Respuesta :

holesstanham

In the case Mapp v. Ohio (1961), the United States Supreme Court declared that evidence that had been obtained illegally (in violation of the Fourth Amendment) could not be used in criminal law persecutions, whether at the state or federal level.

Justice Clark explained why it is so important to disregard illegally obtained evidence. He argues that even if the criminal were to go free because of it, the citizens would be sure that the court followed the law, and that it is the law which is setting him free. Nothing would damage the citizens' trust more than knowing the law is not respected. Therefore, the government cannot fail to observe the law, or bend it to its advantage.



ogorwyne

According to the Judge it is better to let the criminal go free instead of bending the law because this may cause citizens to lose trust in the government.

What was the verdict of the Justice?

According to the Justice, it is better to let the criminal go free than for the government to act in ways that are not honorable because they want evidence.

According to him, if this is done, the laws in the country would be questioned and people would want to break them.

Read more on Justice Clark here: https://brainly.com/question/402748

Otras preguntas