Pixiq

pretty sure the supreme court has ruled on this, or at least a state supreme court.

The freakin cops are allowed (in certain states) to record phone calls that they make to suspects.

I bet there have been wiretapping arrests made in those states too.

I hate one sided legislation.

I’m so glad my state (Oklahoma) is a single party consent state. I’ve filed 4 complaints against police officers over the years and 3 were found in my favor – Why? Simple, those three I had audio and/or video evidence of the police harassing me or others. If I would have lived in a 2 party consent state then simply gathering evidence would have led to my arrest.

Samples:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TgcAcz1smok

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSwCyrSj_Mw
Brian Bates´s last blog ..JohnTV.com is now streaming LIVE online!

For your information only:

http://www.aapsonline.org/judicial/telephone.htm

The scary thing about this article is they say that certain individuals have been prosecuted for having hidden cameras in places like Massachusetts and other anti wire tapping state areas. They say that since a microphone or a camera was hidden in clothing that it fell under that law, even though the recordings were in public areas where nobody had an expectation of privacy. The judges who are ruling against individuals who have hidden mics and cams in public areas seem to be the most evil enemies of the state as they are slowly changing and eroding the 1st amendment.

So, I have to assume that the LEOs who made these arrests don’t use dash mounted cameras without consent of the people they video, right?

Well, it’s like anything else. The Cops want it both ways.. with everything pointing in their direction! All for them and none for us.

Rail Car Fan

This is happening to me right now. See and .
Eli Damon´s last blog ..Response to Racerx’s Comment

Ok, so I’m quoting from Andrew Kantor’s publication entitled:

Legal Rights of Photographers

A photographer is not trespassing, even on private property, if such a place is open to the public. There is no need to get specific permission to enter any facility that is open to the public, including office buildings, malls,
banks, etc. Of course, that permission can be revoked. Photographers can be asked to stop shooting or to leave, but are not at that point trespassing unless they refuse to comply.

So, do I understand that one can enter a public place, point a camera, be asked not to shoot pictures, or to stop shooting pictures, or to leave, be legitimate, BUT, if they do not stop shooting, and refuse to comply, however, if asked to leave and they reuse to comply, they are trespassing?

Joe: You might be right but you are missing the point. (1) No one is being charged with trespassing; they’re being charged with wiretapping, which is VERY different. (2) Wiretapping laws pertain only to recording of voices, not images, and the recording must be done secretly to qualify as wiretapping. Permission to record is irrelevant.