|
Is it legal to record a person's conversation without his/her knowledge.
I was told that it was or was not depending upon the state.
Allegedly it's true in NY where it is OK to record what someone says even if
the recording is done surreptitiously.
Thanks.
|
| |
| |
On Apr 16, 6:58 am, "Charles Manoras" <inco...@cette.adresse> wrote:
Is it legal to record a person's conversation without his/her knowledge.
"That depends."
I was told that it was or was not depending upon the state.
You were told correctly. However, all states AFAIK forbid a non-party
to a conversation to surreptitiously record what 2 or more other
people are saying -- that is called "electronic eavesdropping" or,
sometimes, "wiretapping." The government can do so, in limited
circumstances, to detect crime, but only after getting a warrant from
a Court upon a showing of a particularized need (at least, that was
the law until the Bushies got ahold of it) to avoid general fishing
expeditions that would trample on individuals' privacy rights.
If it is a participant in the conversation that is doing the
recording, some states require the consent of only one party to a
conversation, which of course means that the party doing the recording
is the only one who needs to consent, allowing him to keep the fact
that they are being recorded secret from the other participants.
Other states require the consent of both, or all, participating
parties before their conversation can be recorded.
Allegedly it's true in NY where it is OK to record what someone says even if
the recording is done surreptitiously.
You'll have to ask a NY lawyer, I don't know.
MD is a two-party-consent state; surreptitious recording, even of a
conversation in which one is participating, is a crime here. That's
why my neighbor Linda Tripp got in trouble with the local prosecutor
for secretly recording her tell-all conversations with her friend
Monica Lewinsky a few years back.
--
This posting is for discussion purposes, not professional advice.
Anything you post on this Newsgroup is public information.
I am not your lawyer, and you are not my client in any specific legal
matter.
For confidential professional advice, consult your own lawyer in a
private communication.
Mike Jacobs
LAW OFFICE OF W. MICHAEL JACOBS
10440 Little Patuxent Pkwy #300
Columbia, MD 21044
(tel) 410-740-5685 (fax) 410-740-4300
|
| |
| |
In article <5umb04d4fsigtfad335tngp7kdua88pfr3@4ax.com>,
"Charles Manoras" <inconnu@cette.adresse> wrote:
Is it legal to record a person's conversation without his/her knowledge.
What kind of conversation? A telephone conversation? A personal
conversation between you and the person. A conversation between others
that you are not a party to? In a private or public place?
The laws and/or court decisions can depend on the details.
I was told that it was or was not depending upon the state.
Correct.
Allegedly it's true in NY where it is OK to record what someone says even if
the recording is done surreptitiously.
Maybe - maybe not. The laws covering recording telephone conversations
and in person conversations are not necessarily the same.
--
-Ernie-
|
| |
| |
In article <5umb04d4fsigtfad335tngp7kdua88pfr3@4ax.com>,
Charles Manoras <inconnu@cette.adresse> wrote:
Is it legal to record a person's conversation without his/her knowledge.
I was told that it was or was not depending upon the state.
Allegedly it's true in NY where it is OK to record what someone says even if
the recording is done surreptitiously.
Under federal law, it's permitted to record a conversation if you're a
participant. You are not required to be blatant about it. Some
states are more restrictive.
Seth
|
| |
| |
In article <5umb04d4fsigtfad335tngp7kdua88pfr3@4ax.com>,
Charles Manoras <inconnu@cette.adresse> wrote:
Is it legal to record a person's conversation without his/her knowledge.
"It depends." "who","when", "where", "why", and "how" all come into play.
Relevant statues will -probably- be found using one or more of the following
keywords for searching:
wire-tapping
eaves-dropping
surreptitious recording
I was told that it was or was not depending upon the state.
I'm sure details vary _wildly_ by state.
Consider the inconsistencies on recording telephone conversations in the various
States. Let alone the State of Confusion. <grin>
At a minimum there are going to be major differences depending on whether or
not the person making the recording is a participant in the conversation.
i.e., is it a 'secret' recording of what people say to the recorder, or is it
recording via a 'bug' that's been planted somewhere.
And, of course, a court order _authorizing_ the recording 'unbeknownst to'
the participants does trump whatever statute says on the matter. :)
Allegedly it's true in NY where it is OK to record what someone says even if
the recording is done surreptitiously.
*IF* you believe the TV show "Law & Order", in NY it hinges on whether the
party (or parties) recorded had any "expectation of privacy". In the story
line, two suspects were recorded talking in the back of a squad car, but the
back door of the car was wide open. The recording was, according to the show
plot-line, admissible evidence.
|
| |
| |
On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 06:58:40 -0400, "Charles Manoras"
<inconnu@cette.adresse> wrote:
Is it legal to record a person's conversation without his/her knowledge.
It depends.
I was told that it was or was not depending upon the state.
True.
Allegedly it's true in NY where it is OK to record what someone says even if
the recording is done surreptitiously.
Only if you are one of the parties to the conversation.
Thanks.
You might want to try
http://www.rcfp.org/taping/
for more information....
T.
|
| |
| |
Charles Manoras wrote:
Is it legal to record a person's conversation without his/her knowledge.
I was told that it was or was not depending upon the state.
Andy writes:
You were informed correctly.
If you google with keywords like " state illegal recording " you will
probly
find the websites which list the requirements of each state on this
issue. I have done this several times, and the list is so easy to
find
with google that I haven't even bothered to bookmark it.
Andy in Eureka, Texas
|
| |
| |
In article <n0ge045p1dc3ud8mbimk0acq4rtsi89odp@4ax.com>,
Mike Jacobs <mjacobslaw@gmail.com> wrote:
If it is a participant in the conversation that is doing the
recording, some states require the consent of only one party to a
conversation, which of course means that the party doing the recording
is the only one who needs to consent, allowing him to keep the fact
that they are being recorded secret from the other participants.
Then there's the issue of defining "participant".
Joe and Jane are having an excited discussion. Clearly, they're
participants. Jim is standing next to them, unsuccessfully attempting
to get a word in edgewise. Is Jim a participant? John is also
standing there, listening with fascination, not attempting to speak.
Is John a participant? Mike is also standing there, with earphones in
and dancing in place to music only he can hear. Is Mike a
participant?
A couple of feet away (the weather is bad, and they're all in a bus
shelter) Alice and Bob are having a conversation. A recording of that
is made by Alice, and the recorder also picks up Joe and Jane's
conversation. Is Alice a participant in that one?
Seth
|
| |
| |
On Apr 18, 8:16 am, se...@panix.com (Seth) wrote:
Then there's the issue of defining "participant".
<examples snipped>
Clearly, all of Seth's examples are highly fact-specific and also law-
specific to the particular jurisdiction where the event occurs, so the
answer to all of them is, "it depends."
No one can give a definitive answer of whether you are safe to make a
recording or not, in the abstract, or based on a skeletal set of
hypothetical facts. Brother Seth is very good at constructing
hypotheticals, but the bottom line always is, if you're even thinking
of doing something that could result in legal liability, get advice of
counsel first (and follow it, if he advises you not to do it).
--
This posting is for discussion purposes, not professional advice.
Anything you post on this Newsgroup is public information.
I am not your lawyer, and you are not my client in any specific legal
matter.
For confidential professional advice, consult your own lawyer in a
private communication.
Mike Jacobs
LAW OFFICE OF W. MICHAEL JACOBS
10440 Little Patuxent Pkwy #300
Columbia, MD 21044
(tel) 410-740-5685 (fax) 410-740-4300
|
| |
| |
|
