Not only that, but I guess we're all just fine with secretly recording people nowadays.
The reporter said he left the recording equipment behind on purpose. It was obviously either not visible or it was disguised in some way.
Privacy doesn't matter anymore I guess.
Those were two county commissioners and the sheriff discussing county business. That makes the meeting a quorum. Recording it is legal, and the meeting itself wasn't advertised to the public making the meeting illegal. But he wants to charge the people that busted them being dick's as felons. Fuck those cops and fuck you too you faggot boot licker.
End justifies the means?
That term doesn't apply here. The person that secretly recorded an illegal meeting and caught them talking like psychos did the right thing from the beginning. There arnt any immoral means to justify the end of exposing tyrants. You can believe they were just blowing off steam but put yourself in the shoes of a law abiding citizen that has to learn about a sheriff talking about murdering them and hiding the body. Someone with that kind of power shouldn't be talking like that in any context.
It depends if it's a single party consent state under wiretapping laws. Most are two-party consent. I think it's a felony to violate it in most states.
Most are two-party consent
Actually most are 1 party consent. It's a good thing too, because I used to record every interaction between my ex and I. Before doing so I spoke with attorneys and did the research myself. My ex was incredibly toxic and she used to play games with my custody rights with my oldest. Once I proved to the courts she was the one instigating the issues I was given custody.
https://www.justia.com/50-state-surveys/recording-phone-calls-and-conversations/
The journalist not being in the room or present to the conversation makes 0 parties consenting and illegal everywhere. The beak on this journalist is concerning and I hope the sheriff tells him to pound dirt.
Since when can anyone secretly record others private conversation via planted bug to fish for evidence you don't yet have. That'd never be admissible in court and therefore nothing legally can be done to these sheriffs.
Usually, conservative states are one party consent, liberal states are usually two party. I’ve had a need to know this before, it’s why I know.
The only reason for two-party consent is to protect the guilty from unknowingly admitting to their crimes. It follows that it would be common in liberal states.
(post is archived)