A suspect in a robbery was photographed at a random traffic stop some
days after the incident, and the picture was used as evidence to
convict him.
The Court of Appeal agreed the way that evidence was obtained was
unlawful. Nevertheless, they allowed its use in the trial to stand.
Now the Supreme Court has pointed out that that cannot be allowed to
stand: if certain evidence was obtained unlawfully, then it cannot be
admitted into the prosecution case, Without that crucial piece of
evidence, the conviction has been overturned. And the Crown has
announced it will not bother with a retrial, so the suspect goes free.
Why was this the right thing to do? Because the alternative leads to a
police state.
<
https://www.stuff.co.nz/nz-news/360680418/man-has-conviction-quashed-after-unlawful-photo-taken-police-officer>
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)