AIPOTA SEARCH AND SEIZURE LAW
The nation of Aipota Search and Seizure Policy is the same as here in the United States as guaranteed in our 4th Amendment. It shall include 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. Included in this policy is an accountability factor directed at law enforcement officers for misconduct. Law enforcement is to be held accountable to a jury which consists of 12 Jurors, 6 are peers and 6 are civilian. Conviction will come at 2/3 majority. The only circumstance for unlawfully breaking the 4th Amendment is if there is an immediate threat to life.
I like the idea of holding officers accountable for their actions regarding the 4th amendment. I hope there is a direct distinction between a mistake and intention. The current system does a great job of acquitting individuals on ill gotten evidence. Also, I would question a jury made up of 6 officers and 6 civilians. A 2/3 majority vote would be almost impossible to get under these circumstances.....but, maybe that's the genius in the law, it takes something truly obvious to be convicted. Also, I would look to re-phrase the final sentence. I would restate it as a lawful circumstance to circumvent the 4th amendment. Some others would include these: See section 5
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution.