Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Recording Laws needs to be changed in Florida

  1. #1
    Regular Member Rick H's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Hoover, Alabama
    Posts
    323

    Recording Laws needs to be changed in Florida

    What would it take to get this law changed to allow recording a LEO encounter?
    Who do we need to contact so we might be able to get this bill rolling?
    I am not so good at these things and would be willing to help in any way possible.
    I believe that One should be able to protect Ones self from undeniable harassments that LEO does and will attempt. Why would LEO be without prosecution in such matters but we that are without representation are not. Are our LEO above the law and why would this be for the Government (Tyrannic) To enact and they not be pursuant to follow such laws? and not for We The People. This is an OUTRAGE.
    God Bless America.

  2. #2
    Regular Member FLEMTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Charlotte, NC, USA
    Posts
    36
    I dont know why you would think the laws need to be changed. Currently it IS legal to record a stop by a LEO. The reason being is that law enforcement officers have no reasonable expectation of privacy in the performance of their duties in the state of Florida, and in fact, most LEO's have dash cam and/or voice recorders running during their stop of you.

    Your best bet is to carry a personal voice recorder, or use a voice recording app on your phone if you have one. I wouldn't bother telling them you're recording them, because some will get defensive and demand you shut it off.

    I always record any stops by LEO's ( doesnt happen often) and most are usually pretty brief.

    Hope this helps!

  3. #3
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069
    There are several 'experts' who are spreading fud here to the contrary... It's only reasonable that the OP fell for it and thinks action is required.

    I would like to it be more statutorily clear, but the facts are still the facts even if the road to finding them is convoluted.
    Last edited by ixtow; 03-21-2011 at 09:34 PM.
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

  4. #4
    Regular Member Rich7553's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SWFL
    Posts
    516
    Quote Originally Posted by ixtow View Post
    There are several 'experts' who are spreading fud here to the contrary... It's only reasonable that the OP fell for it and thinks action is required.

    I would like to it be more statutorily clear, but the facts are still the facts even if the road to finding them is convoluted.
    Can you cite case law? There are a few folks I know of that would love to have the reference.
    Rich
    MSgt, USAF Ret.
    Executive Director
    Florida Carry, Inc.
    www.floridacarry.org
    Glock 23 RTF2
    Mosin Nagant M91/30 (1942 Izhevsk)
    _____________________________________
    Want to do something about your gun rights?
    PITCH IN, QUIT B*TCHING!

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    fl
    Posts
    1,835
    The laws on this apply to you, me and everyone else including the LEOs. Open recording, fine -good luck getting it admitted into evidence in any court, but all-good.
    Surreptitious/Covert recordings- of anyone- no-go. Fail. And next to zero chance of using it to "prove" you were harrassed by anyone.
    And even if you do do so, and manage to get a court to accept it into evidence, be prepared to be also purchasing some Data Forensics software (if it's digital media) and be fully prepared to present the MD-5 hashes ,at a minimum, to validate that it's the original recording, and not a copy or an edited version. (and, as a civillian, lots of luck with that.. )
    Last edited by j4l; 03-22-2011 at 02:28 AM.

  6. #6
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069
    Quote Originally Posted by Rich7553 View Post
    Can you cite case law? There are a few folks I know of that would love to have the reference.
    I recently had another run-in with the unpleasantness of being the Fact Welfare. I provided links to events which were directly impacted by the Facts. Very recent events. Anyone willing to make an effort could have easily put the dots together, but were more interested in denial. Willful Ignorance for the sake of ranting on an Internet forum.

    I return to my previous policy of refusing to be the Fact Welfare. This isn't hard to find and I don't need to put up with the crap of those who refuse. Not directed at you, but it makes th thread useless. Happens every time. Not doing it again.

    Just Google up the incident in January relating to Tarpon Springs PD, and the SA who refuses to prosecute. There are other cases relating, but that is the most recent. Technically, it's not even a case, since the SA is refusing to prosecute...

    Hell, I even used "LMGTFY" and still people wouldn't... Pathetic.
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

  7. #7
    Regular Member Rich7553's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SWFL
    Posts
    516
    Quote Originally Posted by ixtow View Post
    I recently had another run-in with the unpleasantness of being the Fact Welfare. I provided links to events which were directly impacted by the Facts. Very recent events. Anyone willing to make an effort could have easily put the dots together, but were more interested in denial. Willful Ignorance for the sake of ranting on an Internet forum.

    I return to my previous policy of refusing to be the Fact Welfare. This isn't hard to find and I don't need to put up with the crap of those who refuse. Not directed at you, but it makes th thread useless. Happens every time. Not doing it again.

    Just Google up the incident in January relating to Tarpon Springs PD, and the SA who refuses to prosecute. There are other cases relating, but that is the most recent. Technically, it's not even a case, since the SA is refusing to prosecute...

    Hell, I even used "LMGTFY" and still people wouldn't... Pathetic.
    No problem, and no offense intended. Thanks for the reference, I'll look it up.
    Last edited by Rich7553; 03-22-2011 at 09:20 AM.
    Rich
    MSgt, USAF Ret.
    Executive Director
    Florida Carry, Inc.
    www.floridacarry.org
    Glock 23 RTF2
    Mosin Nagant M91/30 (1942 Izhevsk)
    _____________________________________
    Want to do something about your gun rights?
    PITCH IN, QUIT B*TCHING!

