If they did find Suzanne’s body, would it matter legally how it was found? I’m hoping you mean people might be fined for trespassing, but the FINDINGS would still be in play legally for prosecution of Suzanne’s murder. But I don’t know? Yikes!
YES, it makes who found it and how and whether or not there was a violation of BMs 4th Amendment rights. Courts weigh a number of factors in assessing whether the poison of a Constitutional violation has been purge:
o 1.
The time period between the illegality and the acquisition of the secondary evidence: The longer the period, the more likely that attenuation will be found.
o 2.
The occurrence of intervening events: The more links in the chain between the illegality and the secondary evidence, the more attenuated the connection.
o 3.
The flagrancy of the initial illegality: The more deliberate and flagrant the constitutional violation, the more reason there is to suppress all evidence that can be traced back to the illegality.
Conversely where the violation is unintentional and minor, the necessity for deterrence of future misconduct is less compelling. There are exceptions for errors made in good faith (didnt know it was an error) and theres a chance illegally obtained evidence could be brought back under:
·
Independent Source Doctrine: Permits introduction of evidence initially discovered during, or as consequence of, unlawful search, but later obtained independently from lawful activities untainted by initial illegality
o When the challenged evidence has an independent source, exclusion of such evidence would put the police in a worse position than they would have been in absent any error or violation.
·
Inevitable Discovery Exception: If the police can demonstrate that they inevitably would have discovered the evidence, without a violation of the Fourth Amendment, the exclusionary rule does not apply, and the evidence is admissible
Offending law enforcement officers should not be placed in a better position as a result of an illegality (and must therefore be deprived of the fruits of their violation); but they should not be deprived of evidence that they actually secured through an independent source, or would have inevitably secured, notwithstanding the illegality.
Ive never dealt exclusionary rule issues in practice so i cant speak so how it would play out in court but given PEs experience in LE, they know all the rules and I dont think they would do anything to hurt the admissibility of evidence in this case
