FirmhandKY -> RE: Plain Clothes, Unmarked car ... and a gun (4/16/2010 4:58:01 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: eyesopened I didn't see the actual Maryland law regarding police but there is a law against recording people generally. "Federal law allows recording of phone calls and other electronic communications with the consent of at least one party to the call. A majority of the states and territories have adopted wiretapping statutes based on the federal law, although most also have extended the law to cover in-person conversations. Thirty-eight states and the District of Columbia permit individuals to record conversations to which they are a party without informing the other parties that they are doing so. These laws are referred to as “one-party consent” statutes, and as long as you are a party to the conversation, it is legal for you to record it. Twelve states require, under most circumstances, the consent of all parties to a conversation. Those jurisdictions are California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Washington. Be aware that you will sometimes hear these referred to inaccurately as “two-party consent” laws. If there are more than two people involved in the conversation, all must consent to the taping. Regardless of the state, it is almost always illegal to record a conversation to which you are not a party, do not have consent to tape, and could not naturally overhear." http://www.rcfp.org/taping/ I don't necessarily have a problem with "two party consent" laws, although I think there needs to be a better way. My original comment was that public officials in the performance of their duties should always be subject to recording without the need of their consent. An extension of the sunshine laws you might say. Firm
|
|
|
|