Regulating covert policing methods: From reactive to proactive models of admissibility
In this paper I will explore (a) how the courts, through their judicial discretion to exclude evidence and procedural rules, regulate the admission of evidence, and (b) the impact (if any) that court rulings have on investigative practices. Focusing on a range of examples from the field of covert investigation (including controlled operations and covert interviewing), this paper will explore the effectiveness of this model of judicial review. The paper explores whether, in lieu of post hoc judicial review, there are other regulatory models that could be employed proactively to determine the admissibility of evidence in cases where the legality and ethics of investigative methods are contestable.
The Social Implications of Covert Policing
Law and Legal Studies not elsewhere classified