1. Free Legal Help, Legal Forms and Lawyers. TheLaw.com has been providing free legal assistance online since 1995. Our most popular destinations for legal help are below. It only takes a minute to join our legal community!

    Dismiss Notice

Recorded Phone call

Discussion in 'Internet & Social Media Law' started by Innocient, Sep 16, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Innocient

    Innocient Law Topic Starter New Member

    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ok so my ex called me and told me that if i don't delete these online conversation logs where she admitted she has HPV than shes going to sue me, and then she threatened to "stab the shit" out of me. She called me restricted and my phone provider, MetroPCS, only gives call logs to court orders, So i had no other choice but to put her on speaker and got all of it on recorded. now in California it's illegal to record a phone call without both parties consent, but is this enough base to have it over looked if i ever have to use it?
     
  2. army judge

    army judge Super Moderator

    Messages:
    33,278
    Likes Received:
    5,327
    Trophy Points:
    113

    No, it won't be overlooked or ignored, if push comes to shove.

    But, are you sure you were in CA when she called?

    Maybe you went to Vegas that day?
     
  3. Innocient

    Innocient Law Topic Starter New Member

    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    oh heyyy :) I was having dinner in vegas that day, good steaks man! You should meet up with me there, I'll buy you one :D
     
  4. FlaRiptide

    FlaRiptide New Member

    Messages:
    478
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yet, push come to shove, cell phone records can show where you trully were. All present day cell phones are GPS tracking capable.
     
  5. Innocient

    Innocient Law Topic Starter New Member

    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    well how about this, i had it on speaker and my friend was recording a video with his phone, is it excusable that he just happened to be recording when this happened.
     
  6. army judge

    army judge Super Moderator

    Messages:
    33,278
    Likes Received:
    5,327
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Accidents do happen.

    Mistakes are made everyday, yet it takes weeks to sometimes discover them.
     
  7. Innocient

    Innocient Law Topic Starter New Member

    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    does anyone agree that this is at least a really messed up situation lol!
     
  8. Michael Wechsler

    Michael Wechsler Administrator Staff Member

    Messages:
    9,171
    Likes Received:
    622
    Trophy Points:
    113

    LOL - there are exigent circumstances. If she threatened your life and limb it is difficult to argue that the law against recording telephone conversations takes precedent. But moreso, there is also implied consent which would seem to apply in this case. See the law in California posted below. FYI in this post:

    States with consent of all parties to record a telephone conversation:

    California
    Connecticut
    Delaware
    Florida
    Illinois
    Maryland
    Massachusetts
    Michigan
    Montana
    New Hampshire
    Pennsylvania
    Washington

    States requiring only one party required to consent to recording

    Alaska
    Arkansas
    Colorado
    District of Columbia
    Georgia
    Hawaii
    Idaho
    Indiana
    Iowa
    Kansas
    Kentucky
    Louisiana
    Maine
    Minnesota
    Mississippi
    Missouri
    Nebraska
    Nevada
    New Jersey
    New Mexico
    New York
    North Carolina
    North Dakota
    Ohio
    Oklahoma
    Oregon
    Rhode Island
    South Carolina
    South Dakota
    Tennessee
    Texas
    Utah
    Vermont
    Virginia
    West Virginia
    Wisconsin
    Wyoming
     
