If you are a Law & Order buff like me, you'll appreciate this. Today, in a 5-4 decision (Herring v. US), the US Supreme Court officially declared that in certain instances where the police have mistakenly assumed that they have the authority to arrest someone and do and then later discover their mistake, they are no longer required to simply free the arrestee. Instead, if their mistake was isolated, innocent, and not the result of "systematic error or reckless disregard of constitutional requirements," their arrest stands. If not, the typical exclusionary rules apply. This decision excites me as a Law & Order fan. Not only will the show's detectives now be able to defend erroneous arrests that they mistakenly and in good faith make, but the show's prosecutors (e.g. Alana De La Garza) will be able to fashion arguments that make all police mistakes things of serendipidous beauty. Can't wait! No more will despicable criminals get released. No more will Jack have to stare in a intensly peeved manner at opposing council's blatant disregard for his moral convictions! Law & Order has been given a gift. Hopefully it will use it responsibly. If you want to read the opinion please go to: http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/08pdf/07-513.pdf
Since we have seen almost every episode of Law and Order, and therefore can pretty quickly guess the sequence of events of the show, this truly does excite me. Hopefully the writers are as aware of the new ruling as you! Can't wait to see if this is actually incorporated.
ReplyDelete