You are an investigator with the District Attorney’s Investigation Team for a major metropolitan area. You are one of the recently hired 16 new investigators that will be sprinkled throughout the department. All 16 of you have had little time as investigators and the Chiefs concern is that you all are properly trained in issues of the exclusionary rule to avoid problems later on during investigations. This is a political hot potato because these are supposed to be the best investigators in the jurisdiction. Your goal is to develop a 5-6 page white paper that outlines concerns for Exclusionary Rule issues.
In a white paper of 5-6 pages to be presented to the newly assigned investigators, please include responses to the bulleted issues listed below. It is critical that when you make a statement of fact in your presentation that you cite the reference you obtained the information from in the text of the paper and that the reference is included in your reference page. As always your paper will be submitted in the APA format current edition. No abstract is required as this is a short position paper but a title page, reference page, and appropriate running header with page numbers are necessary. Assignment Guidelines
Address the following in 5-6 pages: Describe the “Exclusionary Rule” and what it is meant to protect the citizens of this country from. What are the benefits of the Exclusionary Rule? Explain. Identify at least two methods of demonstrative evidence which would explain the concept of “Best Evidence”. You may use scenarios to describe the theory of Best Evidence. Explain to the newly appointed investigators the absolute adherence to avoiding any evidentiary issue that would result in a “Fruit of the Poisonous Tree” violation. Explain the ramifications and results of such a violation. Use at least two scenarios to demonstrate this issue. Explain to the new investigators the idea behind the courts displeasure with issues like the Christian Burial Speech. What might it mean in the long run to a serious case just as it did with Brewer v. Williams.
