Use of Audio/Video recorders - Page 2
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20

Thread: Use of Audio/Video recorders

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Close to Reading, PA
    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony_I_Am View Post
    These following states require the consent of all the parties being recorded for it to be legal. If your state is not listed here than you can legally record in public without the consent of the other parties.

    New Hampshire

    All the others

    Source: "Can We Tape?"
    My state (Pennsylvania) is listed here, and what you say isn't accurate. All parties must be informed if there is no reasonable expectation of privacy. In public, you have no reasonable expectation of privacy, so you can record audio and video, especially if the other party knows about it.

    There was a case in a place called Carlisle, PA where the passenger of a car was recording a cop during a traffic stop. He was arrested, and the charges were eventually dropped. The police later stated that a person has the right to record police since police have the right to record citizens.

    Washington had a similar issue. A man recorded a police chief as the chief sat in his car talking to dispatchers and was arrested for the same type of law. It went to federal court, and here is a quote from that case "Wardlaw (the judge) also held that Nelson (the police chief) had no reasonable expectation of privacy because he knowingly exposed his conversation to the public. " Here's a link: NMU (11/5/2004): Filming police officer not invasion of privacy

    So yes, while you risk arrest, it likely won't hold and you would then be able to sue for violations of 1st and 4th amendment rights, among others. If the officer has no reasonable expectation of privacy, and considering that he is an on-duty public officer doing public things, you can audio and video record without permission in any state.

  3. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Yuma, AZ
    Yes, it would be nice to have a recording device in those rare instances. Unfortunately, the cost and upkeep is simply not feasible for me. However, I know several users on the various speed radar forums that have these in numbers. I suppose it’s all about priorities and favorite past-times. I seem to be one hobby short of the poorhouse so I’ll just stick to guns n’ roses and lay low.
    “Monsters are real and so are ghosts. They live inside of us, and sometimes they win.”
    ~ Stephen King

  4. #13
    I carry a small Olympus digital recorder everywhere I go and I have it running all day. (it will record about 260 hours) If nothing happens I just erase it and go again tomorrow. I can trim the recording and burn it to CD with my computer if I need to save something.
    Kershaw Shallot 1840, Kel-Tec P-3at, Kel-Tec PF-9, Glock 17, Glock 19, Glock 26, Kel-Tec SUB-2000 9mm (Glock 17 mag compatible), Maverick Arms 88 Security 8-shot 12 gauge.

  5. First of all I want to say Hello from New Hampshire. Looks like you guys have a nice forum here. I have had my CCW ( we just call it a pistol permit ) for ten years now. Never had to pay a dime to exercise my 2nd Ammendment right. As for this topic. From personal experience I think this would be a great idea. There are way too many cowboys out there that do not give a hoot about your rights as a citizen. Don't get me wrong. One of my brothers has been a city cop for 20yrs, another has been a part time city cop for 25 yrs, another brother has been a Corrections officer for 10 yrs as I was also. But , as most of us know, there are those that give all a bad name. I can personally tell at least three stories that I was minding my own and was unduly harassed by local cops. Am I a criminal because I "accidentally " left the recorder on? I find it hard for anyone to expect privacy when two people are talking along side the road.

  6. #15
    Long story I won't bore you with, but a case I worked and several conversations were recorded because some State Rep's (not law enforcement) were way out of line and destroying some people's lives in the process. So, when in Court, and after they had "told their story" on the events, findings, recommendations, etc. to the Court, the atty asked them if they had ever threatened X, Y, Z, etc... if they didn't comply with what they wanted, and asked if have they ever said this or that.... and on and on... to which they adamantly denied ever doing. I mean , who could even suggest such a thing ?

    Then the attorney asked if they would like to change any of their testimony and if it was all accurate. They had all stated "of course it was". After questioning the last one of them, the attorney pulled out 12 double sided tapes .... informed the present witness of what perjury was and the penalities, and that he would submit them for evidence as well as the transcripts of them, with certain "highlights" which proved that they all actually did ALL of the above and lied about it all on the stand. This person retracted their statements immediately, fessed up and told how the DA, a State worker and them had conspired.... lied, made up stories, threatened folks if they didn't "go along", etc. One person they had been threatening to make life tough for was a Doctor, if they didn't testify and say what they wanted them to in certain court cases. The Doctor, with our evidence, would have lost their license if they did not tell the truth and come clean .... as we had set them up with some examinations where the individual was then examined after their visit with this Doctor, by 3 other independent Doctors, who's findings were quite different than what the Doctor was reporting. This Doctor was writing what she was told to write by these workers. It got interesting. All due to taping some conversations and meetings.

    They all lost their jobs, and several other cases they had been involved in where the findings depended upon their testimony were reviewed, and reversed.

    Some times there are 'a few' bad people in the system, and sometimes, it is great to watch true justice and the "truth" come to the surface.

  7. #16
    I have thought about one of those digital recorders. I usually give a LEO my license, CCW permit and attorney's card. Maybe I should print up a little card informing them that they may be recorded. I would think that since the supreme court has ruled that there is no expectation of privacy, if a lower court ,even in an all parties must consent state, throws out the recording a higher court could side for the recording. Case law seems to go a long way even if it was contrary to the written law on the books. Just hope I'm not the one that has to fight that battle. There is a lot of food for thought in this thread.
    Last edited by ems_kws; 04-29-2010 at 08:20 PM. Reason: o

  8. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    For those with windows mobile on their phone, here is a free voice/audio recording program that works great.

    AXYZ Mobile - Mobile Solutions Today

  9. #18
    Oregon law is a little more complex than stated. Be very careful when recording in this state. the law that can become an issue has been listed. There are a few other exceptions. There are also Cities that have what could be considered as having more stringent criteria.

    ORS 165.540 Obtaining contents of communications.
    (1) Except as otherwise provided in ORS 133.724 or 133.726 or subsections (2) to (7) of this section, a person may not:

    (a) Obtain or attempt to obtain the whole or any part of a telecommunication or a radio communication to which the person is not a participant, by means of any device, contrivance, machine or apparatus, whether electrical, mechanical, manual or otherwise, unless consent is given by at least one participant.

    (c) Obtain or attempt to obtain the whole or any part of a conversation by means of any device, contrivance, machine or apparatus, whether electrical, mechanical, manual or otherwise, if not all participants in the conversation are specifically informed that their conversation is being obtained.

    (5) The prohibitions in subsection (1)(c) of this section do not apply to:

    (a) A person who records a conversation during a felony that endangers human life;

    (8) Violation of subsection (1) or (2)(b) of this section is a Class A misdemeanor.

  10. Having digital recorders is a necessity that some call the "right to keep and bear camera." Unfortunately it's not a case of one or two bad apples and those who don't record instances with LEO do so at their own peril. All it takes is one LEO's "bad day" or need to make a quota to result in severe harm to you. Happens all the time. The website VeteransAgainstPoliceAbuse.Org discusses some good car recording devices and you can see one of those camera systems catching LEO's in that act of a fourth amendment violation below. The Border Patrol agents in this video called the driver's military supervisor and sent a three page letter complaining about the driver's actions. The driver would have been defenseless explaining the situation had it not been for five cameras installed in his vehicle.

    YouTube - Border Patrol (Uvalde, TX) Violation of Fourth Amendment - 18 March 2010

  11. I'll bet if you ask the cop if he consents to being recorded, a lot of crap will cease. That's what I did when the Hwy Patrol was hassling me about overwidth loads.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts