Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Legal question about Voice Recorders and my first post

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Arvada, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    30

    Post imported post

    Hi,

    I've been surfing here for a while, but this is my first post. Happy to be here! I have my Colorado CCW permit, but to be honest haven't done any CC or OC yet, I'm still building up my confidence andmemorizing the laws regarding the issues while I wait for someholsters that I ordered.

    After reading some of the threads here, I have decided that I would like to have DVR (digital voice recorder) on my person while I'm carrying a firearm and I have ordered this:

    http://www.amazon.com/Sony-ICDUX70-Recorder-Recording-Playback/dp/B00142VMMS/ref=pd_bbs_sr_4?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid= 1215664294&sr=8-4

    I can't recommend this DVR, as I haven't received it yet, but it seems to be a decent product, only time will tell.

    Here is my question: Assuming everything is recorded... In the unfortunate circumstance that I am involved in a self defense shooting, am I better off informing the responding officers that there is a recording of the incident and letting them have the recording device as evidence, or am I better off letting my attorney present the recording at a time that he deems best for my defense?

    It seems to me that presenting the recording immediately might prevent an elevatedcharge being leveled against me. But at the same time, letting my attorney present the evidence would keep the LEO's from having the ability to erase the recording.



    I sincerely appreciate all comments on this.

    Thanks!

    RichB





  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Arvada, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    30

    Post imported post

    I'm sorry, I forgot to mention that Colorado is a "One Person" state when it comes to recording conversations. As long as one person, "me", knows the conversation is being recorded, it's ok.

    Thanks

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,422

    Post imported post

    *

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Lake Charles Area, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    1,723

    Post imported post

    I've HEARD, that in Louisiana, if the person being recorded "IS NOT MADE AWARE" that they are being recorded, the tape will not be admissable in court.

    Might want to make sure that's not the same for you.

    I'll try to find out if that's just a rumor.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    376

    Post imported post

    You need to see the "Never talk to the police" video. If I were involved in ANY significant event, the only time I would willingly disclose the contents of any recording would be in court.

    Presenting the recording means nothing as far as you being charged. If they want to charge you, they'll charge you, tape or no tape. You won't be able to talk your way out of it, so why bother and try? Why give them more evidence to charge you with?

    Once the recording leaves your hands, it is subject to being erased at any time, and ALL your evidence is gone. Why take that risk? If the recording vindicates you, save it for later.

    If you are not being arrested, you will probably be ordered to turn it off if they see the recorder is on.

    At which point, I'd keep recording.

    I've HEARD, that in Louisiana, if the person being recorded "IS NOT MADE AWARE" that they are being recorded, the tape will not be admissable in court.

    Easy answer is to file your 42 USC 1983 suit in Federal court. All recordings are admissable.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    Pointman wrote:
    If you are not being arrested, you will probably be ordered to turn it off if they see the recorder is on.
    Under what authority?

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Arvada, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    30

    Post imported post

    I realized shortly after I posted just how idioticmy question was, LOL

    Of course the LEO has no call in whether or not I'm charged and of course I should hold onto the recorder.

    I was pondering the value of having the recorder admitted as evidence right away -vs- having the courts think the recording might have been tampered with. I'll just leave it to my lawyer to decide what to do. Hopefully this won't ever be necessary!!!! I just like to be prepared.



    Pointman wrote:
    My suggestion is to always leave the recorder running when in public, and not on voice activation mode. When you turn it on, state the time and date, so you have a 5-hour record of doing "nothing" before being arrested for Disorderly Conduct While Armed.

    You make an EXCELLENT point, one that I had never thought of. I was just going to keep it set for voice activation, but you have certainly changed my plan of action. Thanks!!

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,422

    Post imported post

    *

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
    Posts
    3,806

    Post imported post

    http://www.rcfp.org/taping/

    http://www.rcfp.org/taping/states/colorado.html


    Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-9-303: Recording or overhearing a telephone conversation, or any electronic communication, without the consent of a party to the conversation is a felony punishable by a fine of between $1,000 and $100,000 and one year to 18 months in jail. Recording of a communication from a cordless telephone, however, is a misdemeanor.

    Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1.3-401. Using or disclosing information obtained through illegal wiretapping is prohibited if there is reason to know the information was obtained illegally. Anyone who is not "visibly present" during a conversation who overhears or records the conversation without the consent of at least one of the parties commits a felony carrying the same punishment as a telephone interception, as does anyone who discloses the contents of such a conversation.

    Colo. Rev. Stat § 18-9-304. However, nothing in these statutes "shall be interpreted to prevent a news agency, or an employee thereof, from using the accepted tools and equipment of that news medium in the course of reporting or investigating a public and newsworthy event." Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-9-305.
    So, if you're a part of said conversation, you can give yourself consent.
    Why open carry? Because 1911 > 911.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Silver Grove, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    81

    Post imported post

    I am from KY and I have used this 20 years ago but in no way connected to CCW/OC.

    After being pulled over for a traffic violation, my recorder on the seat covered with a single page of newspaper folded, and running, I had a pad of paper and a pen and after our opening pleasantries while he was looking at my licences and insurance and before he walked away I asked him, "is it ok to record a little of this and take down some notes like your name and badge number?" Holding the pad and pen up for him to see..three seperate times I was told go right ahead.

    Yes I was'nt a very good driver at the time and this happened twice in KY and once in Ohio....Plus I had other agendas way back then that had nothing to do with firearms. But in court the recorder played and the officer was heard to agree to my recording.

    Just some rocks in your sling bag.?






  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    376

    Post imported post

    http://www.rcfp.org/taping/states/kentucky.html

    Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 526.010: It is a felony to overhear or record, through use of an electronic or mechanical device, a wire or oral communication without the consent of at least one party to that communication. Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 526.020.

    Why are you doing that in KY?

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Silver Grove, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    81

    Post imported post

    I am not "doing it"...at least not now. Twenty years ago I had no knowledge of the laws or statues...except maybe one.

    I was doing it in connection with a U. C. C. defence of being "coerced" into having a license in order to have the privileged to operate a motor vehicle.

    At that time I did find under Constitutional Law under the right of egressthat (a loose quote), "A citizen of the Commonwealth has the constitutional protected right of locomotion, using the common ways and means, to move from one place to another without obtaining a license to do so unless you are engaged in commerce ( this is a real close quote here) specifically without interference from the Police unless you are observed in a criminal or felonious activity.

    Another words..twenty years ago I got out of three traffic tickets using the same "Law" the Police operate or get their authority from...The Uniform Commercial Code. Our drivers License are permission from the State to engage in commercial activities with our vehicles..of course most of us don't deliverpizza with our vehicles. We do have a RIGHT to go to and fro with out getting any license or plates or insurance...hmm..who would have thought?

    U. C. C. 1-207 (book 1 sect. 207) is their own law against coercing us to follow their rules even though we are not technically even under the "Commercial Code!" But try to drive w/out a licence plate = stopped, ticketed, towed, lawyer, court, win, retrieval fee, missed work, next day do it all again! After awhile I just let it go and got into drugs!

    I repeat...I am not recording anyone now..that was just my technique for doing it then. It was pretty cool though, to see the Judge in Hamilton Co. Oh. Get so mad at me he turned red!!! I was very courteous and pleasant..All I said to him was.."Off the record your Honor, I am only doing this to see if it works. Someone told me it would and so I wanted to see...back on the record" He was Peed off good. And it did work!!!

    Now I know it wasn't me...but several months later that same year,Hamilton Co. issued a statement saying that if you wrote anything on your license other than your name they would not be valid..Ha ha ha ha ...





  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    11

    Post imported post

    jbradford1 wrote:
    I am not "doing it"...at least not now. Twenty years ago I had no knowledge of the laws or statues...except maybe one.

    snip

    I repeat...I am not recording anyone now..
    I think the "why" was why are you asking permission, not why recording.

    If Kentucky is a one party state, so you only need your own permission to record any conversation you are part of.
    You have no legal requirement to ask for anyones permission to record if they are talking to you.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Silver Grove, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    81

    Post imported post

    Got it!....I dont need to ask permission....thanks.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •