Slashdot Mirror
"Wiretapping" Charges May Be Oddest Ever Recorded
netbuzz writes "Guy kicks up a fuss at a Massachusetts car-repair shop, employees call the police, guy allegedly gives them a hard time, too, and they charge the fellow with a variety of expectable charges: disorderly conduct, resisting arrest ... and 'unlawful wiretapping and possessing a device for wiretapping.' The device? A digital voice recorder. Massachusetts is one of only 12 states that prohibit the recording of a conversation unless all parties to it are aware it's being recorded."
Link to source?
Illinois is one of theose twelve states. I refer to it as the "liar's law". There is no other reason I can't record a conversation in a public place except that the politicians don't want their lies revealed.
Well, maybe there are other secrets they want kept that aren't lies -- like their extramarital affairs. These 12 states, including mine, must have some incredibly immoral and hypocritical legislators.
However, I'll bet that the wiretapping charge doesn't stick. These days the cops make all sorts of spurious charges and the DA plea bargains the charges down. I'll bet he pays a few huundred bucks fine for a misdemeanor.
Oh wait, strike that -- gambling is iolegal here, too.
Free Martian Whores!
http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/news/x1467270710/Police-say-irate-car-dealership-customer-recorded-altercation
extern warranty;
main()
{
(void)warranty;
}
From http://www.articlesbase.com/national,-state,-local-articles/audio-recording-laws-in-the-us-431017.html: "The 12 states which definitely require all parties to a conversation to consent before it can be recorded are: California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Washington"
Possibly the weirdest mix of red, blue, coastal, and fly-over states.
Why can't the legal system use common sense. Simply recording something is not the same as a wiretap. A wiretap implies access to conversations through some sort of technological loophole or exploit and is usually long term. If this is to be illegal then the law should refer to unlawful recording without consent.
IMHO, it doesn't make sense that it can be illegal to record a conversation that you are part of since you have been explicitly granted access to the information (the guy is F@#$ing talking to you).
Having such a recorder might be potentially important for memory impaired people on details and for the strong oral promises of con artists later denied.
The law is Chapter 272: Section 99. Interception of wire and oral communications". Section B, paragraph 4 has the pertinent details:
The term interception means to secretly hear, secretly record, or aid another to secretly hear or secretly record the contents of any wire or oral communication through the use of any intercepting device by any person other than a person given prior authority by all parties to such communication; provided that it shall not constitute an interception for an investigative or law enforcement officer, as defined in this section, to record or transmit a wire or oral communication if the officer is a party to such communication or has been given prior authorization to record or transmit the communication by such a party and if recorded or transmitted in the course of an investigation of a designated offense as defined herein."
I could tell you, but you'd have to stop recording this conversation.
Developers: We can use your help.
If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him.
Lol, self-pwned - meant to type "exactly 24%". Nit-picking claims another victim.
The solution to this, your eminence, is to make fewer things that everyone does illegal, not to ban writing.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
12/50 = 24/100
Doesn't sound like exactly 20% to me. Closer to exactly 24% (or ~25%)
Am I missing something?
Canada? Western Europe? Iraq?
It doesn't hurt to be nice.
Actually, the laws only apply to audio, video is just fine as long as there is no microphone.
Atlas stands on the earth and carries the celestial sphere on his shoulders.
And she was still indicted. By the democrats, even.
-Clio
Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
When a cop is called to a dispute or fight, not always but often, s/he will ask each participant a few pointed, even brusque questions. [...] If you're stupid enough to react to a cop aggressively rather than addressing any wrongs later through the courts or a police complaints board then you're likely gonna get charges laid against you that otherwise might be let go.
Yes, but this is the point - you will always be less credible than a cop before a court, if word stands against word. So if they prohibit your recording of all the insults the cop hurled at you (just because he can), you have no realistic chance of redress later through the courts (whether you became aggressive or not).
Comment removed based on user account deletion