Posted on 03/09/2024 1:33:04 PM PST by Macho MAGA Man
Good to see someone on here that’s thought about the knotty legal issues. Interested if someone comes up with some solid case authority on the issue.
“IMO, this one man is the prime person who should be in actual PRISON for what he did in helping Democrats cheat that election. Life sentence.”
This is the reason that during the time of war, if an enemy combatant is wearing the opponant’s uniform, then he is immediately executed.
In Kearney v. Salomon Smith Barney, Inc., 137 P.3d 914 (Cal. 2006), the California Supreme Court applied California wiretap law to a company
located in Georgia that routinely recorded business phone calls with its clients in California. California law requires all party consent to record
any telephone calls, while Georgia law requires only one-party consent. Applying California choice-of-law rules, the Court reasoned that the
failure to apply California law would “impair California’s interest in protecting the degree of privacy afforded to California residents by
California law more severely than the application of California law would impair any interests of the State of Georgia.”
honestly, this is the FIRST thing I thought of when I heard the conversation was recorded!
it was seriously recovered?? who recovered it?
The law gets very interesting when the call is across state lines.
Your comment that the law in the state where it was recorded prevails is not necessarily true. See the case I posted sbove.
...and where was Trump at the time? In FLA? In DC? Elsewhere?
Can you record a call from another state?
Recording conversations between states
Generally speaking, laws favor the state where the call originated from. In this case, only one-party consent is needed because the call is coming from Texas. If the call originated in Florida, two-party consent would be needed.
Ratsburger appears to have broken the law as Trump called him.
DC Wiretapping Law
The District of Columbia’s wiretapping law is a “one-party consent” law. DC makes it a crime to record a phone call or conversation unless one party to the conversation consents. See D.C. Code § 23-542. Thus, if you operate in DC, you may record a conversation or phone call if you are a party to the conversation or you get permission from one party to the conversation in advance. That said, if you intend to record conversations involving people located in more than one state, you should play it safe and get the consent of all parties.
In addition to subjecting you to criminal prosecution, violating the DC wiretapping law can expose you to a civil lawsuit for damages by an injured party.
Consult The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press’s Can We Tape?: District of Columbia for more information on DC wiretapping law.
Yep. Yet, somehow he got re-elected.
This adds to the complex mess. While I don’t trust Wiki....
“On January 2, 2021, Trump held a one-hour phone call with Raffensperger.[5][40] Trump was joined by chief of staff Mark Meadows, trade adviser Peter Navarro, Justice Department official John Lott, law professor John C. Eastman, and attorneys Rudy Giuliani, Cleta Mitchell, Alex Kaufman, and Kurt Hilbert. Raffensperger was joined by his general counsel Ryan Germany.[41][42] Jordan Fuchs, a Republican operative and chief of staff to Brad Raffensperger, while listening on mute, recorded the phone conversation, while visiting her grandparents in Florida.[43][44][45][46].
Sounds like RICO to me.
My take is that any party recording in a state where 2 party consent is required by law is in violation if they do not disclose said recording to the other party regardless of what state/state laws are there.
If the recording was actually done in Florida, which it appears to be, it would be illegal.
It would also be illegal for anyone to use this illegal recording.
The recording would seem admissible in a GA trial (a 1 party jurisdiction) inasmuch as it seems irrelevant that the call initiated out of state or was recorded out of state.
It is unlikely Trump called Chief of Staff Fuch's grandmother's house in an attempt to reach Brad unless Trump had a reasonable belief Brad was in Florida (a 2 party jurisdiction). But, if so, the recording would seem inadmissible in a Florida trial. (??)
The act of recording was illegal in Florida where it was done. The criminal and civil action for the illegal act of recording, and damages for anyone using the illegal recording would be in Florida.
In most states, the law holds those who use the illegal recording as also liable criminally.
Trump did not (we are told) call a Florida telephone number and Fuchs was not a party to the call and did not direct the course of the discussion. Moreover, what if the phone Fuchs used for the recording this business call while she just happened to be in Florida was her GA state issued business phone with of course a GA state number?
A significant GA state interest is at risk by simply moving Fuchs a few feet across the border. 1 party state callers who wish to exercise their recording rights would now bear the burden of knowing the exact location of every party to the call before recording. {;^)
It is my understanding that any official business conversation with the president is automatically classified. If the call was recorded without permission, a felony was committed.
Enough in there to make a decent law school exam. My next question would be whether Jordan was a known participant. Might not have even been a legal taper if she was in Georgia. In any event she probably needs a Florida lawyer.
I'm pretty sure the answer to that is still no, but you probably need to consult a lawyer in the one party state.
I do know of cops in north Florida who would drive up to a friendly law enforcement office in southern Georgia and call drug dealers to arrange a deal. The Georgia cops got a solid arrest, the Florida cops got rid of a drug dealer. And the rural Georgia judges back in the day were not soft on foreign (as in Florida) drug dealers. But this was all years ago.
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.