• 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.

Video taping

Misguided Child

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2007
Messages
193
Location
, Washington, USA
imported post

Ok, I know the laws concerning audio taping have been discussed here several times. But how about video taping? I ask because after the break in at my house in Feb. I had a video security system put in that should give me vid of anyone breaking into house or garage. Today a co-worker told me the video couldn't be used in court unless I posted the house with a warning that I had video security running. There is no audio on these cameras.

I know this seems off topic but it does relate to keeping our firearms secure and out of the hands of the BG's

Alan
 

sv_libertarian

State Researcher
Joined
Aug 15, 2007
Messages
3,201
Location
Olympia, WA, ,
imported post

I don't know. I would imagine inside your house if authorized persons are aware of it, then unathorized persons really don't have any rights, but I don't know.
 

expvideo

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2006
Messages
1,487
Location
Lynnwood, WA, ,
imported post

Misguided Child wrote:
Ok, I know the laws concerning audio taping have been discussed here several times. But how about video taping? I ask because after the break in at my house in Feb. I had a video security system put in that should give me vid of anyone breaking into house or garage. Today a co-worker told me the video couldn't be used in court unless I posted the house with a warning that I had video security running. There is no audio on these cameras.

I know this seems off topic but it does relate to keeping our firearms secure and out of the hands of the BG's

Alan
He is absolutely incorrect. You can record all you want. It's your home, not Nordstrom. A theif has no legal expectation of privacy whilst robbing your home. You can't broadcast it on TV without consent from the person on film, or you will have to blur his face.
 

ATCer

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2008
Messages
89
Location
Iraq
imported post

Aditionally, wouldn't you be completly within your rights to audio record as well?
 

expvideo

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2006
Messages
1,487
Location
Lynnwood, WA, ,
imported post

ATCer wrote:
Aditionally, wouldn't you be completly within your rights to audio record as well?
Be very careful recording audio. I wouldn't risk the criminal charge for recording a "private conversation" without notification. Even if it is your house, and even if it is a theif, you aren't allowed to do that.
 

Misguided Child

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2007
Messages
193
Location
, Washington, USA
imported post

I am pretty sure you can't record a phone call you make from inside your house so it follows I can't record someone else's conversation in my house. I deliberately didn't buy cameras with audio for that reason. What if they had audio and the BG's lawyer argued the tapes were inadmissible in court because of the illegal recorded conversation? I'd lose all benefit. Although my real purpose is just to identify the BG's to get my property back.



Alan
 

Mike

Site Co-Founder
Joined
May 13, 2006
Messages
8,706
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
imported post

expvideo wrote:
He is absolutely incorrect. You can record all you want. It's your home, not Nordstrom. A theif has no legal expectation of privacy whilst robbing your home. You can't broadcast it on TV without consent from the person on film, or you will have to blur his face.
Cite to authority? Why such an inconsistent rule set? We are talking about Washington state where folks taping police officers on official duty are being charged with crimes - the post above is not helpful.
 

Misguided Child

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2007
Messages
193
Location
, Washington, USA
imported post

Posting a sign on my house is what I'm trying to avoid. I don't want them tearing the house up looking for the DVR.

We have people recording Police being charged with crimes? Have I missed something lately? I know the guys in OR had a problem recently.
 

joeroket

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
3,339
Location
Everett, Washington, USA
imported post

Mike wrote:
expvideo wrote:
He is absolutely incorrect. You can record all you want. It's your home, not Nordstrom. A theif has no legal expectation of privacy whilst robbing your home. You can't broadcast it on TV without consent from the person on film, or you will have to blur his face.
Cite to authority? Why such an inconsistent rule set? We are talking about Washington state where folks taping police officers on official duty are being charged with crimes - the post above is not helpful.
State vs Flora is the precedence for audio taping police. As long as the recorded party have been advised or it is recorded in a public place it is legal. I am with expvideo on this one, I am not sure it is legal to record audio on the basis that it is your house because it is a private setting.
 

jaredbelch

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2007
Messages
545
Location
Cottonwood Heights, Utah, USA
imported post

irfner wrote:
Just post a sign on the door of your house (business) warning that video and or audio are recorded for security.
Wouldn't you want to post it on your window? I mean isn't that how he's getting in anyway?

Lawyer: Your Honor this evidence clearly infringes on my clients rights to privacy. He was unaware he would be recorded.

Me: Your honor this is a picture of the notice on my front door warning all who enter that they are on tape.

Lawyer: As you can see your Honor, this notice is posted on the door, my client isn't in the habit of using doors as they are usually locked. In the great state of ___ the law clearly states that a notice shall be placed at all entrances. This was not followed, and since my client entered through the window, the evidence is inadmissible.

