benefits of the exclusionary rule
They argue that: 1  exclusion is costly inasmuch as it requires freeing guilty offenders; 2  that the rule does nothing for innocent victims of police misconduct, who have no evidence of crime to be suppressed; 3  that the rule's deterrent benefits are, as an empirical matter, doubtful; that, if the rule does deter, it may overdeter by causing the police not to engage in searches that, although close to the line of illegality, are not over that line; that the tort remedy might be made more effective by plausible reforms;