Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Psalm 144

In the event of an illegal act itself? One could argue it for days, but no matter—the perv has been outed and will rightly be shunned.


24 posted on 10/06/2011 11:13:05 PM PDT by OCCASparky (Steely-eyed killer of the deep.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]


To: OCCASparky

“In the event of an illegal act itself?”

It depends on who did the illegal act. For the Exclusionary Rule and so on to apply, “illegally seized” means specifically that a government actor or proxy violated the law to obtain the evidence, not that the evidence was obtained in the course of a crime by a private citizen.

All of this is rooted in court decisions on the workings of the Fourth Amendment, which puts a curb on -government- actions. It was not even applied to the states until 1961, but only to the US government. It does not apply to private persons.


27 posted on 10/06/2011 11:21:42 PM PDT by Psalm 144 (Voodoo Republicans: Don't read their lips - watch their hands.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson