This chapter discusses U.S. constitutional law surrounding the admissibility of confessions and the contexts in which the law demands exclusion and those in which a cost-benefit analysis by the court results in its inclusion. Justifications and practical effects of exclusionary rules and the public debates surrounding their use are explained. In the U.S., rights that are expressly protected by the Constitution—such as the right to remain silent, the right to be free from an unreasonable search or seizure, and the right to counsel—are weighed more heavily than the state’s need to fully explore the facts in a criminal case. The values of fairness, dignity, privacy, and liberty embodied in these rights frequently outweigh the need for reliable fact finding. In deciding how to enforce these constitutional rights, however, U.S. courts are well aware of competing interests throughout the criminal justice system.
CITATION STYLE
Turner, J. I. (2019). Regulating Interrogations and Excluding Confessions in the United States: Balancing Individual Rights and the Search for the Truth. In Ius Gentium (Vol. 74, pp. 93–129). Springer Science and Business Media B.V. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12520-2_4
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.