>
>
QUOTE
The alleged Long tactic of using telephone conversations as primary
> source
> material is very offensive to me.
>
> While I don't know Washington law at all. However, I believe that if a
> person
> records telephone conversations in Oregon without the explicit prior
> consent
> of the other party, that person could be in big, big troubles. May such
> troubles fall on those who deserve them most.
> Does anyone know about such a law in Washington?
>
> Joe Beelart
> West Linn, Oregon
> source
> material is very offensive to me.
>
> While I don't know Washington law at all. However, I believe that if a
> person
> records telephone conversations in Oregon without the explicit prior
> consent
> of the other party, that person could be in big, big troubles. May such
> troubles fall on those who deserve them most.
> Does anyone know about such a law in Washington?
>
> Joe Beelart
> West Linn, Oregon
According to the " The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press":
QUOTE
Twelve states require, under most circumstances, the consent of all
parties to a conversation. Those jurisdictions are California,
Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan,
Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Washington. Be aware
that you will sometimes hear these referred to inaccurately as
"two-party consent" laws. If there are more than two people involved in
the conversation, all must consent to the taping.
Regardless of the state, it is almost always illegal to record a
conversation to which you are not a party, do not have consent to tape,
and could not naturally overhear.
Federal law and most state laws also make it illegal to disclose the
contents of an illegally intercepted call or communication.
Mr. Long seems to be in violation of the law.
William "Guillermo" DeHollander
Ellensburg WA
parties to a conversation. Those jurisdictions are California,
Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan,
Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Washington. Be aware
that you will sometimes hear these referred to inaccurately as
"two-party consent" laws. If there are more than two people involved in
the conversation, all must consent to the taping.
Regardless of the state, it is almost always illegal to record a
conversation to which you are not a party, do not have consent to tape,
and could not naturally overhear.
Federal law and most state laws also make it illegal to disclose the
contents of an illegally intercepted call or communication.
Mr. Long seems to be in violation of the law.
William "Guillermo" DeHollander
Ellensburg WA
Hmmmmm........ Mr. Long, whats up with that!!??