Posted on 07/28/2015 11:13:44 PM PDT by Morgana
What you said, and double from me. FN SERIAL KILLERS!
Yes, but it is a PUBLIC PLACE and there should be no EXPECTATION of privacy.
I am merely reporting the facts of what the law says and how it is being interpreted within its jurisdiction. You can yell about it all you like but it won't change a thing.
Any judge who views a video of those conspiring to commit atrocities shouldn’t take too kindly to the criminals. In any case, the video was well worth the sacrifice of the videographer.
How else would this ever have come to light? And who wants a trial of the ‘perps?’ PP would have answered honestly about what they do? ha! BUT if this were prosecuted, it’d be more devastating to PP than to CMP. Keep talking about it, folks.
(taping without notification isn’t illegal everywhere. Memory is that it’s OK in DC and some states)
You didn't her me saying that what they did was wrong, only that it does appear to be illegal.
And who wants a trial of the ‘perps?’
PP probably does.
PP would have answered honestly about what they do? ha! BUT if this were prosecuted, it’d be more devastating to PP than to CMP.
They do have a lot of money and CMP probably doesn't, yet. It will be interesting to see what happens. Hopefully with the withdrawal of donor and public funding, PP will soon have considerably less operating liquidity.
I wouldn't put my money on that in this State. It depends upon the judge.
In any case, the video was well worth the sacrifice of the videographer.
That was clearly their judgment.
Prosecution would be PP’s worst nightmare. It would allow the perps to have discovery. THAT would be even more devastating than the tapes. They simply can not afford to have that happen. And, if there’s a prosecution, it continues the story that they would prefer to be shut down, pronto.
Civil prosecution, yes. Criminal prosecution, not so much.
This ain’t a court of law, Planned Baby Parts, but the court of public opinion - guess what? You lost ... on steroids.
Why would criminal prosecution be less a problem to PP than civil? There’s still that dreaded discovery.
Unless I am mistaken, the court has a tighter rein on the discovery process in a criminal case.
Yes, I would not put in past them to decide that just in this one instance they were violating the law. But there have been cases over this law and it was decided in favor of the recorder.
Of course they can bring up Donald Stirling case and just when is whatzerface going to be arrested for taping private phone calls?
Maybe he should have talked about tearing babies apart for fun and profit not who her guests were at a basketball game. Then it would have been private.
Both ways from what I can tell. In reading the statute, I can't call it unambiguous.
A criminal defendant would have broader latitude to unearth evidence than a civil defendant. A defendant in a criminal case faces time in prison, loss of liberty, etc., or (depending on the case/state) death penalty, so the courts are far more lenient with them. Prosecutors have more limitations. Defendants are entitled to anything, all proof/evidence, that would help their case. Tell me PP would want that!!!
Interesting. I guess I misunderstood the federal statute in question.
Thanks for the correction.
You are presuming a justice system per the State and Federal Constitutions. I'm not so certain we would have that in a case like this.
We'll see.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.