I just don't understand how you can get in trouble for recording an adult
doing their job... I believe it was stated that this happened on a public
highway and the officer was a state employee.. Whats the difference in me
doing it versus the media doing it? With this same thought Rodney King
could have gotten in trouble for recording his own beating or even the
bystander that taped it.. The courts have already upheld that employees can
be taped and monitored at work so whats the difference in a citizen doing
it.....
I believe I asked for the exact article that referred to this incident but I
never got a reply... I could'nt find it on Google which was where I was
originally told to find it...
Jon
----- Original Message -----
From: "Trei, Peter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Bill Stewart'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2001 10:30 AM
Subject: RE: Recording conversations and the laws of men
> And if you're in a two-party state, unless you have a sign or
> tell the trooper that you're recording, you can wind up in
> jail. It's happened recently here in Massachusetts.
>
> Peter Trei
>
>
> > ----------
> > From: Bill Stewart[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >
> > At 08:57 PM 04/24/2001 -0500, Jim Choate wrote:
> > >No, I don't have any responsibility to tell you when I'm recording or
> > why.
> > >The best protection for bad speech is more speech, get your own
recorder.
> > >
> > >I predict a new industry, mobile surveillance systems for cars. There
> > will
> > >be a small CCD camera mounted on the passenger side with a wide-angle
or
> > >perhaps split lens system via a itty bitty periscope. There will also
be
> > a
> > >microphone on the driver side window sill, as well as the middle bumper
> > >area. It will drive a small 12VDC recorder (initially tape, moving to
> > >solid state).
> >
> > Tape? How antique!
>
>
