Discussion Board 1.1-  This is a Discussion and not a PAPER!

Earlier in your core classes you were introduced to the exclusionary rule of evidence in the case of Mapp v. Ohio.  The exclusionary rule simply serves to regulate the admissibility of evidence obtained in violation of the Constitution. Excluding such evidence from use in criminal trials is one of the Supreme Courts solutions to a relatively toothless Bill of Rights. You may want to refresh your memory by a review of your text and by reference to your earlier work. Once you have refreshed, consider the following for discussion:

Constitutional law seminal cases of Cady v. Dombrowski, 413 U.S. 433 (1973) and United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (1984) served to modify and to clarify the original Court considerations of the limits and scope of the exclusionary rule. Following a reading of these cases and the completion of a review of this weeks reading and video assignment, take an advocacy position which argues that these exceptions dilute the original exclusionary rule to the point that it is ineffective. Your discussion should include a thoughtful discussion of the Courts original purpose for creating the rule and then a sympathetic analysis of the impact this rule (and its modifications) has had on the ability of law enforcement to actively promote public safety. Include in your discussion your analysis of how this rule has altered the course of police investigations. Finally, state whether you support the current state of the exclusionary rule or whether you would prefer a more liberal reading which would allow greater police discretion.