Quote:
Originally Posted by DiverRich
lol good luck with that. Remember two wrongs don't make a right. And the Rodney King situation is apples and oranges. First, it was a third party at a distance and the laws of California are totally different on this matter. That's why I suggest checking your state's law.
All I'm saying is that it's not worth going to jail and giving someone the ammo they need to put you there. I've seen people try this tactic on Oregon police officers and it always ends up with the citizen being arrested, the recording is barred from being used as evidence against the officer, and the cop gets away with being an ass. This works both ways. I've seen murder convictions overturned because the officer forgot to inform the suspect he was recording the confession.
All one has to do is inform the other person they are being recorded and then (in Oregon at least) there is no illegality. My guess is that once this officer knew he was going to be recorded he would avoid you like the plague. If he's dumb enough to be an ass then he deserves to get hammered.
|
I understand that that's the law there in Oregon, but I'd still make the recordings to cover my ass.
Now...this discussion borders on our legal system and all, but the laws restricting these recordings are antiquated in my opinion. Not only that, but it seems that they are not enforced fairly. For example, when you stop someone in Oregon, do you inform the person you've pulled over that the stop is being recorded? If not, why is that allowed when a public citizen is required to do so.
To me, the whole concept of permission to record anothers actions these days is pretty silly. We have tons of public cameras out there from stop light cameras for tickets to security cameras for business'. There is really no such thing as privacy anymore except in your own house/apartment. Everyone has a camera phone.
The laws need to adapt to this new reality. That law in Oregon may need to be changed to reflect this. And, in order to change that law, appeals where recordings like I was referring to above might need to be made. I would consider being able to record an officer a "protection" of my rights, because otherwise it's his word vs. mine.
I trust and respect police officers, but I have also experienced first hand where an officer lied to protect himself as well. Most police officers are great...but as I said earlier, they are human and there are going to be a few bad apples out there as well.
edit: Another thought on this.
Also, once they know you're recording, their behavior will change. This, however, doesn't deal with the problem that perhaps that officer might have been acting inappropriately to begin with....and might do so again to someone else later on down the line...someone who might not record the incident. To me, the officer should be above reproach at all times. If they act honestly, then a secret recording shouldn't matter. I'd hope that all officers should act like they are on camera at all times, don't you think?
