The leaves are tumbling off the Shady Oak like a political version of a simultaneous attack of mildew, black spot, canker, fireblight, and the Titanian mold.  First it was the Census Bureau dumping them (thus signficantly damaging Donk prospe…

Exactly, I won custody of my kids, Pro Se and accomplished most of it through discovery and subpoena. If you want to see a judges face turn red, nail him with his own court’s rules of discovery, WITHOUT having a JD and a BAR membership.

Woody

No. In a common area, maybe. But in a back office or conference room there is an expectation of privacy. Arguing that because they were a business they therefore had no expectation of privacy is silly. Don’t throw common sense out the window.
Blake on September 24, 2009

Did you see the video?

Did you notice the door was open and people were going in and out like it was a walk way.

Common sense tells us if the conversation is “privet” as in a business, the door is closed, people don’t go wandering through the room.

DSchoen on September 24, 2009 at 5:19 PM

You are amking some great points and raising some excellent questions. I’m hoping that some of the lawyers that post here on HA will weigh in with their observations.
Personally, I’m not worried about O’Keefe and Giles actually being convicted because I don’t think there will be a criminal prosecution. ACORN’s civil suit, as many have noted, is very stupid of them to do as it opens them up to further scrutiny and keeps the story active in (some) media.

I read that law end to end, perhaps I missed it but can you point out what section, clause whatever that it is NOT about “Intercepted Interceptions, Intercepts” communications?

Nothing in these tapes were “Intercepted Interceptions, Intercepts” communications. They were direct 2 party conversations. Nothing was “Intercepted”, as that would require a 3rd party.

Would it be illegal to wear a “hidden camera” and “microphone” while inside the DMV?

If not why not
If yes please explain?

http://www.redstate.com/leon_h_wolf/2009/09/23/watch-me-get-the-acorn-lawsuit-dismissed-in-15-minutes-or-less/

I guess O’Keefe is too young to remember Linda Tripp.
hicsuget on September 24, 2009

That would be the Linda Trip who refused to lie under oath, thus helping to impeach Clinton? Yes?

That would be the Linda Trip that sued the Department of Defense and the Justice Department for releasing information from her security file and employment file to the news media in violation of the Privacy Act of 1974?

The Clinton Admin illegally leaked her employment file?

“O

n November 3, 2003, Tripp reached a settlement with the federal government. The settlement included a one-time payment of more than $595,000, a retroactive promotion, and retroactive pay at the highest salary for 1998, 1999 and 2000. She also received a pension and was cleared to work for the federal government again. Her rights to remain part of a class action lawsuit against the government were also preserved.”

Wow! do you remember Linda Tripp?

The Linda Trip that 49 Democrats in the Maryland Legislature signed a letter to the state prosecutor demanding that Tripp be prosecuted, she was charged by state authorities with violating Maryland’s wiretap law.

The case was thrown out for various reasons, one of which, the Star witness Lewinsky, was an admitted liar and not credible as a witness.

Is the entire ACORN organization ready to be examined to find out if they (ALL of THEM) are credible?

Do the trolls that post “remember Linda Tripp?” actually remember Linda Tripp?

An “external” conversation between a workplace insider, such as a proprietor, and a workplace outsider, like a customer, is more probably business-related and thus not sufficiently private and personal in character to make any privacy expectation reasonable. For example, in Desnick v. American Broadcasting Cos., 44 F.3d 1345 (7th Cir.1995), test patients covertly videotaped their conversations with ophthalmic surgeons who recommended cataract surgery to the test patients. Desnick, 44 F.3d at 1348. The Seventh Circuit held that the surgeons had failed to state a claim for invasion of privacy because “[t]he test patients entered offices that were open to anyone expressing a desire for ophthalmic services and videotaped physicians engaged in professional, not personal, communications with strangers (the testers themselves).” Id. at 1352.

That’s an invasion of privacy case, but the expectation of privacy standard applicable to Maryland’s Wiretap law is similar.

September 24, 2009
Treasury agrees to formal review of ACORN

Fox News has learned that Treasury Department Inspector General J. Russell George has sent a letter to Sen. Susan Collins, R-ME, and Rep. Darrell Issa, R-CA, agreeing to conduct a formal review of ACORN and the IRS’s oversight of ACORN and other nonprofits.

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Treasury Department Inspector General, J. Russell George agreed to comply with a request submitted by House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Ranking Member Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) and Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs Ranking Member Susan Collins (R-Maine) to conduct a review of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) and of the IRS’s oversight of nonprofit organizations.
“The lack of an appropriate firewall between ACORN’s charitable activities and its political arm has raised significant questions regarding the appropriateness of their status as a taxable nonprofit corporation and their management of federal dollars,” Issa said. “Cutting ties with ACORN is a good first step for the federal government, but since they have been the recipients of taxpayer dollars, we have an obligation to investigate to discover whether or not those dollars were misused in anyway.”