|
|
|
|
|
by Tomte
3987 days ago
|
|
Germany: none at all (barring extreme cases), and that's really the overwhelming mainstream opinion of German scholars. Only defenders lament it. The idea is that much harm comes from letting people walk, just because the police did an honest mistake. Or even a willful, outrageous thing. Punishing the police officer should be enough to deter such behavior. I think that it's a reasonable stance, but I'm not invested into it much. I tend to see it as another example where we try to find a reasoned and weighted position, whereas America usually takes a very black and white approach. I don't mean that disparagingly, it's a valid position. Just an observation. |
|
Of course evidence still retains its context. An admission made under torture, for example, is likely to be considered inherently invalid because it is extremely unreliable. This is actually a bit ironic (Morissettian irony, not literal irony) if you consider that the US is engaging in systematic torture to extract bullshit intel out of terrorist suspects (whereas reliable evidence provided by a police investigation could be dismissed because of mere formalities).