Do the chapter on reviewing the cases where one who has been wronged and violated has received remedy by the courts. We can discuss the “rules” and the “laws” and what is supposed to happen but show us the cases that shows us how those who violate these rules and laws are held accountable. !? Now that’s a video that will get you way more than 300 views.
Regarding the "Time Bomb" scenario: most people would say that violating the bomber's rights via torture in order to save lives is a good trade-off, and reasonable people can disagree on that point. However, as far as the exclusionary rule goes, I would say that saving those lives is a good trade-off for ultimately excluding the evidence. In other words, if you're willing to do the wrong thing for the right reasons then you can do the right thing for the same reasons and exclude the evidence. You can get mad about it or you can get busy finding other ways to charge the bomber that don't violate his rights. But then, I'm far from a Supreme Court justice. I'm just some slob on the internet who happened to come across this video for some reason. Tell you what though: just last week I happened to watch a lawyer successfully argue a motion to suppress because the officer failed to inform the defendant of his right to refuse a ride to a safe spot and conducted a pat search which revealed a firearm that the defendant shouldn't have had. I believe the cases cited were Tobin and Scott but don't hold me to that, I could be wrong. Anyway, I found myself cheering on defense counsel. And to hear that his motion could be stifled in the future is kinda frightening. What power are we ceding?
