pittsmark6
Member
What is the name of your state? pennsylvania
I was charged with interception of communications title 18 section 5703. In pennsylvania the law states all parties have to consent but pennsylvania v mcivor 670 A. 2d 697 (Pa. super.ct.1996) states a trial court has held that a communication protected by the legislation is one in which there is an expectation that it will not be recordedrather that one in which there is a general expection of privacy. thus the fact that a participant may believe he will have to reveal the contents of a communication does not necessarily mean that he would have expected that it would be recorded , and it is the expectation that it would not be recorded that triggers the wiretapping laws protection.
In my case the tape recorder was in plain view she knew it was being taped cause the tape has her saying stop recording me. now if the law states theres an expection the conversation would not be taped, does that mean she could not have expected it to not be taped if there was a recorder in plain view with the record button pushed in? how could she not have expected it to not be taped?
also i read some states ruled tape recorders are exempt from the electronic devices designed to intercept communications cause they do not transmit signals to another location. does anybody have any information about those states and rulings?
I was charged with interception of communications title 18 section 5703. In pennsylvania the law states all parties have to consent but pennsylvania v mcivor 670 A. 2d 697 (Pa. super.ct.1996) states a trial court has held that a communication protected by the legislation is one in which there is an expectation that it will not be recordedrather that one in which there is a general expection of privacy. thus the fact that a participant may believe he will have to reveal the contents of a communication does not necessarily mean that he would have expected that it would be recorded , and it is the expectation that it would not be recorded that triggers the wiretapping laws protection.
In my case the tape recorder was in plain view she knew it was being taped cause the tape has her saying stop recording me. now if the law states theres an expection the conversation would not be taped, does that mean she could not have expected it to not be taped if there was a recorder in plain view with the record button pushed in? how could she not have expected it to not be taped?
also i read some states ruled tape recorders are exempt from the electronic devices designed to intercept communications cause they do not transmit signals to another location. does anybody have any information about those states and rulings?