Posted on 09/12/2009 8:08:34 PM PDT by Bob Eimiller
By Noel Sheppard | September 12, 2009 - 15:26 In a shocking twist to Thursday's ACORN sting video story, the Baltimore city state's attorney is considering charging the two people that exposed the activity.
As NewsBusters has been reporting, Hannah Giles and James O'Keefe caught on video several ACORN representatives giving them advice as to how to get a loan to purchase a house to be used as a brothel whose employees would be under-aged illegal immigrants.
Despite the long list of laws possibly broken by these ACORN representatives, the Baltimore city state's attorneys office is looking into whether or not Giles and O'Keefe violated statutes concerning taping people without their consent....
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
I'm not a lawyer. But it's my impression that the law is not about all communication in the sense of all speech between people, but communication in the sense of high-tech communications ... phones, wires, electronic means of transferring info.
I shouldnt go out on a limb. But I really think the prosecutor is trying to twist the law. She has to divorce the audio part of the tape from the visual part to argue that the law applies ... she's only alleging that the audio part might have been illegally obtained. To me this sounds like nonsense. I just doubt the law applies this way.
But like I said, I'm just a dumb layman. Of course it's always possible that a nonlawyer FReeper is smarter than a RAT prosecutor who loves ACORN.
I think they’d have no trouble attracting pro bono representation from the best law firms in Baltimore.
Jury nullification.
We have four boxes of resort. Gotta use ‘em.
But should these two get prosecuted it will make them bigger heroes then they already are. And will make the corrupt system of media and leftist government look worse than it is already does.
A criminal defense attorney would be used to being on the other side of the govt. I would be surprised if that were a problem. Also doubt the blue chip firms do much, if any, work for the City of Baltimore. Not likely the city can afford them.
Let’s say you have a huge law firm with a criminal practice as well as lots of other areas such as business. Hard to believe that city lawyers would hold a grudge against all the lawyers at the firm because the criminal people did pro bono work on a case.
That Prosecutor better have a snow white life record if he is going to try this.
Maryland law technically gives an out for those recording crimes
You're right! Wire tap laws, implemented to protect telephone conversations and private conversations between two individuals usually speak to the interception of communications between two individuals without their consent. One-party consent is where one party has consented and knows the conversation is recorded. At the Acorn offices, both James and Hannah knew the conversations were being recorded, and there seemed to always be multiple individuals in the room which negates the argument of an expectation of privacy by one individual. There are many more nuances that a prosecutor/defendant can use, but generally law-makers don't like hidden cameras used to document crimes. They think about what they have done or could have done, and don't want to get caught.
law makers have not been able to update the laws as to the recording of audio and video together.
The parallel universe are computer network crimes. The laws being used still rely on old telephone data components as to the seizure of digital data.
What this case needs is a Federal Prosecutor (United States Attorney) to initiate a RICO investigation of ACORN. Then give James and Hannah limited-use immunity upon review of all of their recorded material. That would protect what has not been seen and give pathways to additional leads that can be pursued. RICO are the laws implemented to bring down organized crime. Racketing-Influence and Corrupt Organization statues. A big plus for a Federal prosecutor in RICO is that they can introduce to a federal court evidence of state crimes that were not charged. They can even go back prior to the end of statute limitations for criminal charges (usually 5 years) just to talk about a criminal pattern to introduce the criminal enterprise, or just how they function to break laws. ACORN has a long track record, so a basis for a RICO investigation has long been there. Another plus of RICO is that upon indictment, not just conviction, but a charge by a Grand Jury, a lot of financial assets can be seized. A RICO charge can put an enterprise out of business fast even before they go to trial by drying up their funds.
Just my take, I've been out of the business for awhile, so things could have changed.
Thanks for the link, I read it and it looks as if Maryland may have a case against them.
I know that even businesses around here use cameras that are in plain sight and they do not have audio.
If the Baltimore city state’s attorney tries to indict these folks the good people of Maryland should rise up and stone him.
Not him... Her
I’m not a sexist,
Stone her.
I don’t think the MD state attorney will actually prosecute the Acorn Sting Video Makers. It is more of an intimidation threat for YouTube, Fox News, and Talk Radio not to broadcast the damning videos.
See #89
RE : “It is more of an intimidation threat for YouTube, Fox News, and Talk Radio not to broadcast the damning videos.”
LOL, Doesnt seem like that would work. Imagine the story that would make,
Notice if you are a pervert and hide a camera it is a misdemeanor if you are doing to investigate corruption it is a felony
they have no case against them.
Don’t forget that ACORN got millions from the GWB administration. Farming out govt. programs to private orgs. may be a conservative idea, but this is ridiculous.
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.