If a civilian’s rights are violated they may be allowed to have protection through state and federal laws, which means the person whose rights were violated are being protected by the government. One of the main reason for civil rights laws is to protect civilians from government abuse. Even though the police officer went too far with a civilian, the police officer cannot be sued. The civilian still has recourse through federal law. Retired police officer David Couper talks to Dr. Greg Gelembiuk, one who gathers data from police reports, “Sometimes I hear the argument that raising the bar on police use of deadly force will somehow put more police officers in physical jeopardy.
Since due process is how we define the order and the correct way of doing things, this is how it applies: In the Terry versus Ohio case, Terry believe that officers should have probable cause before the officer was able to stop and frisk individuals. Under the Fourth Amendment, officers have the right to stop and frisk without probable cause, meaning the process McFadden used was correct. On the other hand, in Miranda versus Arizona, Miranda had not been informed of his right to remain silent before giving his confession of committing the crimes he had been accused of. In turn his confession was not valid. If the officers had used the correct process and made Miranda aware of his right to remain silent, his confession could have been used in trial.
The Majority of the court 's decision includes McLachlin C.J. and Bastarache, Deschamps, Abella, Charron and Rothstein JJ. The court had to decide in this case whether the seriousness of an offence or knowing that one might be a threat to public safety can be a justification to stop anyone without having solid evidence against them. The court stated that both Mr. Clayton and Mr. Farmer were guilty of carrying concealed weapons in a public place. The police had the right to search them even though their car didn’t match the description described by the 911 caller because the officers have to be consistent with their duty towards public safety and act in accordance to the seriousness of the
The safety of the community is crucial and attempting to deam stop and frisk as unconstitutional limits law enforcement. There is much controversy on how it can target a certain group or race but I believe the goal of any police is to deter crime when implementing stop and frisk. I believe stop and frisk can help reduce crimes and eliminate potential crime in a city, neighborhood, or street. Boyette, C., & Martinez, M. (2013). Court blocks ruling against NYPD's stop-and-frisk policy.
“While body camera evidence has already played a role in the disciplining of a few officers nationally, advocates are warning that the technology will not be a magic bullet for behavior or resolution of legal disputes.” Meanwhile the body-warn cameras are known for having evidentiary value. They are useful for resolution of citizen complaints and also yield evidence for criminal prosecution. Additionally body cameras are admirable for those who are training to be a police officer, so they could watch how police- citizens encounters. Although on the other hand this body worn camera can also have limitations for legal complications. “Officer Privacy is also an issue with cameras.
Surveillance has been used to catch and stop many dangerous people who show a threat to the safety of the United States. It is very important to use surveillance, but if you use it unjustly it can give more power to public order than individual rights. It causes a similar problem as the ones mentioned before, that it can prove challenging to identify if you had a good reason to use surveillance. You might not always know if you have a good enough reason to use surveillance, but you should exercise your best judgement to decide whether or not to use
The most important weakness of this policy is that it offers grounds for dirty cops to utilize force illegally to pursue selfish personal agendas that are not in the interests of the public. A police officer can use deadly force and allege that the use of force was necessary when indeed it was not and since there are no effective ways to measure such allegations such officers will end up going scot free. The police officers are supposed to be each other’s keepers and prevent their colleagues from misusing the authority given by the policy while officers who break the law can be charged in court. However, this is not guarantee that such authority will not be used illegally. Another weakness is that cases of mistaken identity can lead to harm to innocent civilians who are suspected of being
The Fourth amendment protects the citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures by law enforcement officials. The search warrant is usually issued by a judge to authorize law enforcement officials to search specific locations and obtain particular items. Arrest warrants, on the other hand, are similar to the arrest warrants save for the fact that rather than granting authorization to search and seize specific items, arrest warrants provide authorization for the arrest and detention of an individual. The role of warrants is to ensure the protection of citizens’ rights by placing the judgement of an independent and impartial judge between law enforcement actions and the privacy of the citizens (Etats-Unis, & Library of Congress, 2013). For any search or arrest warrant to be
Although the rationale of peremptory challenges, ironically, would be for the defendant and the prosecution to get rid of any potentially biased jurors, lawyers may instead use their peremptory challenges to form a jury that would pass a more favourable verdict. As lawyers are also not required to explain their decisions in striking out jurors in most cases, the makeup of the jury can thus be heavily imbalanced. However, as a judge would be required to not let any preconceived bias affect the administering of justice, the accused would hence receive a fairer treatment as compared to juries that might have any bias towards either the prosecution or the defendant. With juries also not being required to explain their decisions, any bias that the jury might have would not be easily found and challenged. Especially in cases where the death penalty is concerned, it is all the more important that juries mete out a fair verdict.
This essay shows three aspects about thinking this controversial problem more rational. First and foremost, making the control over guns stricter could save many people’s lives through preventing parts of the suicides. Secondly, making the control over guns stricter may protect citizens’ lives by keeping them away from violence and some crimes. Last but not least, making the control over guns stricter might protect people from the risk of traumatic stress disorder. Adversely, there are some opposing views.
This practice is not illegal as it is used to prevent the swallowing of drugs that may be in the accused mouth that will aid in substantiating the charge. The RCMP officers had reasonable grounds beyond mere suspicion to conduct the search without a warrant as prescribed by the NCA section 10 (1); therefore, they were within the parameters of the law to conduct the search of the accused (R. v. Collins,  1 S.C.R.
Point 1. The collected evidence ought to be suppressed for failure to issue Miranda warnings during a custodial interrogation. Miranda warnings were made mandatory by the Supreme Court to protect the citizenry from hard police interrogation tactics and forced confessions. However, when a private citizen becomes the interrogator outside, the application of Miranda becomes less strict. The Constitution does not restrain a private citizen in the same ways as law enforcement, unless that citizen is acting as an agent of law enforcement.
Even though a misdemeanor is defined as a lesser criminal act and comes with less severe punishments, criminal defense lawyers urge clients not to take misdemeanor charges lightly. The criminal justice system is often unpredictable, but Buntin, Etheredge, & Fowler, LLC in Dothan, AL, wants to help. Here are three reasons to hire a criminal defense attorney if you are facing misdemeanor charges: If You Don’t Have A Record: There are programs in place that may help with a dismissal of charges for those who do not have a criminal record. An experienced criminal defense attorney will help determine if you are eligible for such a program. If You Do Have A Record: If you already have a criminal record and are facing a misdemeanor, you could be
One of these rules is that prior sexual history should not be brought up by defense counsel to discredit complainant. This helps to protect the complainant from further trauma and to insure the trial is fair and just. In trials, complainants are able to use testimonial aids. There aids help prevent further trauma from happening by aiding complainants tell their emotional stories. There are many challenges faced in Sexual Assault Law.
Primarily, the attenuation doctrine serves to determine whether or not the unlawful actions directly caused the discovery of evidence. The Court ruled regarding each of the three factors of attenuation; it first decided that the issue of temporal proximity rests firmly in favor of suppression. In favor of the State, however, the Court held that the discovery of the warrant was indeed an intervening circumstance, attenuating the evidence on the grounds that the warrant was independent from the stop. The Court applied the Segura ruling, which held that the exclusionary rule does not apply “if the connection between the illegal police conduct and the discovery and seizure of the evidence is so attenuated as to dissipate the taint” (Burger) (Segura v. U.S. ). The Court contended that because the warrant was valid, existed before the stop, and was unconnected with the stop, it sufficiently attenuated the seizure of the evidence from the unlawful stop as an independent and intervening circumstance.