Chicago Police: Tape Us, Get Sentenced to 15 Years in Prison

Class 1 Felony of recording a conversation is just below the prison time you'd spend for murder

http://www.dailytech.com/Chicago+Police+Tape+Us+Get+Sentenced+to+15+Years+in+Prison/article20735.htm

Seems a bit harsh...

 

Disgusting.

 

I love these two paragraphs from the article: "Mark Donahue, president of the Fraternal Order of Police, said his organization cheered the decision, stating that he "absolutely supports" throwing those who tape police officers behind bars.

He complains that citizens monitoring police activities for wrongdoing might "affect how an officer does his job on the street."

Isn't that the whole point? Maybe we're just odd over here on the East coast, but it seems to me that the actions of the protectors of law and justice should, at all times, bear scrutiny of a level greater than that of an ordinary citizen, because they are endowed with greater powers of detention.

 

I guess N.W.A had it right with their hit F^ck the Police.

I am curiuos how it is eavesdropping when it is a conversation between you and the officer about business involving yourself. Can't a phone conversation can be taped/recorded when at least one party knows...so what is the difference??

I could understand if you bugged the police station or a cop car and listened in on business not related to you.

I would not be suprised if the public stops assisting police with investigations if they can't have a copy of the converstions themselves if they want. what is next....news reporters getting locked up for filming and taping the police when they are on the scene???

15 years in prison for a felony of recording a police conversation...and then you have one of Illinios finest killing 2 girls because of speeding and texting.

 

FT(Chitown)P!

Ummm, too soon?

I don't see this as a long lasting deal, kinda like the soon to be dismantled healthcare debacle/issue/bill/law/thingie...

 

Sounds very harsh, never would have guessed that Illinois would have any kind of law resembling this.
In law enforcement today its expected that someone is audio taping or video taping your actions. I am not sure what makes Illinois so special.

 

Doesn't Maryland have a similar law??

http://www.autoblog.com/2010/04/19/motorcyclist-arrested-for-recording-cop-brandishing-gun-with-hel/

http://rt.com/usa/news/film-cop-maryland-arrested/

 

The police video taping their situations makes the police officers safer. Video taping the police in action makes the public safer.

On their bumpers should have a “how’s my driving? Call 1-800…” bumper sticker too.

 

If squad cars have video recorders in them, hasn't a cop already given his consent to be taped.

I mean Officers KNOW theres a video camera recording, does it really matter the NUMBER of recordings?? They have defacto already waived the right.

 

+1:up:

 

3rd party recording

Actually Occifer, I've not made any recordings, but the On-Star has got it all!

 

I would laugh if On-Star spent 15 years in prison

 

I think this is a perfect example that people need to known their right as a juror to find someone not guilty regarless of the law (nullification). It's to bad that jurors seems to be carefully selected to to make sure they find those with the IQ of a peanut.

 

one more reason never to go to Illinois

 

If the cops are doing their jobs properly, they should have nothing to worry about.

At least that's what we are always told when the government wants to record or video tape civilians.

 

So...when IM pulled over by the police, dont i have to be made aware that IM being video taped too???? Wouldnt that make dash cams as illegal as one on my helmet theoretically?

bs for sure

wait....did just post in the dungeon???? crap!

 

I spent 3 days in a criminal trial jury pool once, it was frightening how moronic your "average joe/josie" is. I am not so sure that picking stupid people on purpose is the issue.
One of the things I found so stunning about the OJ trial, the prosecutor literally spent weeks talking about the intricacies of the DNA evidence when it should have been clear to them that most of the OJ jury couldn't spell DNA to begin with. The other factor that should have been abundantly clear was the jury didn't care if he actually did it...

 

the Illinois law, passed in 1994 makes it a felony to record ANY conversation without the consent of all parties. It's been in effect since Jan 1, 1995 or about 16+ years.

Unfortunately, it isn't a short-term thing. It's been upheld by Illinois courts at least twice so far.

 

free country right?

 

Wonder if i should take this down...
(need sound)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPW9GXN5rbc