It probably was obtained unlawfully. Recording a conversation with a person without so advising them is prohibited in California. These people at CMP were willing to go to jail to do what they did.
Planned Parenthood finally seems afraid.
Does that apply to recording in a public place such as the restaurant in the first video?
it varies by state, not everything they recorded will be from california.
Illinois has the same set up. Our pols don’t want to be recorded.
Fortunately, I think the reporters had good legal advice.
Under California Law Penal Code § 632:
632. (a) Every person who, intentionally and without the consent of all parties to a confidential communication, by means of any electronic amplifying or recording device, eavesdrops upon or records the confidential communication, whether the communication is carried on among the parties in the presence of one another or by means of a telegraph, telephone, or other device, except a radio, shall be punished by a fine not exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500), or imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one year, or in the state prison, or by both that fine and imprisonment. If the person has previously been convicted of a violation of this section or Section 631, 632.5, 632.6, 632.7, or 636, the person shall be punished by a fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000), by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one year, or in the state prison, or by both that fine and imprisonment.By having the discussion in a public place (a restaurant), there could be no expectation of not being overheard, and so no "confidential communication"(b) The term "person" includes an individual, business association, partnership, corporation, limited liability company, or other legal entity, and an individual acting or purporting to act for or on behalf of any government or subdivision thereof, whether federal, state, or local, but excludes an individual known by all parties to a confidential communication to be overhearing or recording the communication.
(c) The term "confidential communication" includes any communication carried on in circumstances as may reasonably indicate that any party to the communication desires it to be confined to the parties thereto, but excludes a communication made in a public gathering or in any legislative, judicial, executive or administrative proceeding open to the public, or in any other circumstance in which the parties to the communication may reasonably expect that the communication may be overheard or recorded.
“Recording a conversation with a person without so advising them is prohibited in California.”
It isn’t in MN, I know that for a fact. Very few states are actually two party states. Of course if you record something across state lines (video conference or telephone for example), then Federal law comes into play, which requires all parties are aware of recording.
Borders on whistleblower, although not directly employed. There may be something along this angle for protection.
No.
Recording a conversation with a person without so advising them is prohibited in California.
If you are in a place where you could reasonably expect privacy yes. If you are sitting in a public restaurant where anyone can overhear you, no.
They checked the laws very carefully to make sure they were complying with them.
I heard the guy talking about it on Hannity radio yesterday.
Even the California recordings have precedent.
Recording a conversation in a public place is no violation as there isn’t an expectation of privacy while sitting at a table in a restaurant.
A good attorney would emphasize the fact that this conversation took place in a public restaurant. So much for right to privacy.
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)