Am I required to notify passenger of a dash cam?

davidmcbeth said:

SNIP The Marines are part of the Navy.

Click to expand...

That's like saying the wine sauce is part of beouf bourguignon. While partly true, everybody knows the main reason for beouf bourguignon is the sautéed mushrooms. :banana:

Citizen said:

That's like saying the wine sauce is part of beouf bourguignon. While partly true, everybody knows the main reason for beouf bourguignon is the sautéed mushrooms. :banana:

Click to expand...

They are the men's dept. (making some feel better)

davidmcbeth said:

They are the men's dept. (making some feel better)

Click to expand...

So what would you call this unit in A-Stan?



(pic of US Marines with the FET 1st Battalion 8th Marines, Regimental Combat team II pose at their forward operating base on Nov. 17, 2010 in Musa Qala, Afghanistan.)


Appears that the "Men's Department has become more "Unisex".

Dash cams & body cams/videography of events

Do LEOs inform that they are recording when making a traffic stop? Does a person using their cell phone to take video of a concert/sporting event ask for consent before they start recording?

Our local City Council used to tape record all public meetings, but now do not as there have been some legal issues involved with those recordings.

Almost all places that do video/audio surveillance have signage stating that they are present & in use & that signage is consent enough. Although I do believe, however, there are some retail/wholesale outfits that have surveillance packages on premises that do not have any signage.

Do Uber & Lyft allow for the recording of users per their contractual agreements?

amlevin said:

Doesn't the presence of a "third party" negate any expectation of privacy. Does "Attorney/Client Privilege" still stand if the conversation is held in the presence of others???

Isn't that pretty much the same?

Click to expand...

The presence of a third party MAY negate the expectation of privacy... unless the third party is also represented by the attorney.

davidmcbeth said:

I would think that if 2 folks are discussing something in front of another then privilege is gone. Really go to google scholar and start doing some searches.

Click to expand...

There is generally no expectation of privacy in a conversation between two people in front of another. Neither is there an expectation of privacy in anything one person says to another, even when not in the presence of a third person UNLESS some other privilege exists (attorney-client, doctor-patient, priest-penitent, accountant-client, numerous others). Do not confuse an "expectation of privacy" with a "privileged communication." While frequently related, they are not the same thing, and different rules control the ability to disseminate the information divulged in the communication.

What if you are a pro se litigant? Do you think attny privileges apply to a non-lawyer?

Click to expand...

Assuming you mean the "attorney-client privilege," no (assuming that you are a pro se litigant). The privilege does not belong to the attorney. It belongs to the client.

amlevin said:

My question was really directed to the attorney who said he wasn't so sure that privilege was lost.

Click to expand...

Oh, I didn't say that the privilege wasn't lost. Decklin prefaced his reasoning that that the expectation of privacy was lost because it was a "public business transaction." It wasn't. The hypothetical described a PRIVATE business transaction.