Re: audio surveillance public place

More | Report Post

Thank you for answering me : I actually do not know what these wackos
are accusing us of but this latest flas accusation is that I was inside
my home working one day I was on and of the tellphone as well as cell
phone speaking to work related people all day. My mother was at my hosue
with me all day also. These people call the police 3 days later saying
that I was calling them white tarsh and trailor trash and that I wanted
to .... there 40 year old no attractive at all daughter!Regardless,I
would never ever say that about a very attractive lady anyways! I will
not write the word becasue I do not ever use that word.They are
fabricating and writing absolutely lies and putting this in sworn
statements.I believe that they told the police that they overherd me
saying these things and that are sending out there audio video cameras
tapes to be enhanced to try and see if they are actually on there tapes!
Well, it will not be on there tapes becue I never ever said that about
there daughter. I do have an attorney.He is actually a very good defense
attorney.This is not the most important case to him,understandably.What
do you think? I really appreciate your help very much.Thank you
again,tonyOn 5/10/08, -- wrote:
> On 5/10/08, tony wrote:
>> Well it has gotten worse! These crazy people are claiming that I had
>> aid something while inside my home one day.I was working at home
>> with the radio on and with a friend there.I was on and off the phone
>> all day.Well 4 days later the police show up at my door saying these
>> people said I said something very bad and offensive to me and my
>> family! Terrible! Well,they are investigating this! They told me
>> that they both made a sworn staemnet to this false allegation and
>> also they are sending there audio tape which they have on 9 cameras
>> toward my house out to get enhanced .The police tell me that even if
>> the audio comes bnack "garbled" i may still be arrested becaus eof
>> there sworn statements to this false allegation!Remember,I was
>> INSIDE my hosue when they are claiming they overherd what they are
>> lising to what they said I was saying! CAn this be happening? First
>> of all., I NEVER SAID WHAT THEY SAID I SAID! Second, I was INSIDE MY
>> house.Thirdly,why did they wait 4 days later to call the police? Can
>> you help me with your advice?Thank you.On 4/04/08, -- wrote:
>>> On 4/04/08, Tony wrote:
>>>> Is it legal for our crazy neighbor across the street to have 9
>>>> audio+video cameras pointed in our childrens bedroom windows as
>>>> well as ALL the windows of the front or our home?They are AUDIO
>>>> equipted and tape our conversations from our front yard,garage
>>>> and also INSIDE OUR HOME! We have called the local police and
>>>> they have viewed as well as listened to these tapes and they
>>>> tell us it is NOT illegal! We live in Connecticut. Can anyone
>>>> shed some light on this for us? Thanks...Tony
>
> Tony:
> You need to get a lawyer. As I wrote to you before, (see below) using
> a device such as a camera/audio recorded that can hear/see into a
> place where you have a reasonable expectation of privacy (like inside
> your house) is a felony in your state.
>
> However, even if neighbors committed a crime in recording you inside
> your house, the recording might be admitted as evidence in court
> against you because it was not the government who did the illegal
> snooping. Your Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable search
> and seizure only apply to government acts. If your neighbor breaks
> into your house and searches it -- and finds 10 pounds of drugs -- if
> he turns the evidence over to the police, it can be used against you
> even though he might also be prosecuted for breaking and entering.
>
> Are your neighbors accusing you of drug activity or what?
>
>>> Tony:
>>>
>>> Connecticut has a fairly strict “eavesdropping
>>> statute. “Mechanical overhearing of a conversation”
>>> (see definition below) is a felony in Connecticut.
>>> If a person uses a recording device hooked up to a
>>> sensitive microphone, that is illegal unless they
>>> have the permission of at least one person involved
>>> in the conversation. The people being eavesdropped
>>> on must also have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
>>> If you are in a public place like a store you probably
>>> don’t have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
>>> However, if you are in your house and speaking in a
>>> voice that could not be heard beyond the boundaries
>>> of your property without the assistance of a
>>> “mechanical device” then you do have a reasonable
>>> expectation of privacy.
>>>
>>> The audio recording you described is clearly a
>>> violation of Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-189.
>>>
>>> Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-187 (2008) [Eavesdropping]
>>>
>>> § 53a-187. Definitions. Applicability.
>>>
>>> (2) "Mechanical overhearing of a conversation"
>>> means the intentional overhearing or recording
>>> of a conversation or discussion, without the
>>> consent of at least one party thereto, by a
>>> person not present thereat, by means of any
>>> instrument, device or equipment.
>>>
>>> § 53a-189. Eavesdropping: Class D felony.
>>>
>>> (a) A person is guilty of eavesdropping
>>> when he unlawfully engages in wiretapping or
>>> mechanical overhearing of a conversation.
>>>
>>> (b) Eavesdropping is a class D felony.
>>> ******
>>> Connecticut law appears to deal with video recording
>>> under its Voyeurism law. See below. The video
>>> recording you described may be illegal under Conn.
>>> Gen. Stat. § 53a-189a. I found one case where a
>>> conviction and lawsuit followed an act of video
>>> voyeurism. See below.
>>>
>>> Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-189a (2008) [Voyurism]
>>>
>>> § 53a-189a. Voyeurism: Class D felony.
>>>
>>> (a) A person is guilty of voyeurism
>>> when (1) with malice, such person knowingly
>>> photographs, films, videotapes or otherwise
>>> records the image of another person (A)
>>> without the knowledge and consent of such
>>> other person, (B) while such other person
>>> is not in plain view, and (C) under
>>> circumstances where such other person has
>>> a reasonable expectation of privacy, or (2)
>>> with intent to arouse or satisfy the sexual
>>> desire of such person or any other person,
>>> such person knowingly photographs, films,
>>> videotapes or otherwise records the image
>>> of another person (A) without the knowledge
>>> and consent of such other person, (B) while
>>> such other person is not in plain view, and
>>> (C) under circumstances where such other person
>>> has a reasonable expectation of privacy.
>>>
>>> (b) Voyeurism is a class D felony.
>>>
>>> Case law on voyeurism:
>>> Wilderman v. Powers, 2007 Conn. Super. LEXIS 1001 (Conn. Super.
>>> Ct. 2007)
>>>
>>> On August 5, 2005, Gregory Powers, without the plaintiffs'
>>> knowledge, entered the plaintiffs' property, approached
>>> the window of the bathroom, and photographed or attempted
>>> to photograph Lisa Wilderman in a partial state of undress.
>>> While outside the bathroom window, Gregory Powers struck the
>>> bottom of the window with his camera, and as a result, Lisa
>>> Wilderman became startled, and noticed the camera and hand
>>> holding it. She contacted police, which resulted in the
>>> arrest of Gregory Powers that evening with the camera in
>>> his possession, hiding in the woods across the street from
>>> the plaintiffs' home.