• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Advice

davidmcbeth

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
I was at a bar and the guy asks me if I had the time .. I thought he was going to steal me watch ! So I ran away and called my mother. She said I was the dumbest of the 12 kids she had. I asked her if I was dumber that half-wit Nick, she said yes.

Now can I get my story on the big screen? A story of 12 dumb kids...
 
marshaul

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
That's why I don't go into bars much anymore. Too many louts looking for attention.

Not being a lawyer, the best advice I can give to the OP is to begin carrying a voice (if not video) recorder. A clear record of your unimpeachable conduct would prevent "he said she said".

I'm sorry to say, when it comes to drunk people at bars, it's basically all "he said she said". Which means all it takes is a confrontation with a guy who has friends willing to lie for him to screw you over for something you didn't do. There really isn't much recourse in my experience.

That's why I've learned to go out of my way to avoid conflict in the first place. And that's why I avoid going to bars.
 
Last edited:
marshaul

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
Nightmare said:
LOL I go to one of our three bars open year around most every Monday night to drink (two pints and two neat tall gins) and play cards with a bunch of other grey-pates. By the time we finish our dinner the barflies have cleared out and we have a peaceful couple of hours of cards. In Wisconsin we must be sober while armed.
Click to expand...

Indeed. I have a friend whose family comes from Wisconsin, and he reports bars there are a different animal altogether.

Maybe I'll stop in one if I'm every in Wisconsin, and feel like disarming.
 
WalkingWolf

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
ricky_g said:
Marshaul, voice recordings are only legal if ALL recorded parties are privy.
Click to expand...
The New Hampshire Supreme Court has held that a party effectively consented to the recording of a communication when the surrounding circumstances demonstrated that the party knew the communication was being recorded. New Hampshire v. Locke, 761 A.2d 376 (N.H. 1999); see also Fischer v. Hooper, 732 A.2d 396 (N.H. 1999) (upholding the sufficiency of an instruction that the jury could consider, under the standard for implied consent, not only a defendant’s words but also her actions in determining whether she consented to the recording of her conversation), superseded by statute on other grounds. More recently, the state high court ruled that a criminal defendant consented to the recording of a real-time online conversation because he knew that the recording on the other party’s computer of the instant message was necessary for its recipient to read the communication. New Hampshire v. Lott, 879 A.2d 1167 (N.H. 2005).
http://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recording-guide/state-state-guide/new-hampshire
 
marshaul

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
WalkingWolf said:
The New Hampshire Supreme Court has held that a party effectively consented to the recording of a communication when the surrounding circumstances demonstrated that the party knew the communication was being recorded. New Hampshire v. Locke, 761 A.2d 376 (N.H. 1999); see also Fischer v. Hooper, 732 A.2d 396 (N.H. 1999) (upholding the sufficiency of an instruction that the jury could consider, under the standard for implied consent, not only a defendant’s words but also her actions in determining whether she consented to the recording of her conversation), superseded by statute on other grounds. More recently, the state high court ruled that a criminal defendant consented to the recording of a real-time online conversation because he knew that the recording on the other party’s computer of the instant message was necessary for its recipient to read the communication. New Hampshire v. Lott, 879 A.2d 1167 (N.H. 2005).
http://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recording-guide/state-state-guide/new-hampshire
Click to expand...

More pertinently (from the same link):

In-person conversations: It is unlawful to record “any verbal communication uttered by a person who has a reasonable expectation that the communication is not subject to interception, under circumstances justifying such expectation” without first obtaining the consent of all parties engaged in the conversation. N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 570-A:1. Thus, a journalist does not need consent to record conversations in public where there is no reasonable expectation of privacy. ​

Also:

The law, however, does not criminalize the use of recording devices for other purposes in areas in which there is no reasonable expectation of privacy (i.e., filming conversations on public streets or a hotel lobby). The state Supreme Court found that a classroom was not a private place where a school custodian could reasonably expect to be safe from video surveillance. New Hampshire v. McLellan, 744 A.2d 611 (N.H. 1999).​

So, no, it does not seem that NH is among the few states which criminalize the recording of conversations in public places.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top