From: pam
(itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge)
(Twistedhed) wrote in news:29441-41B70F4D-19
@storefull-3256.bay.webtv.net:
LOL,,I checked and rechecked this,,,not only is it illegal, it's a
felony. Once again, get yourself educated.

You have checked with the wrong people


No,,you have.

then, or the wrong state, i work with law

enforcement officials on a daily basis

What type? I mean, it really has no merit or relation, but YOU mentioned
it so you wanted it known. What type?


this has come up in may scenarios such as

wire taps also law enforcement have cameras

in thier cruisers and wear microphones they

dont have to and dont tell you that you are

being audio and video recoreded anything you
say can be used as evidence against you.


Correct. LEO's are permitted to so in many states when investigating
crimes, but you are not a LEO.

I can record a phone conversation with you

and not tell you,


You sure can, but it makes you a felon.

i cannot record you and landshark talking with

out telling either of you. End of story.


You sure can, but it sill makes you a felon. Please cite the LEA you
invoked that gave you poor and incorrect advice. Their department
attorney needs to know they have an active LEO running around that isn't
educated on the laws they are to enforce. In fact, now that you
mentioned a LEO told you this, if there are ANY cases involving this
alleged LEO that have anything to do with such in the past, grounds
exist to have the case tossed out or even overturned. Why do I have this
feeling you won't address the LEA the LEO allegedly belongs to that
allegedlytold you this bull****.
Nevertheless, I already checked this and rechecked it, you have not and
are relying on mistaken persoal belief, so you are free to believe
whatever you will...contact the FCC and ask them. It is your right to
insist on remaining wrong and in the dark even when the information is
made available to you. Then pluck the feathers from the ornithological
dining experience from whcih you are so familiar. In the mean time,
continue to "x-no archive" your posts and scream about all you do not
comprehend. While you are at it, blame me a few more times for your
ignorance and plight.

"Twistedhed" wrote in message
...
From: pam
(itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge)
(Twistedhed) wrote in news:29441-41B70F4D-19
@storefull-3256.bay.webtv.net:

You sure can, but it sill makes you a felon. Please cite the LEA you
invoked that gave you poor and incorrect advice. Their department
attorney needs to know they have an active LEO running around that isn't
educated on the laws they are to enforce. In fact, now that you
mentioned a LEO told you this, if there are ANY cases involving this
alleged LEO that have anything to do with such in the past, grounds
exist to have the case tossed out or even overturned. Why do I have this
feeling you won't address the LEA the LEO allegedly belongs to that
allegedlytold you this bull****.
Nevertheless, I already checked this and rechecked it, you have not and
are relying on mistaken persoal belief, so you are free to believe
whatever you will...contact the FCC and ask them. It is your right to
insist on remaining wrong and in the dark even when the information is
made available to you. Then pluck the feathers from the ornithological
dining experience from whcih you are so familiar. In the mean time,
continue to "x-no archive" your posts and scream about all you do not
comprehend. While you are at it, blame me a few more times for your
ignorance and plight.

Why even bother with Geo WA3MOJ? He will argue, just for the sake of
causing hate & discontent. He doesn't care about anything other than being a
troll and harassing CB'rs, in
CB group.

Landshark


--
Is it so frightening to have me at your shoulder?
Thunder and lightning couldn't be bolder.
I'll write on your tombstone, ``I thank you for dinner.''
This game that we animals play is a winner.

From: pam
(itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge)
i work with law

enforcement officials on a daily basis

What type? I mean, it really has no merit or relation, but YOU mentioned
it so you wanted it known. What type?

this has come up in may scenarios such as

wire taps also law enforcement have cameras

in thier cruisers and wear microphones they

dont have to and dont tell you that you are

being audio and video recoreded anything you
say can be used as evidence against you.

Correct. LEO's are permitted to so in many states when investigating
crimes, but you are not a LEO.

No pulling you over for speeding, or a traffic

violation is not a crime.



Only you misinterpret it to have a relation.
Pulling one over for whatever reason takes place in public. The Supreme
Court ruled one does not have a reasonable right to expect privacy in
public.

