial and not considered.
The exclusionary rule.
exclusionary rule
exclusionary rule
exclusionary rule
exclusionary rule
exclusionary rule
Mapp v. Ohio
In law this is known as the exclusionary rule.
if an unlawful search of your property/residence/vehicle is conducted without your consent, and evidence of a crime is found, its an illegal search, the judge can throw out the evidence if an illegal search was done
Unless you are willing to reveal your source of information, you have NO evidence. Evidence is only able to substantiate claims if it can be proved.