Video/Audio recording

[paulooch1958]

There have been a lot of youtube videos showing encounters with police officers during traffic stops, etc. I think that this has been determined to be legal to do (even though it may bother the officer a bit). I have seen posts suggesting that a person involved in a self defense shooting try to record on video with his or her cellphone whatever evidence there may be at the scene (like shell casings, where the knife was tossed, etc).

This is fine, but there is only your word to go on in many cases as to what led up to the shooting. Time dilation, tunnel vision, and other factors lead to inaccurate memory of the incident. Of course you can't run around with a vid recorder running 24/7 so I was thinking about other ways to record, say the last few hours of audio on a continual basis.

I've found a device that does just that. It is a battery powered continuous loop pocket audio recorder. If an attack was to occur, it would be caught on the recording loop and then you could stop the recorder and the event could be captured for later review to (hopefully) help you defend yourself against a murder charge.

Does anyone know of the legality of this? If you can record video of an officer performing his duty, and if public places are by definition in the public domain, is there some problem of recording in this manner? You are not storing or archiving anything, except the last few minutes of a crisis situation.


Thanks in advance,
Paul

 

[Bikenut]

Recording laws for video and/or audio vary from State to State. In some States it is legal to record other people without their consent as long as there isn't an entitlement to privacy. Like it might be Ok to record in a restaurant but not be Ok to record in the bathroom for just one possible example. In other States it might be necessary to get the consent to be recorded from the people being recorded no matter where they are being recorded.

And there might be different/more stringent laws about video recording over audio recording.

It would be wise for everyone who carries (concealed or openly) to consider running some kind of recording device (following the recording laws of their State) every moment they are carrying simply because then there is a recording of how it started, what actually happened while it was happening, and how it all ended up after the cops were done and the dust settled.

There is another advantage to constantly running a recorder (if that is legal in your State) because if someone lies and says you did something that you didn't do............ you have a recording that you can refer to in court and point out the lack of evidence supporting that lie.

In my not so humble opinion video with audio recordings are best because not only is there a record of what was said but there is a good chance you caught who did what while they said it on video.

So.... may I suggest doing a search for the recording laws in your State?

 

[GlassWolf]

There have been a lot of youtube videos showing encounters with police officers during traffic stops, etc. I think that this has been determined to be legal to do (even though it may bother the officer a bit). I have seen posts suggesting that a person involved in a self defense shooting try to record on video with his or her cellphone whatever evidence there may be at the scene (like shell casings, where the knife was tossed, etc).

This is fine, but there is only your word to go on in many cases as to what led up to the shooting. Time dilation, tunnel vision, and other factors lead to inaccurate memory of the incident. Of course you can't run around with a vid recorder running 24/7 so I was thinking about other ways to record, say the last few hours of audio on a continual basis.

I've found a device that does just that. It is a battery powered continuous loop pocket audio recorder. If an attack was to occur, it would be caught on the recording loop and then you could stop the recorder and the event could be captured for later review to (hopefully) help you defend yourself against a murder charge.

Does anyone know of the legality of this? If you can record video of an officer performing his duty, and if public places are by definition in the public domain, is there some problem of recording in this manner? You are not storing or archiving anything, except the last few minutes of a crisis situation.


Thanks in advance,
Paul

Legality varies state to state. In some states it's illegal to record (audio or video) a LEO without his consent. Doing so will result in confiscation of your gear, and your subsequent arrest. These shield laws are, in my opinion, stupid and serve only to protect the government from the citizens it abuses, but they are in place.

 

[Nightmare45]

If recording an event where my or my families life is in danger is illegal, to damn bad.

 

[Burtboomer]

Not saying right or wrong. I do see a lawyer using that as a pre meditated device--If he didn't want to kill him why did he just happen to have this recorder with him. I'm not a lawyer so not sure.

 

[Bikenut]

Not saying right or wrong. I do see a lawyer using that as a pre meditated device--If he didn't want to kill him why did he just happen to have this recorder with him. I'm not a lawyer so not sure.

Ummmm... if the rationale that a prosecutor/lawyer used was that a person is carrying a recorder because he intends to harm someone.. wouldn't the prosecutor/lawyer be able to say the guy was carrying a gun because he intended to shoot someone?

Guns, and recorders, are very useful self defense devices. The gun to defend against the bad guy and the recorder to defend against being wrongfully charged with a crime.

 

[BluesStringer]

Guns, and recorders, are very useful self defense devices. The gun to defend against the bad guy and the recorder to defend against being wrongfully charged with a crime.

