According to Osborn, (2000), the exclusionary rule is used as a tool to protect the fourth amendment which protects individuals from unnecessary search. The police officers are to work within the law to bring forth a case against you. An individual’s is not supposed to be guilty until proven so by a court of law. At this point we find that the burden of proof is left to the government and not the public.
Thirdly, when we go into our courts, not every person who does commit a crime is guilty. Many are the people who are in jail having done no mistakes. With this rule in place, the prosecutors will have to work harder in ruling out a case. However, irrespective of having the above pros, it is bound to have the following disadvantages; it is not part of the United States constitution even if it is used to strengthen the fourth amendment.
Giving more emphasis on this rule can make so many guilty individuals going scot free. Wolf, (1963), the “good faith” exemption in one way or another preserves the integrity of the judicial system. The exemption is in a way deterring the police misconduct putting forward a propitious time for the individuals concerned with the same. Another exemption that I feel it is way up in promoting judicial professionalism is the one that prohibits the government of the United States from collecting any information which in one way or the other violates the constitution.
On the other hand, the “fruit of the poisonous tree” is also a good exemption that disqualifies any information gotten from any unreasonable seizure or search by Oaks, (1970). Police officers have to acquire a search warrant in order to undertake any search. Putting more concern on the fruits of the poisonous tree is more recommendable since many are the officers who engage in violent activities in the name they are searching for evidence. Any information collected against the constitution will in a way weaken the constitution and deem it as unnecessary.
Oaks, D. H. (1970). Studying the exclusionary rule in search and seizure. The University of Chicago Law Review, 37(4), 665-757.
Osborn, D. (2000). Suppressing the truth: judicial exclusion of illegally obtained evidence in the United States, Canada, England and Australia. Elaw Journal, (Murdoch University Electronic Journal), 1(4).
Wolf, P. H. (1963). Survey of the Expanded Exclusionary Rule. Geo. Wash. L. Rev., 32, 193.

Published by Andrew Author at Best term paper site, paper writing service, and Dissertation writing service.