  9. Michael Wechsler

    Michael Wechsler Administrator Staff Member

    Messages:
    9,171
    Likes Received:
    622
    Trophy Points:
    113

    California Penal Code Section 631

    (a) Any person who, by means of any machine, instrument, or
    contrivance, or in any other manner, intentionally taps, or makes any
    unauthorized connection, whether physically, electrically,
    acoustically, inductively, or otherwise, with any telegraph or
    telephone wire, line, cable, or instrument, including the wire, line,
    cable, or instrument of any internal telephonic communication
    system, or who willfully and without the consent of all parties to
    the communication, or in any unauthorized manner, reads, or attempts
    to read, or to learn the contents or meaning of any message, report,
    or communication while the same is in transit or passing over any
    wire, line, or cable, or is being sent from, or received at any place
    within this state; or who uses, or attempts to use, in any manner,
    or for any purpose, or to communicate in any way, any information so
    obtained, or who aids, agrees with, employs, or conspires with any
    person or persons to unlawfully do, or permit, or cause to be done
    any of the acts or things mentioned above in this section, is
    punishable by a fine not exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars
    ($2,500), or by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one
    year, or by imprisonment in the state prison, or by both a fine and
    imprisonment in the county jail or in the state prison. If the person
    has previously been convicted of a violation of this section or
    Section 632, 632.5, 632.6, 632.7, or 636, he or she is punishable by
    a fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000), or by
    imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one year, or by
    imprisonment in the state prison, or by both a fine and imprisonment
    in the county jail or in the state prison.
    (b) This section shall not apply (1) to any public utility engaged
    in the business of providing communications services and facilities,
    or to the officers, employees or agents thereof, where the acts
    otherwise prohibited herein are for the purpose of construction,
    maintenance, conduct or operation of the services and facilities of
    the public utility, or (2) to the use of any instrument, equipment,
    facility, or service furnished and used pursuant to the tariffs of a
    public utility, or (3) to any telephonic communication system used
    for communication exclusively within a state, county, city and
    county, or city correctional facility.
    (c) Except as proof in an action or prosecution for violation of
    this section, no evidence obtained in violation of this section shall
    be admissible in any judicial, administrative, legislative, or other
    proceeding.
    (d) This section shall become operative on January 1, 1994.
     
  10. Michael Wechsler

    Michael Wechsler Administrator Staff Member

    Messages:
    9,171
    Likes Received:
    622
    Trophy Points:
    113

    California Penal Code Section 632

    (a) Every person who, intentionally and without the consent of
    all parties to a confidential communication, by means of any
    electronic amplifying or recording device, eavesdrops upon or records
    the confidential communication, whether the communication is carried
    on among the parties in the presence of one another or by means of a
    telegraph, telephone, or other device, except a radio, shall be
    punished by a fine not exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars
    ($2,500), or imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one year,
    or in the state prison, or by both that fine and imprisonment. If the
    person has previously been convicted of a violation of this section
    or Section 631, 632.5, 632.6, 632.7, or 636, the person shall be
    punished by a fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000), by
    imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one year, or in the
    state prison, or by both that fine and imprisonment.
    (b) The term "person" includes an individual, business
    association, partnership, corporation, limited liability company, or
    other legal entity, and an individual acting or purporting to act for
    or on behalf of any government or subdivision thereof, whether
    federal, state, or local, but excludes an individual known by all
    parties to a confidential communication to be overhearing or
    recording the communication.
    (c) The term "confidential communication" includes any
    communication carried on in circumstances as may reasonably indicate
    that any party to the communication desires it to be confined to the
    parties thereto, but excludes a communication made in a public
    gathering or in any legislative, judicial, executive or
    administrative proceeding open to the public, or in any other
    circumstance in which the parties to the communication may reasonably
    expect that the communication may be overheard or recorded.
    (d) Except as proof in an action or prosecution for violation of
    this section, no evidence obtained as a result of eavesdropping upon
    or recording a confidential communication in violation of this
    section shall be admissible in any judicial, administrative,
    legislative, or other proceeding.
    (e) This section does not apply (1) to any public utility engaged
    in the business of providing communications services and facilities,
    or to the officers, employees or agents thereof, where the acts
    otherwise prohibited by this section are for the purpose of
    construction, maintenance, conduct or operation of the services and
    facilities of the public utility, or (2) to the use of any
    instrument, equipment, facility, or service furnished and used
    pursuant to the tariffs of a public utility, or (3) to any telephonic
    communication system used for communication exclusively within a
    state, county, city and county, or city correctional facility.
    (f) This section does not apply to the use of hearing aids and
    similar devices, by persons afflicted with impaired hearing, for the
    purpose of overcoming the impairment to permit the hearing of sounds
    ordinarily audible to the human ear.
     
  11. Michael Wechsler

    Michael Wechsler Administrator Staff Member

    Messages:
    9,171
    Likes Received:
    622
    Trophy Points:
    113

    All of this stated, I believe that (a) the actions have to qualify under these sections to be punishable, and (b) the California courts have recognized an "implied" consent where the recording party has knowingly agreed to be recorded and the other party is informed of or knows the conversation is being recorded but still continues with the conversation.

    I believe that several telephone companies are offering recording services that feature a beep during the recording period as well.
     

Share This Page

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.