Right to Privacy Opinion Statement

I think that the Fourth and Fifth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution are necessary and important to our form of government, especially in the case of teens, however there are some inevitable problems with the system, humans being humans.  As far as the Fourth Amendment goes, on the civilian side, it is all about saying the right things to get yourself out of trouble or to make yourself look innocent, rather than just being guilty if you are guilty and innocent if you are innocent.  On the side of the police force, they can either suspect a person of being guilty but then go too far in their search and violate that person’s Fourth Amendment rights, or, on the other end of the spectrum, they may do too little and let criminals get away because of their rights.  It’s a very fine line between the freedom people have a right to and the security people need in order to live safely.  In the case of a police officer finding that someone is guilty but doing it the wrong way (i.e. by way of an unreasonable search and seizure), in the eyes of a lot of people the guilty person is somehow less guilty.  My opinion is that the hypothetical cop is clearly at fault for their mistake of law or for being contrary to the law they are supposed to be enforcing, but the criminal is guilty too, for committing a crime.  While the right to privacy (as it has been interpreted from the Fourth Amendment) is something that I agree fully that all people should have, there is something wrong with people exploiting that system to get away with a crime.  There should be some sort of safeguards that are preventative of this type of behavior; something that doesn’t take away people’s privacy, but makes the system less exploitable.  The Fifth Amendment, once again, is crucial in protecting a person from saying anything that may incriminate them, but it can easily be exploited as something a criminal can hide behind in order to skip out on committing a crime.  For someone who didn’t do anything criminal, it’s very important, and yet at the same time it can be used to the advantage of a guilty person.  Due process is critical, as it ensures the government’s decisions aren’t rushed or inaccurate, but, just like with “pleading the Fifth”, it can sometimes be the fact that the system is too slow that causes problems.  When the law can protect criminals rather than having justice be served, and can condemn the innocent rather than protecting them, there is obviously some room for improvement.  I have heard about a Public Servant - a free lawyer appointed to citizens who can’t afford one - who knew her client had raped his step-daughter; he actually told her that it had happened, but because she was his lawyer, because it was her job, she still had to defend him.  This man was clearly and unapologetically exploiting the system, and he knew it.  I don’t know about anyone else, but to me this seems like a big hole in the justice system.