I’ve read sentencing remarks on other cases where, although the initial evidence would have been struck for whatever reason, the weight of evidence found upon subsequent searches during the investigation resulted in the case still going to trial and a guilty verdict being handed down.

Some of those cases have gone to appeal and been reversed by higher courts.

Such is the nature of an adversarial court system predicated upon the rule of law.

We, as a society, have, and continue to, make these trade offs.

Having been ground through the court system for drug trafficking, and been lucky enough to have the evidence struck at pre-trial conference due to a very similar case where the defendant was found guilty but the decision later reversed on appeal due to illegal police search...

I, personally, reserve my judgement on all cases that make it to trial, and prefer to read about them as a curiosity.

Edited to add: I strongly support the idea that law enforcement shouldn’t be searching people’s homes illegally, and that anything found as a result of such a search should be in admissible.

We need strong privacy protections, and if that means some crime goes under reported... well, so be it.