Viktor Bérces: Evidence in Criminal Proceedings
›
Chapter V. The Anglo-Saxon system of evidence today
›
5.3. Characteristics of the US evidence system
›
5.3.4. Prohibitions on evidence

5.3.4. Prohibitions on evidence

Jegyzet elhelyezéséhez, kérjük, lépj be.!

The United States of America has the most extensive body of rules of law on prohibitions on evidence worldwide. This is mainly due to the importance of lay fact-finding and its prestige within the federal system. The continent’s criminal procedural law therefore places particular emphasis on the continuous review of the rules of evidence, and law schools offer special courses on the principles underlying these standards.

Jegyzet elhelyezéséhez, kérjük, lépj be.!

As a preliminary point, I would like to note that US evidentiary law, as a general rule, only interprets these norms in relation to authorities or courts. In the absence of a legal provision, evidence thus obtained by third parties (e.g. the victim) should not be excluded from the scope of evidence.1 The primary reason for this view is that the individual is essentially the most defenceless against the official organs of state power. This is coupled with a distrust of the government, since the basic citizen’s view is that the executive may use the whole judicial system to further its own ends and interests. The purpose of these prohibitory rules is to compensate for this imbalance of power, and from this point of view, the fact that they sometimes impede effective evidence can be considered secondary.

5.3.4.1. Grounds for excluding illegally obtained evidence

5.3.4.2. Interpreting the primary exclusion rules from a case law perspective

5.3.4.3. Interpretation of the secondary exclusion rules in a case-law approach

1 Embregets, M. C. D.: Similarities and Differences: the Operation of the Exclusionary rule in the US, Germany and Netherlands. In C. M. Breur – J. F. Nijboer – J. M. Reijntjes (ed.): New Trend in Criminal Investigation and Evidence II, Intersentia. Antwerp–Groningen–Oxford, 2000. 219-224. In Gácsi (2015) ibid. 32.
chevron_left
chevron_right
Tartalomjegyzék navigate_next
Keresés a kiadványban navigate_next
A kereséshez, kérjük, lépj be!
Könyvjelzőim navigate_next
A könyvjelzők használatához
be kell jelentkezned.
Jegyzeteim navigate_next
Jegyzetek létrehozásához
be kell jelentkezned.
    Kiemeléseim navigate_next
    Mutasd a szövegben:
    Szűrés:
    Kiemelések létrehozásához
    MeRSZ+ előfizetés szükséges.
      Útmutató elindítása
      delete
      Kivonat
      fullscreenclose
      printsave