Document Type


Publication Date



This article gives a brief review of the types of exclusionary rules articulated in modern codes, constitutions, and jurisprudence, and explores how these rules are interpreted when excluding the derivative “fruits” of constitutional violations of the right to silence and human dignity during police interrogations and the right to privacy in one’s home and confidential communications. It shows, whether a country begins with a seemingly airtight categorical exclusionary rule for serious constitutional violations, or allows judges great discretion in deciding whether to use fruits of unconstitutional police behavior, the search for truth has largely triumphed over constitutional rights. As a result, we can expect that law enforcement officials will continue to intentionally short-cut statutory and constitutional procedures either due to convenience or the lack of legal alternatives, and that courts will continue to wink at such conduct in their pursuit of “truth,” i.e., criminal convictions.