• sleet01@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    1 month ago

    “Felony Eavesdropping” is that like “Ninja’ing With Intent to Distribute”?

    I mean, if we’re just making up obviously bullshit charges now…

      • LilB0kChoy@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Were they working at the time? Do LAPD officers wear body cams? Seems like law enforcement officers, at least while working, should reasonably expect to be recorded all the time, which would be implied consent.

        • ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 month ago

          You’re right (and it’s great to see someone that understands implied consent) but they’re absolutely going to make him fight for it. Meaning that if the goal is to discourage the behavior, they’ll charge anyway and let the defense attorney argue it.

      • ReluctantMuskrat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 month ago

        I hate that 12 states are all-party consent. If you’re part of a conversation you should be allowed to record it, and 38 states agree.

        I went to jail after being falsely charged with assault and it was only my recordings of our conversations that saved my ass. To think in California I could have been charged with a felony for providing evidence my accuser was a scheming liar is crazy to me.

    • Dultas@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 month ago

      Don’t they have body cameras. They should have no expectation of privacy if they do.

      • stevles@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        30 days ago

        Not in the locker rooms, and typically only switched on when actively engaged in activities