Me: :banghead:
 

Misguided Child

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2007
Messages
193
Location
, Washington, USA
imported post

bcp you are a GOD! thanks for finding that. Those are all excellent cites I will bookmark.

Jared, actually they pried open the back door. It was probably quieter.

All y'all should check out bcps' post.

Alan
 

expvideo

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2006
Messages
1,487
Location
Lynnwood, WA, ,
imported post

joeroket wrote:
Mike wrote:
expvideo wrote:
He is absolutely incorrect. You can record all you want. It's your home, not Nordstrom. A theif has no legal expectation of privacy whilst robbing your home. You can't broadcast it on TV without consent from the person on film, or you will have to blur his face.
Cite to authority? Why such an inconsistent rule set? We are talking about Washington state where folks taping police officers on official duty are being charged with crimes - the post above is not helpful.
State vs Flora is the precedence for audio taping police. As long as the recorded party have been advised or it is recorded in a public place it is legal. I am with expvideo on this one, I am not sure it is legal to record audio on the basis that it is your house because it is a private setting.

Precisely. There is no law in WA state that prevents you from recording video, but there is a law that prevents you from recording audio of private conversations without notification.

And Mike, I don't need to cite laws. It's clearly written in WA state law that you have to notify all parties for audio, and I can't refference the lack of a video recording law. If you want to prove me wrong, you cite something. Seriously, what am I supposed to cite to prove that a law doesn't exist?
 

Bear 45/70

Regular Member
Joined
May 22, 2007
Messages
3,256
Location
Union, Washington, USA
imported post

jaredbelch wrote:
irfner wrote:
Just post a sign on the door of your house (business) warning that video and or audio are recorded for security.
Wouldn't you want to post it on your window? I mean isn't that how he's getting in anyway?

Lawyer: Your Honor this evidence clearly infringes on my clients rights to privacy. He was unaware he would be recorded.

Me: Your honor this is a picture of the notice on my front door warning all who enter that they are on tape.

Lawyer: As you can see your Honor, this notice is posted on the door, my client isn't in the habit of using doors as they are usually locked. In the great state of ___ the law clearly states that a notice shall be placed at all entrances. This was not followed, and since my client entered through the window, the evidence is inadmissible.

Me: :banghead:
So how's your career as a fiction writer coming along?
rolleyes.gif
 

expvideo

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2006
Messages
1,487
Location
Lynnwood, WA, ,
imported post

expvideo wrote:
joeroket wrote:
Mike wrote:
expvideo wrote:
He is absolutely incorrect. You can record all you want. It's your home, not Nordstrom. A theif has no legal expectation of privacy whilst robbing your home. You can't broadcast it on TV without consent from the person on film, or you will have to blur his face.
Cite to authority? Why such an inconsistent rule set? We are talking about Washington state where folks taping police officers on official duty are being charged with crimes - the post above is not helpful.
State vs Flora is the precedence for audio taping police. As long as the recorded party have been advised or it is recorded in a public place it is legal. I am with expvideo on this one, I am not sure it is legal to record audio on the basis that it is your house because it is a private setting.

Precisely. There is no law in WA state that prevents you from recording video, but there is a law that prevents you from recording audio of private conversations without notification.

And Mike, I don't need to cite laws. It's clearly written in WA state law that you have to notify all parties for audio, and I can't refference the lack of a video recording law. If you want to prove me wrong, you cite something. Seriously, what am I supposed to cite to prove that a law doesn't exist?
OK, so you were right, Mike. For the one time in history, there is a law saying that it's not illegal to do something.
 

Mike

Site Co-Founder
Joined
May 13, 2006
Messages
8,706
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
imported post

expvideo wrote:
joeroket wrote:
Mike wrote:
expvideo wrote:
He is absolutely incorrect. You can record all you want. It's your home, not Nordstrom. A theif has no legal expectation of privacy whilst robbing your home. You can't broadcast it on TV without consent from the person on film, or you will have to blur his face.
Cite to authority? Why such an inconsistent rule set? We are talking about Washington state where folks taping police officers on official duty are being charged with crimes - the post above is not helpful.
State vs Flora is the precedence for audio taping police. As long as the recorded party have been advised or it is recorded in a public place it is legal. I am with expvideo on this one, I am not sure it is legal to record audio on the basis that it is your house because it is a private setting.

Precisely. There is no law in WA state that prevents you from recording video, but there is a law that prevents you from recording audio of private conversations without notification.

And Mike, I don't need to cite laws. It's clearly written in WA state law that you have to notify all parties for audio, and I can't refference the lack of a video recording law. If you want to prove me wrong, you cite something. Seriously, what am I supposed to cite to prove that a law doesn't exist?
But you stated 3 rules of law, and did not cite to any authority for these rules, in the context of background knowledge that it is illegal in Wash at times to record audio. e.g., why can I not broadcast thief's face on TV? What law makes this true?
 
Top