The Book Marketing Network

For book/ebook authors, publishers, & self-publishers

In my new book Compulsion, protagonist Emily Stone takes extensive measures to gather surveillance evidence against some of the worst criminals on our streets. She hides in her truck, the woods, or any other available cover to record the photographs and videos that will bring yet another pedophile, rapist, or murderer to justice. However, Emily is always walking a very fine line. As anyone who has a background in criminal justice or even has watched detective programs on television knows, a defense attorney is going to make every effort to prove that the gathered evidence is inadmissible in court. What guideline does Emily Stone and every member of law enforcement use in determining how evidence can be gathered? It all starts with the Fourth Amendment to our Constitution.

The Fourth Amendment is written as follows: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
This particular Amendment stemmed directly from King George’s abuse of the “writ of assistance,” which served as general search warrants that never expired, in the days leading up to the American Revolution. Since its inclusion in our Bill of Rights, there have been several landmark Supreme Court cases that have refined the meaning and scope of these important words. The Fourth Amendment has been ruled to apply both to the actions of federal and state governments, and the courts have also enforced the need for law enforcement to prove probable cause based on specific information before a search can be approved by a judge. There are instances, though, in which warrants are not needed. If a police officer observes unusual behavior, he has the right to perform a “stop and frisk” maneuver on the suspect. With these rulings in place, there are still many areas of question concerning the extent to which a person’s privacy should be enforced.
Emily Stone manages to capture her evidence from public locations. In addition, the Fourth Amendment protects citizens from searches by the government, not private citizens. So, Emily should feel confident that all of her collected information would be admissible in court. It still would be interesting to see the efforts that a lawyer would make to challenge her important work.
Do you have a legal background? If so, I would love to read your reaction to Compulsion. What arguments could you make for and against Emily Stone’s vigilante methods?

Views: 12

Comment

You need to be a member of The Book Marketing Network to add comments!

Join The Book Marketing Network

© 2024   Created by John Kremer.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service