INFORMATION ADMISSION AND SUPPRESSION
The court system has a responsibility and a duty to implement government laws, rules, and regulations. Moreover, they also have a duty to administer justice by ensuring that the defendant can have an ample time in courts trying to prove their innocence. As a result, the judge has the power to rule out evidence gathered illegally. Thus, the judge or the jury must be well informed of the sources of evidence in courts and how it was obtained so that they can have a strong foundation to either admit or suppress a piece of evidence.
Confidentiality and privacy are one of the key aspects as to why the jury is limited to information access. Despite both the defendant and victim being aligned in the court, their privacy is paramount and whoever has the responsibility of gathering evidence should respect that (Jones, 2010). Moreover, the limitation to information is meant to curb the chances of information bias that may result in the process. In the past, there have been cases of prejudice in the verdict due to the information obtain outside the boundaries.
Related paper: Defendants and Victims
The guilt and innocence should only use the information gathered with compliance to the constitution of the country. Any information obtained through authoritarian –like tactics or intensive coercion methods is likely to be biased compared to the information obtained out of free will. Moreover, this information is likely to be based on personal feelings and judgment rather than the facts provided.
For the rule of law to excel and apply to all members of the society, there should be no exception whatsoever concerning the methods and tactics used to obtain information (Jones, 2010). Any exception can be regarded as favoritism or injustice to the members of the society and the globe in general.
Jones, C. E. (2010). A reason to doubt: The suppression of evidence and the inference of innocence. . The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, , 415-474.