I always have a video cam within reach while in my car, but it's really inadequate for walking around with due to it tying up my gun-hand. I'm not very ambidextrous, but to the extent that I am, the dedicated camera I have is really only a right-handed camera. I could make my phone function with my left hand, but it's clumsy and takes more concentration than I'm willing to allow myself to be distracted from situational awareness by. Do you have any suggestions for an affordable (read: cheap) hands-free rigging while on foot? Something that I could just aim in a general direction, turn it on and basically forget it until after whatever I'm recording is done? I looked and couldn't find anything useful for less than about $350 bucks, and those are large, bulky, restrict movement and more money than I care to spend anyway. I was hoping to find some kind of harness with a fairly unobtrusive mount around the center of my chest. Ever seen or used anything like that? BTW, what I have is not a Go-Pro. It's just a small JVC digital cam-corder. It would be easy if I had a Go-Pro, as they make every kind of hands-free mounts for them that's ever been thought of, but I can't afford a whole new system, just want to go hands-free with what I've got. Anyone who has any ideas would be greatly appreciated.

Blues

 

[paulooch1958]

I live in California. As we all know it's a state full of stringent laws. When I posted the above, I also wrote to the ACLDN editors with the same question. I received a response from Gila Hayes containing links to several ACLDN newsletters with discussions about his very topic.

This newsletter : http://www.armedcitizensnetwork.org/images/stories/journal/Network_2011-5.pdf contains a reply from Attorney Keith H. Rutman, Esq. in San Diego. This is a an excerpt from his reply :

"In short, as far as audio is concerned, California is a
two party consent state. Absent both parties’ consent, it is
deemed illegal wiretapping and you can also be sued for
civil damages. The evidence is also inadmissible in court."

Gotta love this place.:stop:

 

[Deanimator]

Ohio is a one party consent state for recording. As long as I'm a party to the "conversation", I can record all I want and with NO notice.

EVERY time I leave the house armed, I've got an audio recording device running.

Almost EVERY high profile police misconduct case I can think of involved recording of the cop's behavior.

In addition, recording can protect you from other threats as well. An attorney friend once asked me to take pictures of some anti-abortion protesters intentionally blocking the view from a hidden driveway of a building with a Planned Parenthood office in it. This had already almost caused several accidents (including one involving me). This was a small faction of the the protesters who'd been warned repeatedly, and who had in fact said they didn't CARE if it caused an accident, even a FATAL one.

While taking pictures of the illegal activity, I was approached by two of the troublemakers who attempted to provoke me. I just sat silently taking pictures and reading a book on machine guns. In addition to abundant photos of them trying to cause an accident, I got audio of one of them trying to start a fight with me.

Afterwards, my friend called a meeting with the protesters, at which the majority disassociated itself from the troublemakers. As an aside, my friend asked the ringleader of the troublemakers, an easily 350lb. foul mouthed buffoon, if he thought it was bright to try to pick a fight with a guy wearing an NRA instructor's cap and reading a book on machine guns. At that point, a [rather dim] light bulb clicked on over Jabba the Hut's head. Apparently, his life in his mother's basement flashed before his eyes...

 

[Burtboomer]

Bikenut that is a very good point. I have to agree with that.

 

[K7lvo]

There have been a lot of youtube videos showing encounters with police officers during traffic stops, etc. I think that this has been determined to be legal to do (even though it may bother the officer a bit). I have seen posts suggesting that a person involved in a self defense shooting try to record on video with his or her cellphone whatever evidence there may be at the scene (like shell casings, where the knife was tossed, etc).

This is fine, but there is only your word to go on in many cases as to what led up to the shooting. Time dilation, tunnel vision, and other factors lead to inaccurate memory of the incident. Of course you can't run around with a vid recorder running 24/7 so I was thinking about other ways to record, say the last few hours of audio on a continual basis.

I've found a device that does just that. It is a battery powered continuous loop pocket audio recorder. If an attack was to occur, it would be caught on the recording loop and then you could stop the recorder and the event could be captured for later review to (hopefully) help you defend yourself against a murder charge.

Does anyone know of the legality of this? If you can record video of an officer performing his duty, and if public places are by definition in the public domain, is there some problem of recording in this manner? You are not storing or archiving anything, except the last few minutes of a crisis situation.


Thanks in advance,
Paul

Can you give us more info on the device? It sounds like what I'm looking for.

 

[Bikenut]

Got info about recording devices? Please DO NOT!!! share it on the open forum but please use the private message feature. No need to inform the anti gunners what "we the people" are (legally) using to defeat them.

 

[paulooch1958]

Got info about recording devices? Please DO NOT!!! share it on the open forum but please use the private message feature. No need to inform the anti gunners what "we the people" are (legally) using to defeat them.

I'm not sure how super-secret we need to keep the vendor information for an over the counter loop recorder, but since you asked with such emphasis, I won't post the item link here. This isn't rocket science and a quick Google search will find anything these days... but if anyone wants info on the specific item I was speaking of, send me a private message and I'll reply with the link.

Paul

 

[Seeya]

@Bikenut FYI the anti's know about them already, so what difference does it make. We are monitored 24/7 by our elected servants. Suppression of information is impossiable.