  8. #8
    Regular Member Rick H's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Hoover, Alabama
    Posts
    323

    Thumbs up I just found this one and could be used in a court ruling

    This could be the one I was looking for. Man on motorcycle with helmet cam arrested

    http://articles.baltimoresun.com/201...tt-cell-phones

    and another one tooooo.
    http://thehive.modbee.com/node/17656
    Last edited by Rick H; 03-22-2011 at 01:18 PM.
    God Bless America.

  9. #9
    Regular Member FLEMTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Charlotte, NC, USA
    Posts
    36
    this is cited from a legal article written by a lawyer.

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


    All parties must consent to the recording or the disclosure of the contents of any wire, oral or electronic communication in Florida. Recording, disclosing, or endeavoring to disclose without the consent of all parties is a felony, unless the interception is a first offense committed without any illegal purpose, and not for commercial gain. Fla. Stat. ch. 934.03. These first offenses and the interception of cellular frequencies are misdemeanors. State v. News-Press Pub. Co., 338 So. 2d 1313 (1976).

    Under the statute, consent is not required for the taping of a non-electronic communication uttered by a person who does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in that communication. See definition of “oral communication,” Fla. Stat. ch. 934.02. See also Stevenson v. State, 667 So.2d 410 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996); Paredes v. State, 760 So.2d 167 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000).

    In Cohen Brothers, LLC v. ME Corp., S.A., 872 So.2d 321 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004), the District Court of Appeal for the Third District of Florida held that members of a limited liability company’s (LLC) management committee did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy with respect to participation in telephone conference calls with other committee members to discuss continued financing of the LLC, and thus could not hold the committee members liable for recording the conference calls.

    A federal appellate court has held that because only interceptions made through an “electronic, mechanical or other device” are illegal under Florida law, telephones used in the ordinary course of business to record conversations do not violate the law. The court found that business telephones are not the type of devices addressed in the law and, thus, that a life insurance company did not violate the law when it routinely recorded business-related calls on its business extensions. Royal Health Care Servs., Inc. v. Jefferson-Pilot Life Ins. Co., 924 F.2d 215 (11th Cir. 1991).

    Anyone whose communications have been illegally intercepted may recover actual damages or $100 for each day of violation or $1,000, whichever is greater, along with punitive damages, attorney fees and litigation costs. Fla. Stat. ch. 934.10.
    Because a law enforcement officer is performing his duties in a public arena, there is NO expectation of privacy. If there was an expectation, then LEO's would legally be prohibited from recording their encounter with you under the same wiretapping law without your consent.

    the case that was cited about the motorcycle rider using a helmet cam was in Maryland, not Florida. Every state has different wiretap and recording laws.

    It IS NOT illegal to record a stop with a LEO in the State of Florida.
    Last edited by FLEMTP; 03-22-2011 at 02:50 PM.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Kingfish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia, USA
    Posts
    1,276
    Quote Originally Posted by FLEMTP View Post
    this is cited from a legal article written by a lawyer.

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



    Because a law enforcement officer is performing his duties in a public arena, there is NO expectation of privacy. If there was an expectation, then LEO's would legally be prohibited from recording their encounter with you under the same wiretapping law without your consent.

    the case that was cited about the motorcycle rider using a helmet cam was in Maryland, not Florida. Every state has different wiretap and recording laws.

    It IS NOT illegal to record a stop with a LEO in the State of Florida.
    LEO are exempt...


    934.03 Interception and disclosure of wire, oral, or electronic communications prohibited.
    (c) It is lawful under ss. 934.03-934.09 for an investigative or law enforcement officer or a person acting under the direction of an investigative or law enforcement officer to intercept a wire, oral, or electronic communication when such person is a party to the communication or one of the parties to the communication has given prior consent to such interception and the purpose of such interception is to obtain evidence of a criminal act.

  11. #11
    Regular Member Rod0990's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    frozen
    Posts
    35
    Quote Originally Posted by Kingfish View Post
    LEO are exempt...


    934.03 Interception and disclosure of wire, oral, or electronic communications prohibited.
    (c) It is lawful under ss. 934.03-934.09 for an investigative or law enforcement officer or a person acting under the direction of an investigative or law enforcement officer to intercept a wire, oral, or electronic communication when such person is a party to the communication or one of the parties to the communication has given prior consent to such interception and the purpose of such interception is to obtain evidence of a criminal act.

    Thanks Kingfish, was going to post something similar but you nailed it.

    ALWAYS listen to "facts" from reliable sources such as the one linked above, NEVER any kind of "Fact Welfare" or any non-official sources.
    The opinions stated on member's posts are their own, not trying to tell you what to think or what to believe in. I'm am always looking for good criticism and always looking to see members point of view on different issues. Offending the views of other members, in a manic and paranoid way, only causes discontent and a hostile online community. Now the banana dance

  12. #12
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069
    Quote Originally Posted by Rod0990 View Post
    NEVER any kind of "Fact Welfare" or any non-official sources.
    So why ask?

    I encourage people to pull their heads out of their asses and look it up themselves. If they more often choose to jam them deeper instead, that's not my doing.

    We all saw what happened even with a citation. Didn't make a damn bit of difference just because the law is written in a convoluted manner.

    Loud != right.
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

Posting Permissions

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