Suppose Barry's wife challenged the legality of the admitted evidence showing that Lynette paid Barry. If Barry's wife claimed her bank account was private and the police had no right to look into it, why couldn't she have the bank account evidence suppressed? a. She didn't have the fundamental right b. She had no justification c. She wouldn't have standing to do so d. She wouldn't have jurisdiction to do so

Question

Mikaela Harmon

Law

4 January, 14:52

Suppose Barry's wife challenged the legality of the admitted evidence showing that Lynette paid Barry. If Barry's wife claimed her bank account was private and the police had no right to look into it, why couldn't she have the bank account evidence suppressed? a. She didn't have the fundamental right b. She had no justification c. She wouldn't have standing to do so d. She wouldn't have jurisdiction to do so

+3

Answers (1)

Know the Answer?

Diamond Whitaker · Answer 1

c. She wouldn't have standing to do so

Explanation:

Barry's wife challenged the legality of the admitted evidence showing that Lynette paid Barry. She claimed her bank account was private and the police had no right to look into it. She couldn't have the bank account evidence suppressed because she doesn't have the standing to do so.

This is because though Banks have to protect personal and banking related information they are usually made available for Government agencies under special circumstances.