For my story, I want a cop to stumble upon a 'blood in', while on duty. That's where the gang tests a new recruit to see if he/she has what it takes to get in, by spilling the blood of another person. While driving or perhaps walking while on duty, he glances into a secluded alleyway in the distance, and sees two men frisk another man for a wire and weapons. This makes him suspicious so he decides to spy on them and follow them to see where they are going. He follows them very discretely to a building, which they go inside. He looks around the building and finds a small window where, he can see into the basement, partially. He looks around in the small window and sees the kidnapped hostage, in the corner of the room. So he calls for back up. The villains have a police radio scanner, and they hear the call go out, so they escape, but cannot make it with the hostage, and leave her behind. The cop saves her, and manages to arrest one of them, while the others get away. However, the way he discovered the crime and initiated the bust... will it be admissible in court? In my research, I found out that in order for an officer to establish probable cause, the probable cause has to be immediately apparent. That is, it has to be in plain view immediately. However, this cop snooped around until he finds a small basement window. Cause naturally the villains are not going to do commit a blood in, in front of a big window in plain view for anyone to see. So does the cop have probable cause by seeing someone be frisked for a wire, in order to snoop around someone's property, till he finds the window? Or is does this not count as immediately apparent probable cause and the cop's testimony cannot be used in court, as a result, thereby the kidnapping suspect goes free?