Edit: The title should say “episode” rather than evidence.
It’s a dumb question but a fun one so someone has to ask it. Mystery Inc never gets search warrants and has no legal training whatsoever. If they go into a place to investigate a mystery, catch a guy and get him to confess to his nefarious schemes - picking up clues along the way - would any of the stuff they found be admissible in a court of law or are the bad guys always destined to get away?
In some countries, audio call records are entirely illegal. You cannot record a call.
In some countries, you can record a call, as long as both parties, consent to the call being recorded. I.e. No secrert/discreet call records.
In some countries, you can discretely record calls and this is permissible in the court as evidence.
What is the case for Oman?
I know courts generally cannot accept illegally obtained evidence. But let’s say for example, a person is caught murdering somebody on video, but the video was illegally obtained through a person illegally and unconsentually spying on that murderer? Would this illegal video tape be dismissed? Or do courts have the ability to accept some illegal evidence, if so under what conditions?
Suppose a defendant sought a pardon for "any crimes they may have committed between 2019 and 2021" from a Governor, and was rejected.
Admissible at trial?
Ok, really confused.
"Evidence of character to prove the conduct of a person in the litigated event is generally not admissible in a civil case. Fed. R. Evid. 404(a). Circumstantial use of prior behavior patterns for the purpose of drawing the inference that, at the time and place in question, the actor probably acted in accord with her prior behavior pattern is thus not permitted."
However, from a different source...
"Common Plan or Scheme. Courts sometimes admit 404(b) evidence to show the defendant’s common plan or scheme to engage in the charged conduct. See, e.g, State v. Twitty, _ N.C. App. _, 710 S.E.2d 421, 424-25 (2011) (where the defendant was charged with obtaining property by false pretenses after he lied to church members to gain sympathy and collect funds, no abuse of discretion to admit 404(b) evidence that the defendant engaged in the same behavior at other churches to show common plan or scheme)."
Or another example, in the Bill Cosby trial, his prior rapes were admissible to show common plan or scheme.
I do not understand how to reconcile these two concepts. They sound identical to me.
Say that a private citizen unaffiliated with the police illegally obtains evidence of a felony. E.g. they secretly plant cameras in a person's home and record this person committing a murder. The private citizen then saves the video to a flash drive and mails it to the police station with a fake return address.
Though the evidence was obtained through illegal means there was no wrongdoing on the part of law enforcement. Could this evidence be used in a court of law?
Alternatively say that the private citizen uploaded the video to a dark web site and sold it. Then that site was discovered and all its data seized by law enforcement, including the incriminating video. The video has now come into the possession of law enforcement by executing a warrant, though the initial recording was still illegal. Could the video be used to prosecute the murderer?
To our favorite security guard who changed careers into a police officer to writing his own Copera. That single line has been stuck in my head for days! And it randomly pops back up out of nowhere!
Edit: His name is Officer Cackowski! I couldn’t remember it, but a poster filled me in.
If I break into my neighbors house and secretly put tiny cameras that I wifi to my house, illegally, and catch my neighbor killing someone on that video, can I then go to the cops, admit my crime and accept my jail time, but also use that video evidence to convict the neighbor?
This is totally hypothetical.
Say someone had a twin and their twin breaks into a building and the only way to prove it would be the CCTV. How would they know which twin to put away (assuming neither of them admitted to it).
I don't have a twin, but I suddenly thought about this on my jog.
Edit:Assuming England in this case
Lets say I record a video of me talking to 2 other guys, one of the guys gets up and shoots the third guy and then blames me. Through a series of unfortunate events it looks like all the evidence points towards me doing it.
But wait! I have an illegally recorded video, didn't tell them I was recording in a 2-party state, that shows I didn't do it, I was just sitting there the whole time!
So can I use that in my case? Can this illegally obtained video be used to prosecute the guy who actually did it?
I'm in a lengthy custody battle that involves a Bill of Review and a Modification. I posted before about how my ex basically tricked me into giving him custody. I have a recording of him admitting he tricked me and he knew I would never willingly give him custody and he proceeds to say exactly what him and his attorney did by ignoring the changes I requested etc. He was in Belgium on active duty at the time of the phone call. I was in Texas. He didn't know the conversation was being recorded.
NY - I've been tracking all the racial nicknames and massive workloads she gives me, this is stark in contrast to the work she gives to co-workers she likes.
If I make a federal or state level complaint about this (after I leave the job), can the email memos prove my case? This, in addition to paperwork from the day showing how my workload was much higher in distribution compared to other new associates.
So, Pete finds out about Dick Whitman (Drapers former persona) from opening up his mail. If Pete goes to the authorities with this information, would the evidence that was in the box be able to be used against Don/Dick since it was discovered with illegal means (Opening someone else's mail)?
For the show, it's 1960's New York, but it would also be interesting if there is a difference between then and now to know the difference.
If evidence proves that someone is innocent or guilty, what is the reasoning behind making it inadmissible if it is obtained illegally?
