Evidence Exclusion and the Epistemic Search for Truth in Criminal Trials in the United States, Canada, Nigeria and Australia

Abstract

The controversy surrounding the exclusion of evidence in criminal trials has continued with renewed vigour. At one end are those who believe that a piece of evidence should be admitted based solely on its inherent epistemic value without reference to any other external considerations.

At the other end are those who contend that criminal justice systems are meant to serve many societal ideals of which the search for truth is only one, and that criminal trials must be designed to ensure balanced resolutions of all conflicting interests. Naturally, legal systems across the world
exemplify these divergencies with many variations along the spectrum regarding the scope of the exclusionary powers of the fact finder or court and the justifications for such powers. This article sets out to analyse the illegally or improperly obtained evidence exclusion regimes in the United States, Canada, Nigeria and Australia, and their respective levels of commitment to the search for truth. This article provides an insightful frame of comparative reference for stakeholders in these jurisdictions.

Keywords: Exclusion of Evidence, Admission of Evidence, Admissibility of Evidence, Illegally Obtained Evidence, Improperly Obtained Evidence, Wrongly Obtained Evidence, United States (US,USA), Canada, Nigeria, Australia

JEL Classification: K10,K14, K19, K40, K41, K49