Compare And Contrast Imbler Vs Pachtman

In today’s world a structured society cannot stand without the clear establishment of rules and laws that all citizens are forced to follow if there is to be any hope of peace. In these societies police fill the role of enforcer to these rules and have an obligation and duty to follow these rules to a much stricter degree because if they fail to comply with the law it leaves little hope anyone else will. Cases fill our nation’s criminal justice history with examples of law enforcement and other agencies working against the law and even breaking it in order to obtain the “greater good” and that can be seen in Imbler v. Pachtman (Samaha page 437). In this case a District attorney by the name of Richard Pachtman basically lied threw out the case and decided to pick and choose which evidence best suited his trial needs (Samaha page 437). When the truth finally came out he was protected by immunity and could only be sued in civil court (Samaha page 437). Although rouge prosecutors are rare one is enough to do serious harm to a

v. Moscatiello where police lawfully entered a warehouse and in the process discovered drugs, they left the compound as they found it, got a warrant and returned and arrested the suspect for drug possession (Samaha page 393). The court held that the unlawfully entry didn’t help find the drugs (Samaha page 393). Even though the police were in good standing it still shows the law and constitution were fundamentally violated when the police violated Moscatiello fourth amendment right to unlawful search and seizure (Samaha page 393). This case shows that the police can enter a person’s home look around find something leave and come back legally and take what they found while they were searching illegally as long as they can show they would have found it anyway (Samaha page 393). Again if those tasked with keeping the law don’t follow it what is the incentive for the average Joe to follow