 

[BluesStringer]

Got info about recording devices? Please DO NOT!!! share it on the open forum but please use the private message feature. No need to inform the anti gunners what "we the people" are (legally) using to defeat them.

I have to agree with the two previous posts, and would simply say in direct reply, without any 'tude or sarcasm or vitriol intended, that there is no need to hide from the anti-gunners what We, The People are legally doing on any subject.

It's as likely as not that if the NSA or related agencies had an interest in what is said here (and I have no doubt that they do), that they could just as easily get into the PM system as read the boards. They've already got access to our private email and cell phone accounts, how much more difficult could it conceivably be for them to get into PM systems on low-security web servers?

Besides all that, anyone who makes a purchase from, oh, say - some Link Removed kind of website using either a PayPal account or a credit card, the government knows about that too, or at least they have the technology in place to find out about it a big damned hurry if they manufactured a "need" to.

No disrespect intended to Bikenut at all, but I see this kind of issue very similar to how I see OC - I have no more reason to fear the government knowing of my legal activities than the government has valid and legal reasons to monitor them, or harass me over them, or abuse me over them etc. etc. As always, others' MMV.

Blues

 

[rifleshooter474]

In Oklahoma the Oklahoma Highway Patrol do not have to release their dash cam videos to the public. The local city police have been forced to make their dash cam videos public. If there had been an inside video camera recording how Tulsa police officer Ms Kristy Maxwell Allen, treated me when she arrested me on July 16th 2010, and hauled me to jail in that dog cage in the back seat of her patrol car,my hands cuffed behind me tightly and the temp inside the patrol car where i was placed was around 115F. This while she played her RAP music and drove over 90 MPH to get rid of me so she could have the rest of the day off. If there had been a video of my treatment that day, i might have had a chance to prove how worthless this worthless Tulsa cop really was.

 

[Bikenut]

First off I didn't take anything that was said as being disrespectful or offensive or ... well... anything....

The reason I suggested not making every covert recording device out there known to those ...LE and anti gunner.... who peruse gun forums isn't because of what the big name government agencies may or may not know.... and they likely know what time I farted this morning plus what I ate to cause it... it is because small fry police depts. and individual officers also check out these forums... not to mention anti gunners do too. And it is not outside the realm of possibility for a recorder to be taken, the recordings deleted, and the recorder shut off. Or "accidentally" stepped on. I suspect an anti gunner might be aggressive enough to do something like that... and I suspect some LEO's might do that also. Or the recorder might be seized as "evidence" never to be seen again. So if they don't happen to know what a covert recorder looks like the odds are greater that the recording will survive to be of use in court.

That, my friends, is the concern behind my suggesting to not post what devices are available on/in the forum itself.

My concern may not be warranted.... Y'all decide for yourselves.

And I'm just too lazy today to go searching the 'net for incidents where the police did bad things to the recorders that folks had.... so my concern can be chalked up to just my personal opinion.

Edited to add:

Wait... I did a quick google search for "police seize cell phone" and got more than 5,000,000 results.... and everyone knows a cell phone is/could be/can be used as.......... a recorder.

 

[AndeyHall]

I think recording laws, either in public or over the phone aren't necessarily to say that doing so is illegal. They simply determine whether that evidence is admissible in court or not. There is absolutely nothing wrong with recording phone calls without the other person's consent for your own personal use (I use to have a cell phone that would and wish I still did). You just can't always use that recording as evidence if the other person didn't consent.

 

[rifleshooter474]

I think recording laws, either in public or over the phone aren't necessarily to say that doing so is illegal. They simply determine whether that evidence is admissible in court or not. There is absolutely nothing wrong with recording phone calls without the other person's consent for your own personal use (I use to have a cell phone that would and wish I still did). You just can't always use that recording as evidence if the other person didn't consent.

I think you are correct the cop who transported this woman to the police station for an interview, who had her husband fall from a high rise apt building to his death. He had his cell phone or a recorder hidden, and recorded her talking with her grandmother about what happened. she had not been arrested so did not have her rights given to her. Also at the police station while in a room alone she talked again to her greanmother about what had happened in the Apt. leading up to her husband going through the window. And again she was being recorded, without knowing it. everything this woman said was used in her trial, and they got a conviction. So I say be warned keep your mouth shut and don't say anything without first contacting an Attorney.

 

[Bikenut]

I think you are correct the cop who transported this woman to the police station for an interview, who had her husband fall from a high rise apt building to his death. He had his cell phone or a recorder hidden, and recorded her talking with her grandmother about what happened. she had not been arrested so did not have her rights given to her. Also at the police station while in a room alone she talked again to her greanmother about what had happened in the Apt. leading up to her husband going through the window. And again she was being recorded, without knowing it. everything this woman said was used in her trial, and they got a conviction. So I say be warned keep your mouth shut and don't say anything without first contacting an Attorney.

And if they "the government" (and never forget that even local cops ARE "the government") can use recordings as evidence... why shouldn't we "the people" do the same? Think about that very carefully.