[kennyo]

A trial is meant to bring out the truth. Like most conservatives I am very skeptical about the exclusionary rule, which has the effect of excluding the jury from knowing the truth. If you have not committed a crime, real evidence will not lead to your conviction. The best way to avoid conviction for a crime is not to commit a crime.

.And that holds for police officers,too.Don't violate anyone's rights and you won't have to "do the time".I too am skeptical of the exclusionary rule,and believe one way to solve that problem would be to hold officers that obtain evidence illegally be held to answer personally for it,either criminally,civilly,or both.

[Lucius Cornelius Sulla]

I too am skeptical of the exclusionary rule,and believe one way to solve that problem would be to hold officers that obtain evidence illegally be held to answer personally for it,either criminally,civilly,or both.

I agree with this totally, and would hope that this is already the case, if not frequently enforced. This would also mean that the 'Blue Wall of Silence' would be held to be a criminal conspiracy to obstruct justice, and all relevant evidence, in all criminal cases, would be admissible.