Spin some more yarn


You are the only one confused with this issue and insisting on remaining
ignorant, despite being properly informed several times. You claimed you
taped a private party on a telephone call initiated by yourself, and the
person on the other end was not informed you were taping them. If that's
the case, you're a felon, and blaming me and conjuring up images of
traffic law and other irrelevant scenarios won't change that, or your
ignorance. Carry on.

Twist, read these. I think you'll see it is you who misunderstood. One party
consent is legal in most states. Need more? I suppose I can did deeper.


http://www.aapsonline.org/judicial/telephone.htm

http://www.jhllp.com/CM/Articles/Articles17.asp

twithed is too retarded and impressed with his own retardation, to get
the picture. He stays busy pimping FUGGLY.

Nah,,,I like the links you provided.
Conclusion
Intercepting and monitoring telephone conversations, even if done with
the best of intentions, can have serious legal consequences. State and
federal law provide criminal penalties for the unauthorized recording of
telephone conversations, and the person whose conversations have been
intercepted may seek to recover money from the responsible parties as
well. Before embarking on any course which might violate state or
federal laws regulating the interception of telephone conversations, it
is imperative that advice be obtained from experienced, competent legal
counsel.
=A9 FindLaw. All rights reserved.
Firm=A0Overview=A0| Attorney=A0Profiles=A0| Client=A0Testimonials=A0|
Articles=A0| Newsletters=A0| Client=A0Rights=A0| FAQs=A0|
Resource=A0Links=A0| Agencies/Other=A0Resources=A0|
-
So,,let us get back to the issue at hand, shall we? The issue was, he
claimed he recorded a telephone conversation without the other parties
consent. I claimed it was a felony. He claimed it was legal for him to
do so. He resides in a two party consent state. That make HIS
actions...illegal. He called a party out of state. That not only
involves the other state, but makes it a federal issue. Federal issues,
when arising verses state issues, always win. Read your link. It
reiterates one who thinks they are legal under the laws of their state,
should retain counsel before taping telephone conversations, as there
are too many other implications and variables relating to this issue.
Your link also claims that one may seek damages against his actions.
Picture this. The place he turns in is busted...say they get an NAL. The
business, in turn, seeks damages against the one who made the call.
Since our boy broke the law by illegal taping (by virtue of living in a
two party consent state, if nothing else), he is in heap trouble, for
sure. A decent lawyer wouldn't even allow the fact the NAL was issued to
even be entered or brought up as a defense tactic, as it happened after
the fact, and would not exist if not for the crime of illegal taping.
Bottom line, is I never contested state law and never claimed to know
each state's law, with the exception of California and Florida. Federal
law supersedes state law and the implementation of wire tapping done by
a private party without the other party's consent is illegal, as held by
the United States Government. Once again,,,,,,,bottom line is our boy is
an illegal felon for his actions and invoking all 50 states and their
laws and my knowledge of such will not change that fact. His acts being
legal or illegal were the topic, not whether an act that is illegal per
the US government is tolerated in certain states, as for the last time,
state laws are tossed aside when they conflict with federal laws. If
states do not follow the federal law, even when their own state laws may
differ, they are threatened of having ALL federal monies
and benefits stripped. I'm sure I can find many links illustrating
federal law supersedes state laws, if you need more information. The pot
laws regarding medicinal purposes in many states is a picture-perfect
exampe of the feds exercising their rights over state law.

On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 00:32:19 -0600, itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge
wrote:

(Twistedhed) wrote in news:7084-41B8E350-332
:

What type? I mean, it really has no merit or relation, but YOU mentioned
it so you wanted it known. What type?


correctional Facility i am locked up.

mommy sent you to bed without supper again?

On 10 Dec 2004 01:49:13 -0800, "Psychiatrist to keyclowns"
wrote:

twithed is too retarded and impressed with his own retardation, to get
the picture. He stays busy pimping FUGGLY.

Your Fuggly. Or least that is the name you go by on this group.