Question for the legal eagle's

[gopiscrap]

what is the criminal and civil liability for the person who recorded the Romney disaster shown tonight from his fundraiser, if any?

[elleng]

1. Maybe none,

if there legitimately, no stated restrictions. Furthermore, In the United States, federal agencies may be authorized to engage in wiretaps by the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, a court with secret proceedings, in certain circumstances.

Under United States federal law and most state laws there is nothing illegal about one of the parties to a telephone call recording the conversation, or giving permission for calls to be recorded or permitting their telephone line to be tapped. However, several states (e.g., California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Oregon and Washington) require that all parties consent when one party wants to record a telephone conversation. Many businesses and other organizations record their telephone calls so that they can prove what was said, train their staff, or monitor performance. This activity may not be considered telephone tapping in some, but not all, jurisdictions because it is done with the knowledge of at least one of the parties to the telephone conversation. The Telephone recording laws in some U.S. states require only one party to be aware of the recording, while other states require both parties to be aware. It is considered better practice to announce at the beginning of a call that the conversation is being recorded.

There is a federal law and two main types of state laws that govern telephone recording:

Federal law requires that at least one party taking part in the call must be notified of the recording (18 U.S.C. §2511(2)(d)). For example, it would be illegal to record the phone calls of people who come into one's place of business and ask to use the phone, unless they are notified.

[gopiscrap]

2. thanks I was wondering

I live in Washington State and I remember Rep. Jim McDermott getting into some hot water over a recording...

[jberryhill]

3. Unlikely

Whether there were conditions on attendance, we don't know. If there were, then you have some kind of contract or trespassing claim in desperate search of cognizable damages.

Some states have a variety of surreptitious recording statutes which evolved from their wiretapping statutes. Even those which do have such laws, they tend to relate to unilateral recording of a private conversation by one of its participants without the knowledge of the other.

But an address to a group is not likely to satisfy the types of statutory conditions around those circumstances.

That is completely through my hat, and perhaps there is a relevant statute that would surprise me.

Some sort of common law privacy or right of publicity is not going to fly well because, as he put it, "I'm running for president, for Pete's sake."


In fact there is reason to believe that Mitt was admitting more than we know. A forthcoming analysis of Mitt's proposals has rigorously proven through careful research of census and economic data, that his policies in fact will only benefit a single American - Pete Johnson of Preston, Idaho. So it turns out that while a Romney presidency will be disastrous for every other American, it does seem that he is running for president solely for Pete's sake.

[Justice]

4. Possibly. Taped in Florida, Florida law applies, but possible exception here

Florida's wiretapping law is a "two-party consent" law.

It is a crime to intercept or record a "wire, oral, or electronic communication" in Florida, unless all parties to the communication consent. Fla. Stat. ch. 934.03.

However, there is an exception in Florida law for in-person communications when the parties do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the conversation. These kinds of in-person conversations may be recorded without breaking the law.

If you violate the Florida wiretapping law, you can also be sued for damages in a civil suit.

So, the exception may apply if you can show there was no reasonable expectation of privacy in the conversation.

I am remembering a reporter who reported on a similar gathering in Tampa around the convention. He said he was invited by a friend, used his real name, was never told it was off the record or private - so he published his story about the event. It was the event were Karl Rove said if Akin should up dead, not to look at Rove for doing it, or words to that effect.

Maybe no one ever said the May event was private or that you could not record -- so maybe that helps prove the exception.

Also, Romney has verified the comments as being true -- what does he get from asking for criminal charges to be pressed or from suing? He would only look worse (if that were possible).

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

5. This is not a wiretap...

Wiretapping is the interception of an electronic communication. This was a recording of a live event.

The fact that he was speaking at a closed-door, private event might be a problem. But good luck locating the source of the video.