Author Question: The fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine was developed to apply the exclusionary rule to evidence ... (Read 58 times)

magmichele12 · **on:** Aug 16, 2018

The fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine was developed to apply the exclusionary rule to evidence obtained based on illegally obtained primary evidence. Is this a good rule? Why?

What will be an ideal response?

Question 2

Determining when the connection between an illegal arrest and a confession has been broken is difficult. Discuss the issues involved in determining when the connection has been broken. Why is it difficult to determine?

What will be an ideal response?

juwms · **Reply #1 on:** Aug 16, 2018

Answer to Question 1

The fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine is a good rule. It discourages police officers
from ignoring a suspect's constitutional rights. If there was no fruit of the poisonous
tree doctrine, officers would not worry about the initial illegality, because they could
use the later results of that illegal behavior. Knowing that subsequent evidence may
be excluded encourages police to observe constitutional rights at the beginning.

Answer to Question 2

Determining when the connection is broken between an illegal arrest and a
confession requires a determination of whether the defendant exercised free will in
making the confession, with such free will not coerced by the illegal arrest.
Determining what is in someone's mind is difficult.