4 ms·

Accepting Illegally obtained evidence is accepting legally planted evidence. But I think I have an even stronger argument, which is that in a system where the

Accepting Illegally obtained evidence is accepting legally planted evidence. But I think I have an even stronger argument, which is that in a system where the state can get evidence any way, is a system where everyone can be made a criminal and prosecuted at the absolute discretion of power.

nsajko 6y ago
> Accepting Illegally obtained evidence is accepting legally planted evidence. Whether evidence is illegally obtained is independent from whether it is planted. Or am I missing something? Similarly with your second point.
- conanbatt 6y ago
  Illegally searching might mean that you can look for any evidence for any reason anywhere. That means you can plant evidence anywhere, because you never need to justify how to find it or why. On the second one: you might be surprised but it is likely the vast majority of people are breaking the law. Might depend on country, but there are more laws that can even be counted in the United states: very likely you are breaking some!
  - nsajko 6y ago
    I didn't say all evidence should be admissible, on the contrary, I was even quite explicit about this, I said: "excluding otherwise valid evidence obtained illegally".
    - conanbatt 6y ago
      It's an oxymoron: the way the evidence is acquired is how to assess its validity.