Answer :
Final answer:
The answer is that reasonable suspicion is not a legitimate source of probable cause. Probable cause requires a higher standard of evidence than reasonable suspicion, which is used for less intrusive actions like stops and frisks. Personal observation, evidence, and informants can all contribute to establishing probable cause.
Explanation:
Understanding Probable Cause
In the context of law enforcement, probable cause refers to the reasonable belief that a crime has been committed or that certain property is connected to a crime. Probable cause is a critical standard that law enforcement must meet to obtain a search warrant or to make an arrest.
Among the options given, reasonable suspicion is not considered a legitimate source of probable cause. Reasonable suspicion involves a belief that a person may be involved in criminal activity based on specific and articulable facts. It is a lower standard than probable cause, which requires more evidence to warrant actions such as searches or arrests.
Here’s a brief overview of each option:
- Personal observation: This can establish probable cause when an officer witnesses a crime or suspicious behavior directly.
- Reasonable suspicion: This standard does not meet the requirements for probable cause on its own, as it is less stringent.
- Evidence: Any physical evidence or testimony that links a suspect to a crime can be used to establish probable cause.
- Informants: Information provided by informants can contribute to probable cause, particularly if it is corroborated by other evidence.
In summary, while personal observation, evidence, and informants can all support the establishment of probable cause, reasonable suspicion does not meet that threshold.
Learn more about probable cause here:
https://brainly.com/question/8107016
