Is it legal to release a taped phone conversation?
-
edorapietrafesa — 18 years ago(November 10, 2007 07:36 AM)
no it's not illegal. if he was setting dog up with a wire or something.if dog was coerced or was being taped under false pretenses, ok then. but dog VOLUNTARILY left a message on TUCKER'S answering machine. therefore it's open territory for tucker to do whatever he wants to with it. if you GIVE someone your diary, or leave a message on their voice mail, you've got no more ownership to that particular thing anymore. that's how the law works. dog shot himself in his own foot spewing those words by his own volition. he's at fault, not his son. his son can play that on the howard stern show if he wants to.
-
Ilvrockroll — 18 years ago(November 10, 2007 07:43 AM)
it all depends on state laws. Dogs atty said tchat Tucker could legally tape any conversation that he is involved in without letting the other party know. Personally I think that all parties must be informed of any taped conversations.
trolls beware, I use the ignore button so don't bother! -
edorapietrafesa — 18 years ago(November 10, 2007 08:11 AM)
i believe any state in this country would find what tucker did 100% legal. no lie. i have taken many legal classes and this is simply not against the law. how do you think abused parties are able to get something done? they turn in the abusive messages or letters or e-mail into police without the other party knowing. it's to protect you. so dog left this message by his own will and if tucker wants to have others listen, they can. dog can do NOTHING to tucker over this in any state in this country.
-
rekd — 18 years ago(November 10, 2007 03:03 PM)
This was not a message it was a conversation. I am not sure about taping private conversation but I know when a business is taping you they have to tell you.
I do not think she can sue because the comments on the tape were not meant for the public. -
mhecc — 18 years ago(November 10, 2007 05:12 PM)
well, what about when you call at&t for instance, they say what you say may be monitored and recorded, but if you wish not to be monitored and recorded, then tell the agent you wish not to be monitored and recorded?
-
disinter — 18 years ago(November 10, 2007 05:57 PM)
No if you don't want to be recorded by at&t you have to hang up. They do not have to turn off the tape because you want them too. I don't know what "legal classes" one of the posters here took but in mine it varies from state to state. Some states require only 1 of the parties to know that the conversation is being taped. Others require that both parties must know.
-
PatriotsRchamps — 18 years ago(November 11, 2007 04:33 PM)
"i believe any state in this country would find what tucker did 100% legal. no lie. i have taken many legal classes and this is simply not against the law. how do you think abused parties are able to get something done? they turn in the abusive messages or letters or e-mail into police without the other party knowing. it's to protect you. so dog left this message by his own will and if tucker wants to have others listen, they can. dog can do NOTHING to tucker over this in any state in this country."
But Tucker wasn't an abused party, edorapietrafesa. Referring to a person's girlfriend as the N-word like Dog did is not a crime. Unlike letters or e-mails, this was not something that Dog sent to Tucker. This was a personal conversation that was taped unknowingly; just like using a wire by undercover police.
If secret taping is legal for the sole purpose of embarrassing a celebrity (like Tucker did to Dog), then wouldn't it also be legal to secretly videotape sexual encounters with celebrities? Where does the law draw the line? Personally, I think that if a person is not committing a crime, then someone else has no right secretly taping them because it's an invasion of privacy and infringes upon their "right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." -
mhecc — 18 years ago(November 11, 2007 11:42 PM)
Patriot, what Dog said in the private phone conversation was not a crime. Just that what Dog said was not appropriate. This private conversation was NOT even in the public arenas. This is not quite the same as recording illegal sexual encounters or advances. What Tucker did was not appropriate, equalivalent to entrapment: Tucker knowingly having the answering machine turned on continually for the purpose of recording and selling to the national equirer is entrapment. Tucker should be prosecuted!! I do not look at this as a live conversation, even though was the case, because was "private". More so like a "voice message" recording for the purpose of "entrapment". If I was the Judge, I would have had thrown Tucker in jail and throw away the key!!
-
sickthings4eva — 18 years ago(November 11, 2007 10:23 PM)
Apparently it is legal if ONE of the parties consent to the recording. That could be the taper probably? However, some states require that ALL parties give consent to recording a telephone conversation.
Here's a link:
http://www.askdavetaylor.com/is_it_legal_to_tape_my_phone_calls.html -
mhecc — 18 years ago(November 11, 2007 11:46 PM)
sickthings4eva, I seriously doubt Dog consented to the recording. I guess Dog was not thinking when Tucker picked up the phone after the leave the message beep (OR) Tucker may have had a recorder (not an answering machine)..who knows??
-
rmshadowolf — 18 years ago(November 12, 2007 07:51 PM)
Well and I am not a lawyer. But I'd say a private phone conversation does have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Being in a non public place. I believe it is illegal to record someone without their consent. However if it was left on an answering machine. Then yeah its totally legal. Leaving a message is voluntary so consent to be recorded is automatic. But every state and situation is different.
I am not a lawyer. -
mhecc — 18 years ago(November 12, 2007 08:04 PM)
As a courtesy, Tucker should let his father know before the conversation he is being recorded. I believe what Tucker did is the same as recording from any recording machine. That appears to be the main intent. Should be a law against this.
-
CrystalDawn0603 — 18 years ago(December 20, 2007 07:42 AM)
It depends on what state he's in and what the laws are. I know Virginia is a two party state. That means that both people on the phone have to know it's being taped, but Hawaii may be a one party state. Only one person has to know it's being taped there. If it is a two party state, it wouldn't be admissible in court, but Dog's not being tried in court, is he?
I once was lost, but now am found,
Was blind, but now I see. -
texasangel0985 — 17 years ago(July 09, 2008 06:36 PM)
tucker saw an opportunity to get money by selling out his dad an he took itdog went on tv talking about all the help he has given tucker and i am almost willing to bet that the next time tucker needs help he's gonna call daddy to bail him out again and i hope dog tells him where to go